%
>>>
WELCOME TO "NOON
WEDNESDAY,"
%I'M MARISA
WOJCIK
MULTIMEDIA
%JOURNALIST
WITH "HERE & NOW"
ON
%PBS
WISCONSIN.
%TODAY
IS
JULY
14.
%LAST
WEEK,
GOVERNOR
EVERS
SIGNED
%INTO
LAW
THE
STATE'S
BUDGET FOR%THE NEXT
TWO
YEARS,
WHICH
%INCLUDED
A
$128
MILLION
INCREASE%FOR
K-12
PUBLIC
SCHOOLS.
%FUNDING FOR
K-12
EDUCATION
IS
BY
%FAR
THE
LARGEST
PIECE OF
THE
%BUDGET PIE
EVERY
TWO
YEARS,
%HOWEVER, PUBLIC
SCHOOL
ADVOCATES
%SAY WHAT
PASSED
IS
FALLING
WAY
%SHORT.
%JOINING ME
TODAY
IS
DR. JULIE
%UNDERWOOD, THE
FORMER
DEAN
OF
%THE
UW-MADISON
SCHOOL OF
%EDUCATION AND
CURRENTLY
SITS
AS
%THE
BOARD
PRESIDENT FOR
THE
%WISCONSIN
ALLIANCE
OF
EXCELLENT
%SCHOOLS,
AND
DR. UNDERWOOD,%THANK YOU SO MUC
H FOR
JOINING
%ME.
%>>
THANK
YOU
FOR
ASKING ME.
%I'M
PLEASED TO BE
HERE,
AND
THIS
%IS
AN
IMPORTANT
TOPIC
SO THANK
%YOU FOR
DOING
THIS
SERIES.
%>>
ABSOLUTELY.
%I JUST
WANT
TO
START
WITH
THE
%FUNDING FOR
K-12
SCHOOLS
AND
THE
%ENTIRE BUDGET
WAS
MAINLY
SHAPED
%BY
REPUBLICANS
AND
THE
EDUCATION
%PORTION GOT
A
LITTLE
BIT
MESSY,
%BUT
YOU
WROTE
ON
BEHALF OF
THE
%WISCONSIN
ALLIANCE
FOR
EXCELLENT
%SCHOOLS
THAT THIS
WAS
A,
QUOTE,
%GOLDEN
OPPORTUNITY.
%CAN
YOU
EXPLAIN
HOW?
%>>
WELL, IT WAS
A
GOLDEN
%OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE IN THE
STATE
%OF
WISCONSIN, WE
HAVE
A
GREAT
%BUDGET.
%THERE'S
A
GREAT
BUDGET
FORECAST,
%AND
THE
FISCAL
BUREAU
ACTUALLY%IN THE
MIDDLE
OF
JUNE
FORECASTED
%EVEN
ADDITIONAL
REVENUE
LIKE
%$4.4
BILLION
OF
ADDITIONAL
%REVENUE THAT WAS
NOT
EXPECTED
.
%SO WE HAVE
MORE
MONEY
T
O
SPEND
%THAN WE
HAVE IN
THE
PAST.
%THIS
ISN'T A
DAY
WHEN
YOU
LOOK
%AT
A
BUDGET
AND
THINK
THAT WE
%NEED TO
BE
AUSTERE.
%IT IS A
DAY
WHEN
YOU
CAN
LOOK
AT
%THE
BUDGET AND
LOOK AT
A
GREAT
%REVENUE
FORECAST, AND
YOU
CAN
%SAY,
WE
NEED
TO
INVEST
IN
OUR
%FUTURE AND
FIX
SOME OF
THE
%THINGS THAT
WE
HAVE
HAD
PROBLEMS
%WITH IN THE
PAST.
%THAT
REALLY
IS
WHAT
HASN'T
%HAPPENED.%WE HAD
A
GOLDEN
OPPORTUNITY TO%DO
RIGHT
BY
KIDS,
AND
THE
%LEGISLATURE'S BUDGET JUST
%DOESN'T DO
THAT.
%>>
NOW,
YOU
HAVE
CALLED
RAISING
%REVENUE
LIMITS THE
BIG
STORY,
%AND SCHOOL
DISTRICTS
CAN
RAISE
%REVENUE BY
RAISING
LOCAL
%PROPERTY
TAXES, BUT
THEY ARE
%LIMITED IN HOW
MUCH
THEY
CAN
AND
%NOW
ARE
OFTEN
TAKING
IT
TO
%REFERENDUM TO ASK
THE
COMMUNITY%TO BE
ABLE
TO
CHARGE
MORE
MONEY.
%WHY IS
RAISING
REVENUE
LIMITS
%THE
BIG
STORY
TO
YOU?
%>>
THIS
I
S
THE
BIG
STORY
FOR
%SCHOOL
DISTRICTS.
%IN THE
STATE
OF
WISCONSIN, WE
%HAVE
REVENUE
LIMITS,
THEY
ARE
%ACTUALLY
SPENDING
LIMITS, AND
%THEY
WERE
SET
IN
1993.
%THE ONLY
WAY
THAT
REVENUE
LIMITS%OR
SPENDING
LIMITS CAN
GO
UP
IS
%IF THE
LEGISLATURE
DOES
THAT
OR
%IF
A
SCHOOL
DISTRICT
GOES
TO
%REFERENDUM.
%THIS
PARTICULAR
BUDGET
PROVIDES
%A
$
0
INCREASE IN
THE
SCHOOL
%SPENDING
AUTHORITY,
IN
THEIR
%REVENUE LIMIT,
IN
THEIR
SPENDING%AUTHORITY.%IT
REALLY IS
A
SPENDING
LIMIT,
%AND THE
GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL
WAS
%TO INCREASE THAT
SPENDING
%AUTHORITY
BY
$200
PER
STUDENT,
%SO
IF
YOU
DON'T
RAISE
THE
%SPENDING
AUTHORITY,
NO
MATTER%HOW MUCH MONEY FROM THE
STATE
%
YOU PUT INTO
THE
BUDGET,
THE
%SCHOOL
DISTRICTS
CAN'T
SPEND
IT,
%SO
IT
COMES
IN,
AND
THEY
HAVE
TO
%SEND IT
BACK
OUT,
REALLY,
%THROUGH
A
PROPERTY
TAX
CUT,
AND
%SO IT
MEANS THAT
THERE'S
NO
%SPENDABLE
MONEY
FOR
SCHOOLS
.
%
>>
NOW --
%>>
AND
THE
LEGISLATURE --
%>>
K-12 --
%>>
NO,
THE
LEGISLATURE
RIGHT NOW
%IS
CLAIMING
THAT
THEY
HAVE
%INCREASED
SPENDING
CONSIDERABLY,%THAT IT IS
A
GREAT
BUDGET
FOR
%K-12
SCHOOLS, BUT
THAT'S
NOT
%REALLY TRUE.
%SINCE THEY
HAVE
NOT
INCREASED%THE
SPENDING
LIMIT,
SCHOOLS
ARE
%KIND OF CAUGHT
IN
A
BIND.
%THEY
HAVE
MONEY
THAT'S
COMING
IN
%THROUGH
THE
EQUALIZATION
%FORMULA.
%STATE MONEY
THAT'S
COMING
IN TO
%THE
LOCAL
SCHOOL
DISTRICTS
%THROUGH
THE
EQUALIZATION
%FORMULA,
AND
THE
LEGISLATURE IS
%SAYING
THAT
THEY
NOW
INCREASED
%SPENDING ON
K-12
EDUCATION, THEY
%ARE
NOW
SPENDING
TWO-THIRDS THE
%COST OF
K-12
EDUCATION, WHICH%WAS
A
PREVIOUS
PROMISE THAT
WAS
%MADE
TO
EDUCATION
A NUMBER
OF
%YEARS
AGO,
BUT IT
IS
NOT
REAL
%INCREASES.
%THEY
ARE
NOT
SPENDABLE
%INCREASES.
%THIS IS KIND
O
F
A
SHELL
GAME.
%>>
AND
SO
THAT
$128
MILLION,%YOU'RE
SAYING,
DOESN'T
GO
INTO
%SCHOOLS
EXACTLY,
BUT
IT
GOES
%TOWARDS PROPERTY TAX
CUTS?
%>>
EXACTLY.
%SO IF
YOU
GOT
A
SPENDING LIMIT%AND
THE
STATE
POURS
IN
MONEY
%THROUGH
THE
EQUALIZATION
FORMULA
%AND THEY
DON'T
ALLOW
SCHOOLS
TO
%SPEND ANY
MORE,
THEIR
HANDS
ARE
%TIED,
AND
THE
MONEY
THAT
COMES
%IN
TO
THEIR
BUDGET, THEY
NEED
TO
%JUST
SEND
RIGHT
BACK
OUT
AS
%PROPERTY
TAX
CUTS.
%SO
LET
ME
PUT
A
FURTHER
POINT
ON
%THIS.
%ADDITIONAL MONEY DOESN'T
GO
TO
%EDUCATIONAL
EXPENSES
UNLESS
THE
%LEGISLATURE
AUTHORIZES
THE
%DISTRICTS
TO
SPEND
IT,
AND
THEY
%DIDN'T
INCREASE
THE
SPENDING
%LIMIT.
%>>
SO
THE
G.O.P.
BUDGET
WRITERS
%SAID
THEY
ALSO
TOOK
INTO
ACCOUNT
%THE
ONE-TIME
FUNDING OF
NEARLY
%$2.5
BILLION
FROM
FEDERAL
%PANDEMIC AIDE THAT'S
GOING
TO
%PUBLIC
SCHOOLS.
%DOES THIS
NOT
FULFILL
WHAT
%
SCHOOLS
WILL
NEED,
AT
LEAST
%UNTIL
THE
NEXT
BUDGET
CYCLE?
%>>
WELL,
SO
THE
FEDERAL
MONEY --
%THE
FEDERAL
MONEY, THAT'S
COVID
%RELIEF
,
AND,
CERTAINLY, THERE IS
%A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT
OF
MONEY
%COMING
IN
T
O
THE
STATE
IN
%VARIOUS
WAYS,
INCLUDING
MONEY
%FOR
SCHOOLS,
BUT
THAT
FEDERAL
%COVID
FUNDING
REQUIRES
THE
%STATES,
ONE
,
TO
CONTINUE
%
SPENDING IN PROPORTION
TO
THEIR
%BUDGET,
THE
SAME
THEY'VE
DONE%FOR THE
LAST
THREE
YEARS, SO
%BASICALLY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
%DOESN'T
WANT
THE
STATES
TO
STIFF
%THE
PUBLIC
SCHOOLS
AND
USE
THE
%FEDERAL MONEY
INSTEAD
OF
STATE
%MONEY.
%THEY
WANT
THE
FEDERAL
MONEY
TO
%ACTUALLY
GO
TO
COVID
RELIEF,
%TO --
WELL, IT IS
SET
UP
SO
THAT
%SCHOOLS
ARE
REIMBURSING
FOR
%EXPENDITURES THEY'VE HAD
THAT
%ARE COVID
RELATED.
%IT
IS
NOT
JUST
A
BLOCK
SUM
THAT
%ALLOWS SCHOOL
DISTRICTS
TO
SPEND
%MONEY ON
TEACHER
SALARIES
OR
%ENGLISH LANGUAGE
LEARNING
%PROGRAMS
OR -- THAT'S
NOT
%ALLOWED.
%THEY
HAVE
TO
BE
REIMBURSED
FOR
%THINGS,
EXPENSES,
THAT
WERE
%CAUSED BY
COVID
.
%AND
WHAT
THIS --
WHAT
THE%FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT REALLY
%DOESN'T
WANT
THE
STATE
TO
%SUPPLANT FEDERAL
MONEY
WITH
%STATE
MONEY.
%FEDERAL
MONEY
IS
EARMARKED
FOR
%COVID
RELIEF
.
%SO
YOU
CAN'T
RELY
ON
THE
FEDERAL
%COVID MONEY
FOR
YOUR
REGULAR
%EXPENDITURES.
%
IT'S JUST
NOT
ALLOWED.
%YOU
CAN'T
PROVIDE
THIS
FOR
%SALARIES.%YOU
KNOW,
AND
MOST
SCHOOL
%DISTRICTS SPEND
90%
OF
THEIR
%MONEY
SPENT
ON
SALARIES,
AND
THE
%COVID
RELIEF
MONEY
IS
COVID
%RELIEF
MONEY, NOT
SALARY
MONEY,
%NOT
TEACHER
SALARY
MONEY.
%IT
IS
NOT
INTENDED
FOR
THAT
.
%>>
SO THIS
ONE-TIME
EXPENDITURE
%CAN'T BE
USED
FOR
WHAT SHOULD
BE
%REGULAR
STATE
FUNDS.
%NOW, A
S
YOU
CALLED
THIS
"A
SHELL
%GAME,"
THE
REPUBLICANS
TOOK
%MONEY
AND
ALLEVIATED PROPERTY
%TAXES SO
THAT
THEY
WOULD
HIT
THE
%LIMIT
NEEDED
TO
QUALIFY
FOR
%THOSE FEDERAL
DOLLARS, AND
AS
%YOU
STATED
AT
THE
BEGINNING,%THIS
GOLDEN
OPPORTUNITY,
THIS
%BUDGET
SURPLUS, WAS
USED
MAINLY
%FOR
A
SIGNIFICANT TAX
CUT,
AND
%YOU
WROTE A
LETTER TO THE
%GOVERNOR ASKING
HIM
TO
VETO
THE
%BILLIONS
IN
TAX
CUTS IN
THE
%BUDGETS SO
THAT
MONEY
CAN
GO
TO
%EDUCATION, BUT WOULD
THAT
%FUNDING
HAVE
AUTOMATICALLY GONE
%TO
SCHOOLS IF
EVERS
HAD
%PARTIALLY
VETOED
THAT?
%>>
WELL,
THE
MONEY
WON'T
%AUTOMATICALLY GO
TO
SCHOOLS.
%CERTAINLY, THE
LEGISLATURE HAS
%TO GO
BACK
AND
DECIDE HOW
THEY
%ARE
GOING
TO
SPEND
THE
MONEY
%THAT
WAS
RELEASED WHEN
THE
TAX
%CUTS
WERE
VETOED,
SO,
NO, IT
IS
%NOT
AN
AUTOMATIC
KIND
OF
VETO
%THAT
WOULD
ALLOW -- THAT
WOULD
%CHANGE
THE
TAX
CUT
INTO
%EDUCATION
SPENDING.
%IT WOULDN'T
WORK THAT
WAY.
%THE
LEGISLATURE HAS TO
DO
THAT.
%>>
AND
S
O
EVERS,
AS
HE
CALLS
%HIMSELF, THE
"EDUCATION
%GOVERNOR," HE
FELT
HIS
HANDS
%WERE
A
LITTLE BIT
TIED
BY
THIS
%BUDGET.
%HE COULDN'T
VETO
IT
IN
TOTAL,
IT%WOULD
HAVE
JEOPARDIZED
THE
%FEDERAL
COVID
MONEY
GOING
TO
%SCHOOLS, BUT
HE
ALSO
SAID HE WAS
%LIMITED BY
HIS
PARTIAL
VETO
%AUTHORITY THE
WAY
THE
BUDGET
WAS
%WRITTEN, SO
IN
YOUR
MIND,
DOES
%
THIS KIND --
IS
THIS
KIND
OF
THE
%BEST
THE
EDUCATION
GOVERNOR
%COULD DO
WITH
THIS
BUDGET?
%>>
WELL,
YEAH.
%HE -- WITH THE
L
IMITED
POWER
%THAT
HE
HAD
AND
THE
CAREFUL
%CRAFTING OF THE
BUDGET,
I
DO
%BELIEVE THAT IT WAS
ABOUT
THE
%BEST
THAT
HE
COULD DO.
%IN MY
MIND,
HE
SAVED
THE
STATE
%SOME FUNDS.
%HE
VETOED
THE
ADDITIONAL
FUNDING
%THAT WENT
INTO
THE
RAINY
DAY
%FUND,
AND HE
IS
PULLING
THAT
%MONEY
TOGETHER.
%LEGISLATURE WILL HAVE TO
GO
%BACK, AND
THEY
CAN
SPEND
THAT
%MONEY IN
DIFFERENT WAYS.
%NOW,
OBVIOUSLY,
THE
GOVERNOR
%WOULD LIKE THEM
T
O
SPEND
THAT
ON
%EDUCATION RATHER
THAN
COME
%FURTHER
TAX
CUTS,
BUT
THAT WILL
%BE -- THAT WILL BE
A
HARD PUSH
%WITH
THIS
LEGISLATURE.
%>>
SO THERE
IS
ADDITIONAL
%FUNDING IN THE
BUDGET
FOR
MENTAL
%HEALTH
SERVICES,
SPECIAL
%EDUCATION,
AND
ENGLISH LANGUAGE
%LEARNERS.
%DO
THOSE
ALLOTMENTS IN
FUNDING
%GO
FAR
ENOUGH?
%>>
WELL,
SO
THERE
ARE --
THERE
%ARE
FUNDS
FOR
MENTAL
HEALTH
%SERVICES.
%THE
GOVERNOR
HAD
ACTUALLY
%PROPOSED A
$50
MILLION
INCREASE
%IN
MENTAL HEALTH
SERVICES,
AND
%THAT
DID
NOT
HAPPEN
IN
THIS
%STATE
BUDGET,
AND
INSTEAD, THEY
%PROVIDED A
SMALL
AMOUNT
FOR
%COMPETITIVE
GRANTS FOR
SCHOOL
%DISTRICTS,
BUT
THAT
MONEY'S IN
%THE ENOUGH
TO EVEN
MAKE
A
DENT
%IN
WHAT
IS
NEEDED
ACROSS
THE
%STATE.
%THANKFULLY,
THE
REIMBURSEMENT
%FOR
SPECIAL
ED,
THE
%REIMBURSEMENT
FOR
MENTAL HEALTH
%SERVICES CAN BE
TAKEN
THIS
YEAR,
%THIS
UPCOMING
YEAR,
FROM
C
OVID
%RELIEF
DOLLARS.
%THAT IS
ONE OF
THE
ALLOWABLE
%EXPENSES
SO
SCHOOL
DISTRICTS
%WILL HAVE
SOMETHING
TO
FALL BACK
%ON,
BUT
THE
STATE
MENTAL
HEALTH
%SERVICES REALLY ARE
NOT
THERE.
%>>
AND --
%>> AND
YOU
HAVE
TO
THINK
ABOUT
%SPECIAL EDUCATION --
%>>
AND
TALKING
ABOUT
SPECIAL
%EDUCATION.%>>
YES,
SO
LET'S
THINK
ABOUT
%SPECIAL EDUCATION FOR A
SECOND.
%YOU
KNOW,
OUR
SPECIAL
EDUCATION
%FUNDING IS
NOT
GOOD.
%THE
WAY
W
E
FUND
SPECIAL
%EDUCATION
IN
THIS
STATE
OF
%WISCONSIN.
%WE ARE
CURRENTLY
AT
THE
BOTTOM
%AMONG STATES
IN
TERMS OF
THE
%AMOUNT
THAT
THE
STATE
FUNDS
OR
%STATE FUNDING
IS
ALLOCATED
TO
%SPECIAL EDUCATION.
%WE DO
IT
IN
A DIFFERENT
WAY
WITH
%AS
WELL,
AND
IT'S IN
A
MORE
%UNIQUE WAY.
%WE
USE
REIMBURSEMENTS,
AND
SO
%DISTRICTS SPEND
THE
MONEY
TO
%PROVIDE
SPECIAL ED
SERVICES
AS
%THEY
SHOULD,
AND
THEY
DO,
BUT
%THEY
ARE
NOT
PROVIDED
%REIMBURSEMENT
FOR
THAT FROM
THE
%STATE.
%RIGHT
NOW,
THE
STATE
IS
%REIMBURSING SCHOOL DISTRICTS
AT
%ABOUT 28
CENTS
ON
THE
DOLLAR,
%ABOUT
28%
OF
THEIR
SPENDING
IS
%PAID FOR BY
THE
STATES,
BY
THE
%STATE, AND
THE
WAY
THE
LOCAL
%DISTRICTS MAKE
THIS
UP
IS
THAT
%THEY
PULL
MONEY
FROM
THEIR
%GENERAL
FUND,
THEIR
FUND
THEY
%USE
TO
SPEND
ON
ALL
CHILDREN.
%THEY
PULL MONEY
OUT
OF
THAT
%GENERAL FUND
TO
FILL
THE
HOLE
IN
%THEIR
SPECIAL
EDUCATION
BUDGET,
%AND
SO
COMING
INTO
THIS,
INTO
%THIS BUDGET
CYCLE,
WE
ARE
WAY
%BEHIND IN
A
BAD
PLACE
IN
TERMS
%OF
SPECIAL EDUCATION
FUNDING.
%THE
BIPARTISAN BLUE
RIBBON
%COMMISSION THAT TOOK
PLACE
A
%COUPLE
YEARS
AGO, THAT
WAS
%SPECIAL ED
FUNDING THAT WAS ONE%OF THE
THINGS
THAT
EVERYBODY
%AGREED ON
BOTH
SIDES OF
THE
%AISLE.
%WE
NEEDED
TO
INCREASE
SPECIAL
%EDUCATION
FUNDING.
%DURING
THE
LAST
BUDGET
CYCLE,
%THE
BUDGET THAT WAS
PASSED
%ACTUALLY SAID THAT
WE
WOULD
%INCREASE THAT
FUNDING
TO
30
%.
%HOWEVER,
THE
LEGISLATURE
DID
NOT
%MAKE GOOD
ON
THAT
PROMISE
%BECAUSE THERE
WERE
NOT
%SUFFICIENT
FUNDS
ALLOCATED
FOR
%SPECIAL
EDUCATION
REIMBURSEMENT
%TO
MEET
THAT TARGET
OF
A
30%
%REIMBURSEMENT RATE FOR
SCHOOL
%DISTRICTS, SO WE'RE
SITTING
AT
%ABOUT
28%
REIMBURSEMENT
RIGHT
%NOW.
%THAT'S WHERE
WE
ARE
GOING
INTO
%THIS
BUDGET.
%THE
GOVERNOR
PROPOSED
45%
%REIMBURSEMENT
RATE
FOR
THE
FIRST
%YEAR,
AND
THEN
HIGHER FOR
THE
%SECOND
YEAR IN
THE
BIAN
NNIUM.
%THE
GOVERNOR'S
BUDGET WOULD
%RAISE IT
TO
30%,
WHICH
IS
WHAT
%THEY SAID
LAST
TIME.
%SO
HAVE
WE
MADE
ANY
PROGRESS?
%IS THAT
AN
INCREASE
TO
SCHOOLS?
%I
DON'T THINK
SO
.
%>>
AND
SCHOOLS ARE
REQUIRED
TO
%HAVE
ADDITIONAL
FUNDING
FOR
%SPECIAL
EDUCATION,
ENGLISH
%LANGUAGE
LEARNERS.
%ARE
THESE,
IN
SOME
WAYS,
%UNFUNDED
MANDATES?
%>>
WELL,
THESE
ARE -- THESE
%PROGRAMS ARE
MANDATED
B
Y
THE%FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT, AND
THEY
ARE
%MORALLY AND
EDUCATIONALLY
%CORRECT
AS
WELL.
%THESE
ARE
THINGS
THAT
YOU
WOULD
%DO,
BUT
THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT,
%MANY
YEARS
AGO IN
THE
'70s,
%MANDATED
THAT
STATES
PROVIDE
%SPECIAL EDUCATION
S
ERVICES
AND
%ENGLISH LANGUAGE
LEARNING
%SERVICES.
%UNFORTUNATELY,
OUR
STATE
DOESN'T
%PROVIDE
MUCH
STATE
MONEY AND
%PUSHES
THAT
EXPENSE DOWN TO
THE
%LOCAL SCHOOL
DISTRICTS.
%>>
SO
WITH
THIS
COMPLICATED
%FUNDING
FORMULA
AND
SCHOOL
%DISTRICTS BEING
STRAPPED,
SHOULD
%THE
STRUCTURE
OF
HOW
K-12
%SCHOOLS ARE
FUNDED IN
THE
STATE
%BE SOMEWHAT
OFFENDED?
%DOES
THAT
FUNDING
STRUCTURE
NEED
%TO
CHANGE?
%>>
ABSOLUTELY.
%WE HAVE
A
FUNDING SYSTEM
THAT
%HASN'T BEEN
TOUCHED
FOR
YEARS,
%SINCE
THE
'70s.
%IT JUST
KEEPS
GETTING MORE
AND
%MORE
COMPLEX SO
THAT IT IS
HARD
%TO
EXPLAIN
TO
SOMEBODY -- IT
IS
%HARD
FOR
VOTERS TO
UNDERSTAND,
%AND IT
IS
HARD
EVEN
FOR
ELECTED
%SCHOOL BOARD
MEMBERS
TO
%UNDERSTAND.
%THAT'S
NOT
A
TRANSPARENT
SYSTEM
%OF
FUNDING.
%IT IS
ALSO
NOT --
IT'S
NOT
%PREDICTABLE.
%THERE
ARE
TECH
REVENUE
LIMITS,%FOR
EXAMPLE.
%REVENUE
LIMITS,
IF THERE
WERE
A
%PREDICTABLE SEQUENCE SO
THAT
%SCHOOL
DISTRICTS COULD
BE
%ASSURED THAT
THEY
WOULD
AT
LAST
%GET
A
COST
OF
LIVING
INCREASE,
%THEY WOULD BE ABLE
TO
PREDICT
%THEIR
BUDGETS
AND
THEIR
SPENDING%SPENDING.
%BUT
THERE
ISN'T
AN
AUTOMATIC
%INCREASE IN
THOSE
REVENUE
%LIMITS.%IN
FACT,
WE'VE
SEEN
TWICE
SINCE
%REVENUE
LIMITS WERE
CREATE
ED
%WHERE THERE WERE
NO
INCREASES
IN
%REVENUE
LIMITS.
%DURING
THE
SECOND SCOTT
WALKER
%BUDGET, THERE WAS
NO
REVENUE
%LIMIT INCREASE,
AND, OF
COURSE,
%DURING
THE
FIRST
SCOTT
WALKER
%BUDGET, THERE WAS
A
CUT
OF
$550
%MILLION -- I'M
SORRY,
$550 PER
%STUDENT IN
REVENUE
LIMIT
OR
%SPENDING
LIMIT, AND
THIS
I
S
%THE -- THIS WILL BE
THE
THIRD
%TIME WHERE
WE
HAD
NO
INCREASE
IN
%REVENUE
LIMITS.
%REVENUE
LIMITS
IS
JUST
ONE
%EXAMPLE
OF
HOW
THIS
SYSTEM
IS
S
O%CON
VALUDED
WHY
SCHOOL
BOARDS
%HAVE
A
HARD
TIME
PREDICTING
WHAT
%THEIR
BUDGETS
WILL
LOOK LIKE IN
%THE FUTURE.%>>
SO
WHERE
DO
YOU
PROPOSE
%POLICY
GOES
FORWARD,
EITHER
FOR
%THIS
PARTICULAR
BIANNIUM,
SHOULD
%THE
LEGISLATURE OR
C
OULD THE
%LEGISLATURE
TAKE
ANY
ACTION
TO
%TRY
AND
STILL
GIV
E
SCHOOLS MORE
%MONEY, OR
PASS
THIS BUDGET
%CYCLE?
%WHAT DO
YOU
SEE
GOING
FORWARD?
%>>
WELL
,
CERTAINLY,
I
N
THIS
%BUDGET
CYCLE, WHEN
THEY
COME
%BACK
TO
DEAL
WITH
THE
BUDGET AND
%LOOK AT
THE
ADDITIONAL
FUNDING%THAT
IS
THERE
AND
AVAILABLE, I%BELIEVE THAT
THEY
SHOULD
SPEND
%MORE
MONEY
ON
PUBLIC
SCHOOLS.
%THAT, IN
MY
OPINION,
IS
OBVIOUS
%THERE.
%I'VE HEARD
CONCERNS ALL OVER
THE
%STATE, AND
THERE
ABOUT
140
%SCHOOL
DISTRICTS
THAT
ARE
NOT
%GOING
TO
GET
ANY
ADDITIONAL
%FUNDING,
AND, IN
FACT, WILL
BE
%CUT, THEIR
FUNDING WILL
BE
%REDUCED, STATE
FUNDING WILL
BE
%REDUCED.
%THAT
INCLUDES
20 OF
THE
POOREST
%SCHOOL
DISTRICTS IN THE
STATE
OF
%WISCONSIN.
%NOT JUST
GENERALLY LARGE
CITIES,
%NOT URBAN
CITIES,
NOT
POOR
%DISTRICTS, BUT,
LIKE,
THIS
%PROBLEM IS
ACROSS
THE
STATE,
%BUT, OF
COURSE,
IT'S
WORSE FOR
%THE
POOR
DISTRICTS,
AND
THE
%PROBLEM
IS,
REGARDLESS
OF
SIZE
%OR
GEOGRAPHY
OR
POLITICAL
%LEANING,
THIS BUDGET
AS WE HAVE
%NOW
IS
NOT
GOOD
FOR
SCHOOL
%DISTRICTS, AND THEY
NEED TO
FIX
%THAT.
%THEY
NEED
TO
SPEND
SOME OF THE
%MONEY THAT
THEY
HAVE
IN
THIS
%GREAT
FINANCIAL
PREDICTION
T
O
%MEET THE
NEEDS
OF
CHILDREN, TO
%MEET THE
NEEDS
OF
CHILDREN
IN
%PUBLIC
SCHOOLS
ACROSS THE
STATE
%OF
WISCONSIN.
%THIS
BUDGET
IS
HISTORIC
IN
THAT
%IT
PROVIDES
MINIMAL
FUNDING
TO
%LOCAL SCHOOL
DISTRICTS
WHEN
THE
%NEED
IS
SO
GREAT AND
WHEN
THE
%DEMAND
PLACED ON
SCHOOLS
%CONTINUES TO
INCREASE,
AND
%THERE'S
DEFINITELY ENOUGH MONEY
%TO
INVEST IN THE FUTURE
OF
OUR
%CHILDREN.
%STATE'S GOT
THE
FUNDS.
%THERE'S
A
LARGE
BALANCE
%REMAINING, BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS
%THAT COULD BE
SPENT,
AND THAT
IS
%CERTAINLY
SUFFICIENT
TO
FUND
%SPECIAL
EDUCATION,
MENTAL
HEALTH
%SERVICES, ENGLISH
LANGUAGE
%LEARNING
PROGRAMS,
AND
IT
COULD
%EVEN
JUSTIFY
THE
$200
PER
PUPIL
%REVENUE OR
SPENDING
LIMIT THAT%WAS
PROPOSED
BY
GOVERNOR
EVERS.
%>>
NOW,
IS
THAT
WHAT
YOU
WERE
%REFERRING TO IN
YOUR
LETTER TO
%THE
GOVERNOR
AS
THESE
GAPS
%WIDENING?%>>
THE
GAPS
WIDENING
ARE
EXACTLY
%THAT.
%WE
HAVE LARGE
GAPS
IN
OUR
STATE,
%OPPORTUNITY
GAPS,
ACADEMIC
GAPS,
%ACHIEVEMENT
GAPS,
CALL
IT
WHAT
%YOU
MAY,
FUNDING
GAPS,
LARGE
%GAPS
IN
OUR
STATE,
PARTICULARY
%CHILDREN IN
POVERTY,
RURAL
%CHILDREN,
ENGLISH
LANGUAGE
%LEARNERS, CHILDREN
WITH
SPECIAL
%NEEDS, AND
THESE
ARE
CHILDREN%
WHO DON'T
HAVE
THE
%OPPORTUNITIES, ACADEMIC
%OPPORTUNITIES, THAT
CHILDREN
IN
%WEALTHY
COMMUNITIES
HAVE,
AND
%THESE CHILDREN
ARE
IMPORTANT.
%EVERY
CHILD
IS
IMPORTANT IN THE
%STATE OF
WISCONSIN,
AND
EVERY
%CHILD SHOULD BE GIVEN
A
FUTURE
%OR OPPORTUNITY
FOR
A
GOOD
%FUTURE.
%THOSE
ARE
THE
GAPS
.
%IN
THIS
TIME
OF
COVID,
THOSE
%GAPS
ARE
LAID
BARE.
%THEY
ARE
REALLY
HARD
TO
IGNORE
%AT THIS POINT.
%SCHOOL
DISTRICTS WHO
DON'T
HAVE
%BROADBAND.
%SCHOOL DISTRICTS
WHO
DON'T
HAVE
%SUFFICIENT
TEACHERS
OR
AIDES,
%SCHOOL
DISTRICTS
THAT
NEED
%ASSISTANCE,
STRUCTURALLY NEED
%ASSISTANCE.
%MENTAL HEALTH
SERVICES,
ENGLISH
%LEARNING LANGUAGE
SERVICES.
%THE
GAPS
ARE
LAID
BARE, AND
THIS
%PARTICULAR BUDGET IS GOING
TO
%MAKE THOSE
GAPS
WORSE RATHER
%THAN
BETTER,
AND WE
HAVE
%SUFFICIENT
FUNDS
TO
CLOSE
THOSE
%GAPS.
%THE
LEGISLATURE
HAS
NOT
DONE
%THAT,
AND,
YOU
KNOW,
BUDGETS
ARE --
PUBLIC
BUDGETS ARE
A
%STATEMENT
OF
VALUES
.
%YOU
WONDER HOW
MUCH EDUCATION IS
%VALUED WHEN
YOU
SEE
THIS
KIND
O
F
%HISTORIC
MINIMAL
FUNDING
.
%YEARS
AGO,
OUR
PARENTS AND
%GRANDPARENTS IN THE STATE
OF
%WISCONSIN
INVESTED
IN
PUBLIC
%EDUCATION TO
CREATE
A
GOOD
%SYSTEM OF
PUBLIC
SCHOOLS
ACROSS
%THE
STATE
OF
WISCONSIN
SO
THAT
%CHILDREN COULD
BENEFIT.
%DON'T YOU THINK THAT
A
T
THIS
%TIME
IT WOULD
BE
A
GOOD
IDEA
%WHEN WE
HAVE
FUNDS
TO
INVEST
IN
%OUR
CHILDREN
AND
GRANDCHILDREN%JUST
AS
OUR
PARENTS AND
%GRANDPARENTS DID FOR
US?
%>>
THIS
IS
DEFINITELY
AN
ISSUE
%WE'LL BE
WATCHING
GOING
FORWARD
%AND
DEFINITELY MORE
REPORTING
TO
%DO,
BUT
DR. JULIE
UNDERWOOD,%THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR
JOINING US
%TODAY.
%>>
THANK
YOU.
%AND THANK YOU
FOR
YOUR
ATTENTION%TO
THIS
ISSUE.
%I REALLY
APPRECIATE
IT
.
%>>
FOR
MORE
FROM
"HERE &
NOW"
%AND PBS
WISCONSIN,
VISIT
%PBSWISCONSIN
.ORG
/WISCONSIN,
AND%THANK YOU FOR
JOINING
US
ON
%"NOON WEDNESDAY."