BHS Deciding Whether To Sue State on Ed Funding

m.enterprisenews.com/article/20150611/NEWS/150618697/13406/NEWS

First step for Brockton school officials is to find a Constitutional Law attorney – then they hope to meet with other elected officials in July to discuss suing the state. Such action would come 22 years after Brockton brought – and won – a funding equity case that led to the Education Reform Act of 1993.

That legislation increased state aid to school districts by $30 billion over a decade – and launched the statewide MCAS testing system. “By July 21, I hope to at least have a dialogue started,” School Superintendent Kathleen Smith said this week.

"And we will possibly have a law firm to represent us."“ she said.
Smith hopes members of the City Council and Brockton’s legislative delegation will gather on that date, the School Committee’s only July meeting. Last week, Smith said the state education funding system is again failing the city at a time suburban districts with fewer needs want more money. The Chapter 70 funding formula which pays per-pupil costs does not fairly compensate urban districts like Brockton for homeless students and English Language Learners, she said.
The lawsuit would seek to force the state to reconfigure.

So far, Brockton’s $165 million school budget proposal includes a potential 125 teacher layoff and up to 60 cuts to other positions. Other reductions could range from technology and after-school programs to school supplies, parent liaisons, the Family Connections program and transportation for the Brockton High School Band.
*****************************************************
I understand the inequity of Chapter 70 funding. I understand COB seems to get a disproportionate amount of children with a myriad of issues . But another lawsuit? Who pays for that? And what if we lose? Just because we won before; doesn't mean we'd win again.

Hard to be optimistic watching 100 teachers and 50 paras walk out the door. Why are we the only Gateway School System seemingly facing these layoffs? They would have the same issues right?

If we don't bring forth this then this will continue to be an issue. Also there is a good chance other Urban Districts would join with us and costs would be between urban districts.

We have reached a fork in the road and layoffs will get worse and worse without proper funding. We have a good chance of success

I understand but why couldn't another Urban School take the the lead? Where would the funds come from, no matter who is in the lead, to litigate? BPS is laying off at least 100 teachers and 50 paras yet the COB would be able to afford what would be a very lengthy and costly lawsuit per Super Smith?

Another district could take the lead but given we were the catalyst the last time my guess would be other districts are waiting for us. I have not heard any other district saying they were going to sue but we don't have the luxury of waiting.

We are loosing millions per year so we don't have the luxury of waiting to see after 20 years if the state will fix the issue. They have shown they don't care about urban districts the legislature as a whole doesn't so we are on are own.

Yes lawsuits are costly but doing nothing is WAAAAAAAY more costly. There is no and I mean no movement on changes to the formula other than the opposite way

The layoffs will get worse and worse and there is no end in sight and if we don't act this would be tantamount to allowing us to get screwed by millions. Just the 10/2 to 06/01 number on the census cost 2.25 Million that we don't see for 18 months because after 10/2 they don't count those extra kids.

we have now reached a critical juncture and MUST act. The SC and CC and our Mayor and Superintendent all agree the time has come and we can no longer cross our fingers and wait.

Who knows the simple threat may work some magic. I will say districts across the state hear about Brockton

Your points are well taken. And I know you are all working hard on this. Just concerned about the cost of litigation. The amount of teachers being let go is alarming. New teachers don't want to come here. They need some stability and BPS is not stable in terms of employment. And eventually programs will suffer. Just curious, why does Brockton participate in School Choice? It costs $1,000,000, probably money we could use?

A Majority of the school choice is out of district placement (complicated). Would take a lot of time to explain

The other part is we get money if they come here (the funding comes with them) and goes if they goes to a out of Brockton school.

The problem is if we cancelled this we would need to find even more space for those children and we are also in a space crunch so its a double edge sword

Thanks. I know it's complicated. But the amount of students that we take in is minor to those who go out. $1,000,000 is a lot of money and I know Minichello was quoted as saying it was a big jump this year. Maybe it's time to reevaluate?

This is via Brockton Globe Twitter. It's relevent to Brockton, IMO

Editorial & Opinion

Wanted: an accurate measure of student poverty

A change in how Massachusetts counts low-income students in public school districts has resulted in sharply lower reported rates of poor kids, according to a Globe report Monday. That decrease could have dire consequences for the funding that school districts receive from the state and federal government, which is based in part on the number of poor students. That’s why state education authorities need to get this measure right, and comb through different sources of data to come up with the most meaningful and accurate figures. An inadequate metric will translate into less urgency and fewer funds to address critical needs of the low-income population.

Massachusetts had previously relied on the number of families who applied for free school lunches to determine the number of students in poverty. Based on that longstanding metric, 77 percent of students in the Boston schools were designated as low-income in 2013. But when the federal government introduced a free-meal program for all kids, regardless of income, a couple of years ago — thus eliminating the need for families to apply for free lunches — the state had to come up with an alternative way to calculate the number of low-income students. The new metric — called “economically disadvantaged’’ students — is based on the number of kids in families who receive public benefits: food stamps, foster care, or certain MassHealth programs, including Medicaid. With the new measure, only 49 percent of Boston students were classified as economically disadvantaged.

But, for many complicated reasons, not every family that is eligible for public benefits applies for them, and it’s reasonable to question the accuracy of the new figures. That’s why education officials should go beyond participation in welfare programs to identify poor students. They can tap into self-reported data by asking families to fill out forms like those that were used for free lunches. And they should also use data from the state’s Department of Revenue, provided they can address privacy concerns. Aggregate data on income levels, by community, should be readily available, and would not compromise individual privacy.

An inaccurate calculation of student poverty will eventually leave financially strained schools vulnerable to funding cuts. It ought to be a priority for state education authorities to strengthen their methodology for finding and counting the poor. In an age of ubiquitous data, it’s critical for the Commonwealth to pinpoint our neediest populations.