New bill would allow the state to close deficit school districts, promote consolidation
A new bill introduced by state Rep. David Rutledge, D-Superior Township, would allow the state to dissolve financially struggling school districts and shuffle their students to other neighboring schools, according to a report in the Detroit News.
David Rutledge
Currently, if school districts cannot get out of debt on their own through deficit reduction plans, the state can elect to send in an emergency manager to fix the financial problems.
In the case of Muskegon Heights Public Schools, the emergency manager turned four of the district's buildings into charter schools to help Muskegon eliminate its $16 million deficit.
In this case, the district also is using the 18 mills of non-homestead taxes it levies on businesses and second homes, including rental homes, to help pay off its debt, according to MLive.
Rutledge's legislation, if passed, would allow the state to forgo the emergency manager step and dissolve the struggling school system itself, shifting the district's children to other schools within the county intermediate school district.
In Washtenaw County, Ypsilanti and Willow Run public schools, which have a combined deficit of about $13 million, chose to consolidate — taking action locally to fix their financial troubles and avoiding a state-appointed emergency manager. The unified Ypsilanti Community Schools district launches July 1.
Rutledge has been a champion of the Ypsilanti-Willow Run consolidation effort and has been working actively with YCS Superintendent Scott Menzel, the Michigan Department of Education and State Treasury Department to come up with a pay back schedule and time period for the $13 million debt, which the new district will assume.
Right now, the idea is Ypsilanti Community Schools would pay down its debt over a 20-year period. Rutledge told AnnArbor.com, he is working with treasury officials to see about paying off the debt in pre-established, regular intervals — similar to how a homeowner would pay off a mortgage, complete with interest, he said. The plan involves YCS paying back $1 million per year.
The treasury department has not signed off yet on a final plan, Rutledge said.
State Superintendent Mike Flanagan has been a supporter of the consolidation from the onset, dubbing the districts trailblazers, visionaries and examples for the rest of the state.
Flanagan told the Detroit News in Wednesday's article that districts making poor decisions receive the state's attention only when they don't follow their deficit elimination plans and run out of money.
"We are a local-control state. Give me the authority, and I will fix this stuff. People need to consider consolidation, and they are not doing it," he said in the article. "Ypsilanti and Willow Run … they were both sinking like a rock and we encouraged them to combine. It required a tremendous amount of work and a vote locally, but they did it."
Danielle Arndt covers K-12 education for AnnArbor.com. Follow her on Twitter @DanielleArndt or email her at daniellearndt@annarbor.com.
Comments
beardown
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 4:51 a.m.
It is very interesting that he waited until the two districts in his area consolidated before he brought this bill up. And it will be horribly ironic when after a couple years of students bailing the new YCS that his new bill might come back to haunt the new district that he helped create. How about we take the politicians and businesses out of education?
Basic Bob
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 11:01 a.m.
Rutledge was a big supporter of consolidation in Ypsilanti, in contrast to emergency management. This bill is consistent with that approach. Everyone wants the students to stay in the struggling district to keep their state funding intact, but many pull their students out because they know they have a better chance in a charter school. And they tell their friends, family, and neighbors proudly about their charter school experience. That is the conundrum for public school employees.
Anthony Clark
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 11:58 p.m.
"In the case of Muskegon Heights Public Schools, the emergency manager turned four of the district's buildings into charter schools to help Muskegon eliminate its $16 million deficit." I find it hilarious that the "solution" to the problem is the very thing that caused the problem in the first place. Public schools are struggling financially because charter schools are stealing their students and the state funding that goes along with it. "Charter school" is just a new name for what we used to call private, religious, or parochial schools. The law was pushed by right wing religious fundamentalists as a way to provide public funding for their private religious schools under the guise of giving parents a choice. What it did was starve public schools of needed funds by diverting it to private schools. The dismantling of public education has been the Republican agenda all along. We should be strengthening our public schools by giving them the resources they need. If you want your kid indoctrinated at some private school with a religious or other agenda, that's fine, but YOU pay for it.
YpsiLivin
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 3:31 p.m.
AA Resident, It hasn't so far...
A A Resident
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 1:08 p.m.
On the contrary, I think some stiff competition is more likely to improve public schools.
YpsiLivin
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 12:53 p.m.
"The law was pushed by right wing religious fundamentalists as a way to provide public funding for their private religious schools under the guise of giving parents a choice." If that were truly the case, the Michigan State Constitution would have been amended to allow direct payments to private and parochial schools. Sorry, you're giving "right-wing religious fundamentalists" too much credit in your analysis of this one. Charter schools were formed practically to allow the business community to run schools, and politically to diminish the power of the teachers' unions around the country. The irony is that as a group, charter school students perform academically no better than the local public district students do, and in many cases, their academic performance is worse. Eventually, charters will go out of business because they aren't financially viable and they are under no obligation to keep their doors open, and then we'll be left with broken and closed public schools, and nowhere for the students to go.
A A Resident
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 11:33 a.m.
So your concern is that public schools will need to compete with the charter schools for students and revenue? Sorry, but I don't see anything wrong with that.
beardown
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 5:01 a.m.
It's not hilarious. It was the plan from the beginning.
DonBee
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 9:46 p.m.
While on the surface this might look good, the devil is in the details. Giving the schools in a county 5 years to merge might be a better idea. Make them all one district is a great idea. Yes, it means ironing out the details of the difference is foundation grants, employee contracts, etc. Since there is roughly 1 ISD per county (the match is not quite perfect) - the ISD could become the school district, and the administration in the districts could then be eliminated, avoiding the Superintendent shuffle that happened in Ypsi/Willow Run. Even better, since the State manages the retirement system is one teacher contract state wide, then there would be no pay disparity and no issue with teachers moving school to school as the needs change. Charters could be grouped by the granting authority, and that would be their district, administration would be by the granting authority. If this was done then we would end up with about 100 districts in the state, including charters. I can hear the complaints now. School mascots, school pride, sports teams, local school boards, etc. Lots of people will find reason to complain. But it makes more sense than Rep Rutledge's bill.
treetowncartel
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 9:38 p.m.
I can see it going something like this. "hey boss, they shut down my kids' school district. I'm going to have to come in an hour later than I normally do and leave an hour earlier than I normally do to get them to and from school." That will go over well. The consolidation so far is a joke, the people in both districts were hoodwinked into thinking it was the best thing. An emergency manager is better than what we are witnessing in in this new district.
cinnabar7071
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 12:22 a.m.
Elections have consequences
YpsiLivin
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 9:27 p.m.
So Rutledge wants to co-opt neighboring school districts to take on students from failed districts involuntarily? Does the neighboring district have to extend busing service to the "orphaned" students? Does the neighboring district get their own per-pupil payment or will they be forced to accept students at the failed district's per-pupil rate? What happens if the neighboring districts don't have room to take additional students? What happens if the neighboring districts don't have the resources to take additional students? Are charter schools considered "neighboring" districts? What if the neighboring district is financially sound but fails to make AYP? Can students be forced to attend a failing school? What is considered "neighboring"? Are there limits to how far a child could be required to travel to attend school? Do the voters in the failed school district get to vote in the school board elections of neighboring districts? Do the voters in the failed school district get to vote in bond and millage elections in the neighboring district? Do the community members of the failed school district pay two school taxes - one to pay off the failed school district's debts and the other to pay for schooling at the neighboring district? If they only pay one tax, which one will it be? This sounds like a half-baked nightmare dreamed up by a politician who really doesn't understand what's at stake.
ThinkingOne
Sat, Jun 8, 2013 : 5:12 p.m.
Ypsi I am making the leap that once the school district is dissolved, the people are moved into the new school district and not just the children. Therefore, they may be people you haven't elected at first, but as a part of the school district you will have a say going forward. In the meantime you will be served by people that were elected by SOMEONE as opposed to an EFM who was elected by NO ONE.
YpsiLivin
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 6:13 p.m.
Thinking One, What's the difference between being required to send your children to a neighboring school district whose school board you did not elect, and having your child's school district managed by an EFM whom you did not elect? In either case, you have no representation.
ThinkingOne
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 3:41 p.m.
Some good questions were asked here. And perhaps many of the answers exist but just aren't in this article. But the idea that there be an option other than just having an emergency financial manager come in as an un-elected party and having total control - that in and of itself is not a bad thing. At least someone is trying to supply options. Also note the comment from Jay Thomas as it relates to my previous post about county-wide school districts.
Jay Thomas
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 1:42 a.m.
I was going to ask the same thing. It is not for the state to decide who gets to be in your school district!
seekingsun
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 9:25 p.m.
Slightly off-topic, but perhaps relevant from a budget perspective. About 20 years ago the NC state legislature passed a law that mandated no more than 1 school system per county (there are 100 counties in NC vs 83 in Michigan). These mergers created significant administrative efficiencies and eliminated some of the segregated districts that had been created in the white flight era. While extremely controversial at the time, it has been extremely successful. In Washtenaw County alone, there are 10 - soon to be 9 - independent districts. Think about how much money it takes for A2, Chelsea, Dexter, Lincoln, Manchester, Milan, Saline, Whitmore Lake, Willow Run/Ypsi to all manage the central operations independently. Something to think about.
ThinkingOne
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 3:35 p.m.
Everyone seems to think that bigger is automatically better. Was GM better than Ford? Were the Detroit Public Schools ever the best in the state? How many people espousing this view also approve of charter schools, where each school is it's own district? Michigan has a long history of local control of its schools. It will be very hard to convince the people who live in successful school districts that everything in the county needs to be somehow averaged out.
Bill
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 2:05 a.m.
Michigan has far too many districts for it's size. I totally agree that larger districts, properly managed with qualified instructional and financial leaders could lead to a significantly better education for the majority of Michigan students with more opportunities for students and lower overall operating costs. The current structure is not sustainable which has become evident due to the economic downturn. Consolidation would require real change including bringing in personnel with management skills to deal with significantly larger districts.
Hot Sam
Thu, Jun 6, 2013 : 12:47 a.m.
Seeking...I find it amazing that whenever the mount of school districts is questioned, it gets voted down on these pages...for the life of me i cannot figure out why people think we need almost 600 in a state with 83 counties...
YpsiLivin
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 9:35 p.m.
It's not really off-topic. Countywide school districts would have some significant advantages in the state - namely reducing the number of school districts by more than half. (Each charter school is considered its own district, and I think there are about 300 charter schools in Michigan.) It would eliminate a LOT of passengers in school administration. The State of Hawaii has a grand total of ONE school district, and it works for them.
apples
Wed, Jun 5, 2013 : 9:22 p.m.
If only the consolidation had been handled correctly it would be a different situation. This has been a terrible example of what can happened to students,staff and the tax payers. It's a sad day in Ypsilanti.