State
meets obligation on SPED mandate
State
Senator Steve Panagiotakos
Chairman Senate Ways & Means
Committee
The following information is
intended to address the issue of local
mandates and explains how the state
complies with the applicable laws.
I would also like to explain how the
state assists municipalities in the
funding of certain education categories.
One of the provisions of Proposition
2 ½, which was enacted in 1982,
requires that, if the state enacts laws
or regulations that impose new costs on
cities, towns, regional school districts
or educational collaborative, the state
must also provide the necessary
funding. Under this law, any
statute or regulation enacted after 1980
that imposes a cost must be fully funded
by the Commonwealth or be subject to
voluntary local acceptance.
If a law requires the expenditure of
local funds but the state does not
provide those funds, an unfunded
mandate would exist. Laws
enacted before 1980 are not subject to
this requirement.
Another provision of Proposition 2 ½
established the Division of Local
Mandates at the State Auditors
Office. To ensure that the local
cost of legislation is considered by the
legislature, the Division of Local
Mandates reviews significant bills,
prepares preliminary cost studies and
occasionally contacts members of the
legislature to make them aware of the laws
requirements.1
If there are any questions regarding
breaches of the local mandates
provisions, the State Auditors
Office should be notified.
Under the landmark Education Reform Act
of 1993, municipalities are required to
spend a certain amount of money on
education based on each municipalitys
individual foundation budget.
Chapter 70 aid
described in Chapter 70 of the General
Laws was developed as a part of
the Education Reform Act as a way to
assist districts to meet the new
education spending mandates. Every
municipality in the Commonwealth, using a
combination of state and local dollars,
currently spends at least the amount
required under Chapter 70.
The Legislature has demonstrated a strong
commitment to education. Funding
for education in the Commonwealth
currently comprises over 20% of the
bud-get and increases substantially every
year. Chapter 70 funding in fiscal
year 2008 is $3.725 billion, and it is
likely that there will be an increase of
over $220 million in the coming fiscal
year.
Since fiscal year
2005:
* Chapter 70 has increased by $542.4
million
* Regional School Transportation has
increased by $20.3 million
* Special Education Reimbursements have
increased by $18.4 million
* Kindergarten Expansion Grants have
increased by $10.8 million
The education clause of the Massachusetts
Constitution states in part that [i]t
shall be the duty of legislatures and
magistrates, in all future periods of
this commonwealth, to cherish
the
public schools and grammar schools in the
towns.
Mass. Const., pt. II, ch. V, § II.
The plaintiffs in McDuffy v. Secretary of
the Executive Office of Education claimed
that the Commonwealth had failed its
constitutional duty to provide them with
the opportunity to receive an adequate
education of sufficiently high
quality.
The Supreme Judicial Court held that the
Commonwealth had failed to meet its
constitutional obligation and left it to
the Governor and the legislature to
define the details and appropriate means
to provide the constitutionally required
education.
Only days after the McDuffy decision, the
landmark Education Reform Act of 1993 was
signed into law. The legislation
had been in the works since 1991, when
the Massachusetts Business Alliance for
Education published its report, Every
Child A Winner!
Hancock v. Commissioner of Education was
initiated in 1999 as the successor to the
McDuffy case. The Hancock
plaintiffs, representing students in
nineteen school districts, alleged that
the Commonwealth was failing to provide
public school students the
constitutionally required education
outlined in the McDuffy decision. In
February 2005, the SJC dismissed the
case, finding that the Commonwealth is in
fact meeting its duty under the education
clause of the Massachusetts
Constitution. Chief Justice
Marshall, in explaining the courts
decision, stated:
[t]he legislative and executive branches
have shown that they have embarked on a
long-term, measurable, orderly, and
comprehensive process of reform to
provide a high quality public education
to every child
They have committed
resources to carry out their plan, have
done so in fiscally troubled times, and
show every indication that they will
continue to increase such resources as
the Commonwealths finances improve
I cannot conclude that the
Commonwealth currently is not meeting its
constitutional charge to cherish
the interests of . . . public schools.
In 2006, the Commonwealth adopted a new
Chapter 70 formula with the intent of
implementing it over the course of a Five
Year Plan. The Governors FY09
Chapter 70 proposal represents Year Three
of the plan and appropriates $3.949
billion dollars to cities and towns, a
$223 million increase over FY08.
The Five Year Plan addresses issues of
adequacy in the foundation budget by:
* Using the uncapped inflation rate,
which means that all categories of the
foundation budget from which the
state aid allocations are derived
are increased by this years
inflation rate of 5.18%.
* Maintaining the modest increases made
over the past two years to the following
categories: English language learners and
low-income students.
The Five Year Plan addresses issues of
equity by:
* Weighing each districts total
income and total property wealth equally
in determining what the municipality must
contribute at a minimum
towards its school funding.
* Setting the maximum local contribution
for every district at 82.5% of the
foundation budget, thereby setting the
state aid floor at 17.5% of the
foundation budget.
A school district will receive its state
aid in the form of foundation aid
(i.e., the difference between the
foundation budget and its required local
contribution) plus increments of the
other types of aid (e.g., growth aid,
down payment aid), pursuant to the
formula.
The foundation budget is made up of the
following eleven categories:
* Administration
* Instructional Leadership
* Classroom and Specialist Teachers
* Other Teaching Services
* Professional Development
* Instructional Equipment and Technology
* Guidance and Psychological
* Pupil Services
* Operations and Maintenance
* Employee Benefits/Fixed Charges
* Special Education Tuition
Of note: until fiscal year 2003 there was
a professional development spending
requirement. This requirement, which was
$125 per pupil in its final year, was
funded by the state through the Chapter
70 appropriation. Each year the
Chapter 70 aid category called minimum
aid was increased to reflect that
requirement. The minimum
professional development spending
requirement no longer exists.
Below is a list of the education
transportation mandates:
* K-6 transportation is required for
students living more than two miles from
school, and school districts pay for this
without state aid. This mandate
applied to all students in K-12 before
Proposition 2 ½ became law, and it was
relaxed in the early 1980s.
* K-12 regional transportation is also
for students living more than two miles
from school.
This mandate existed before Proposition 2
½ and is therefore is not subject to the
local mandate law. Funding for this
program is appropriated in the budget
through line item 7035-0006. In
fiscal year 2008 it was funded at $58.3
million, representing 88.5% of the total
cost.
* Out-of-district vocational school
transportation is also mandated for
students living more than two miles from
school.
Funding for this program is appropriated
in the budget through line item
7035-0007. In fiscal year 2008 it
was funded at $1.95 million, representing
75% funding of total cost.
Budget Growth compared to Chapter 70
growth 1993-2008:
FY 93 Budget $13,840,980,000
FY 08 Budget $26,812,000,000
Growth 94% increase $12.971
billion increase
FY 93 Chapter 70 $898,131,787
FY 08 Chapter 70 $3,725,671,328
Growth 315% increase $2.828
billion increase
As you can see, the increase in the
overall budget during that time period
was 150%, while the increase in Chapter
70 Educational spending was 315%.
(Footnotes) 1 Division of Local Mandates
- http://www.mass.gov/sao/localmandate.htm/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
All pictures and
material are
(C) copyright, Valley Patriot, Inc., 2008
|