Only 14 of the 60 Vermont school districts and supervisory unions have met the spending cuts required by the Legislature and the Department of Education.
Vermont Act 68, the “Challenges for Change” law: “It is hereby enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Vermont:
“In fiscal year 2011, the secretary shall reduce the general fund appropriation and transfer to the education fund by $3,966,375.00. It is expected that … total local education spending … will be reduced by $13,332,500.” As amended, the Vermont program to increase efficiency and cut budgets across most of Vermont government, requires all schools across the state to reduce the amount they raised by taxes by $23.3 million.
46 school districts and supervisory unions appear to be breaking the law.
Australian site whyshouldi.com tell us “When someone doesnt obey the law, we say that they have broken the law. Sometimes, people get hurt or suffer when laws are broken. Injured people are called victims. When some laws are broken, everyone feels afraid. Not just the victim.
“We call these things crimes and the people who commit these crimes are criminals. We also believe that criminals must be punished. There are many types of crime, such as assault, stealing, or murder.”
Australia apparently expects people, businesses, and governmental units to obey the law.
Back to whyshouldi.com: “One of your property rights is for you to lend your belongings to somebody, or share them with your friends and family. Do they have to ask you first, or pay you for the use of something? That is up to you its your property.
“Some cultures have a different view. In many Indigenous communities, families and friends may use or borrow each others property without getting permission every time. Many people around the world think that land belongs to a group or tribe, rather than one person.”
Ahh. That would apparently be Vermont.
Under Challenges for Change, schools reported last week that they had achieved cuts of $7.5 million, $15.8 million short.
Vermont Governor-elect Peter Shumlin has a plan.
Mr. Shumlin will urge lawmakers to transfer $19 million in federal funds to the schools to cover the $15.8 million shortfall. (Congress had approved that “stimulus” money to prevent teacher layoffs.)
Ya gotta love Mr. Shumlin’s arithmetic.
Law < ——————————————– > Short
In a typical (liberal) political move, the guv-to-be lets 46 lawbreakers off by throwing more money we don’t have at them. It’s OK, though. He got the money from the Feds.
And here I thought Vermont was supposed to stand for self-reliance.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
If the federal money was to prevent teacher layoffs, then the accounting doesn’t appear to be all that creative.
Besides, some would rather twist the law than close the special needs programs, fire P.E. teachers, and increase middle school math classes to fifty students.
I guess my liberal slip is showing.
@Don: “the accounting doesnt appear to be all that creative.”
Too true. It takes no creativity at all to take the tax money out of your right pocket instead of your left one. The real creativity comes in marketing it as “no tax money” went into education this year.
“some would rather twist the law than close the special needs programs, fire P.E. teachers, and increase middle school math classes to fifty students.”
I believe in small class sizes and I’ve seen the data that supports them but I gotta wonder how we managed to put a man on the moon with a bunch of engineers who came from neglected one room schools and fought a war before they crammed in a few years of engineering school and went to work for the gummint.
Decided to approach all this from a different direction:
I wrote a book about School Board Governance. It is no longer being offered to a ungrateful public system. In it I hint — but do not state — that School Board members are first and foremost politicians; and politicians rarely go to jail for breaking the law — unless it involves the drowning of a woman, and he is with the party not in power.
Even then, it’s iffy.