Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

State Superintendent Evers Fair Funding for our Future Plan For more details visit:

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "State Superintendent Evers Fair Funding for our Future Plan For more details visit:"— Presentation transcript:

1 State Superintendent Evers Fair Funding for our Future Plan For more details visit:

2 Revenue limits have been around for 21 years with no per pupil adjustment currently built in after the 2014-15 school year. There are 60 school districts that receive minimal state aid, 20 of which receive no state equalized aid whatsoever. Our system only uses property to measure “wealth” so districts with high property values fare poorly, regardless of their community’s ability to pay. Changes beyond a school district’s control result in schools and kids seeing significant reductions in their state aid from year to year. Our school boards tax at higher rates than technically necessary. We no longer have a predictable system of funding that recognizes school district’s needs or one they can count on. Why do we need to change our school finance system?

3 Category % of State Budget 1. K-12 General and Categorical School Aids33.1% 2. Medical Assistance15.1% 3.University of Wisconsin 7.3% 4.State Correctional Operations 6.7% 5.Shared Revenues 5.9% 6. School Levy/First Dollar Tax Credits 5.8% 7. State Debt Obligation Bonds 2.6% 8. Local Community/Juvenile Correctional Services 2.0% 9. State Judicial/Legal Services 1.7% 10. Choice and Charter School Programs 1.7% All Other Programs18.1% Source: Legislative Fiscal Bureau (2013-15 Biennial Budget Summary-Table 11) Top Ten State General Fund Programs and % Share of State’s 2013-15 General Fund Budget

4 The state’s commitment to school aids has declined over the last decade

5 School District Declining Enrollment Information Revenue Limit (Three Year Average) Definition

6 Fair Funding Plan We can protect students, provide additional resources, and enact school finance reform while holding the line on property taxes. This plan is a realistic and ready first step, providing solutions that are good policy and have received bipartisan support. The Plan: Makes our school finance system more fair, sustainable, and transparent Provides additional revenue limit authority to all school districts Establishes predictable growth in state funding by restoring the state’s two-thirds funding commitment Guarantees state funding for every student Accounts for family income and poverty Strengthens rural schools and schools with declining enrollments Directs all state aid right to school boards

7 Fair Funding Proposal Increased Revenue Limit Authority: Provided an allowable annual increase of $225 in 2013-14 and $230 per pupil in 2014-15 and indexed such adjustments to CPI thereafter. Provided Additional State Support: Increased state general aid by 3.75% in 2013-14 and by 4.50% in 2014-15 to provide additional state support for school districts and property tax relief. Predictability/Sustainability: Created a pathway to restoring the state’s two-thirds funding commitment by 2017 by making public school funding a “sum-sufficient” appropriation once again, similar to state funding for private choice and independent charter schools. 2013-15 Fair Funding Plan Overview

8 Guaranteed Funding: Established a minimum level of state aid ($3,000) behind every student, regardless of where they live. Ability to Pay: Accounted for family income and “ability to pay” by including poverty as a factor (30%) in determining a district’s “wealth”. Protecting Students and Taxpayers: Increased state special adjustment aid from 85% to 90% to help declining enrollment districts. Transparency: Transferred the School Levy Tax Credit (SLTC)/First Dollar Credit into aid formula and paid all monies directly to school boards. Hold Harmless Funding: Ensured every district received the same amount of state support it would otherwise receive under current law. 2013-15 Fair Funding Plan Details

9 Sought additional support for the following existing categorical aid programs: Special Education: Increase reimbursement from 26% to 28% High Cost Special Education: Increase reimbursement from 45% to 55% Bilingual-Bicultural Aid: Increase reimbursement from 8% to 12% SAGE: Fully-fund program at $2,250 per eligible student Sparsity: Fully-fund program at $300 per student in 130 eligible districts Breakfast: Increase reimbursement from 9 to 10 cents per breakfast Transportation: Increase reimbursement for distances over 12 miles. This item was approved into law in the 2013-15 biennial budget. 2013-15 Fair Funding Plan-Existing Categorical Aids

10 Supplemental Bilingual-Bicultural Aid: Provided $100 per student to all school districts educating English Language Learner students, not just those required to have programs. High-Cost Transportation (Approved in 2013-15 Biennial Budget Bill): Targeted state resources to districts whose transportation costs exceed 150% of the state average. STEM Grants (Approved in 2013-15 Biennial Budget Bill): Proposed creating a statewide STEM initiative by awarding competitive grants to districts implementing STEM activities. College & Career Ready/Career and Technical Education: Promoted job creation efforts by providing $1,000 per student to districts graduating students with a high-need industry certification. 2013-15 Fair Funding Plan-New Categorical Aids

11 Accountability: Supported the best practices of high-performing schools and invest in reading and math coaches in lower-performing schools. Graduation: Increased graduation rates by targeting grants to districts with persistent graduation and/or dropout issues. Educator Effectiveness (Approved in 2013-15 Biennial Budget Bill): Provided $80 per educator to support new evaluation systems per state law. 2013-15 Fair Funding Plan-New Categorical Aids

12 2013-15 Fair Funding Plan Impact All districts would have seen increased (95%) or same level of “state support”. Included both local property wealth & family income in our finance system. Ensured all “state support” would be paid directly to school boards. Would have held net property taxes steady and decreased gross tax rates by nearly two mills per $1,000 in property value on average. Would have created a more fair and transparent school funding system designed to make a difference for kids throughout Wisconsin and provide them with a greater opportunity to graduate ready for further education and the workforce.

Download ppt "State Superintendent Evers Fair Funding for our Future Plan For more details visit:"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google