One of the arguments against the Charter School Amendment is that it will de-fund education. The facts do not support this claim. More importantly, amendment opponents are only discussing one side of an equation.
It’s called a Balance Sheet
assets = liability + equity
Yes, if a student leaves a traditional school the local district will no longer receive state funding for this student. But the opposition fails to acknowledge that the corresponding “liability” (the cost of educating that child) is also removed from the balance sheet. Because the cost to educate that one child is greater than the amount that the state sends to the district, combined with the fact that the district will keep all of their local tax dollars; the end result is that they removed more liabilities (i.e. cost to educate) than they removed “assets” (state funding). This results in an overall improvement on their balance sheet and improved position relative to every other child in the district. They now have more money per student than they did before.
Don’t let anyone fool you – you must look at both sides of the equation.
Here’s an extremely simple example:
Before charter in district (100 students):
| Assets | Liabilities |
| State funding = 500,000 ($5000 for 100 students) | Cost of educating 100 students: $750,000 |
| Local Funding = 500,000 | Reserves = 250,000 |
| Total assets = 1,000,000 | Liabilities + Reserves = 1,000,000 |
| Assets per student: $10,000 |
After Charter enrolls 10 students from district:
| Assets | Liabilities |
| State funding = 450,000 ($5000 for 90 students) | Cost of educating 90 students: $675,000 |
| Local Funding = 500,000 | Reserves = 275,000 |
| Total assets = 950,000 | Liabilities + Reserves = 950,000 |
| Assets per student: 10,555 (5.5% more per student after charter school) |
Follow Nancy Jester's Posts
Nancy Jester, DeKalb County Board Of Education says on October 3, 2012 at 9:28 am
I believe that I have good news for you regarding your concerns about the Chamblee Middle School Shuttle from Coralwood. First let me say how much I agree with you regarding “belt-tightening”. As you know, I was not in favor of any magnet transportation. This would have provided for a savings of almost $2 million but the board voted to maintain this service. Additionally, I requested that administrators take a pay cut which would be congruent with your stated opinion that “… we are asking everyone to tighten their belts…”. Again, this was not done. I am happy to note that you share my concern about the serious financial situation of DCSD.
As discussed above, magnet transportation was maintained by the board. The good news about moving one of the shuttles to originate at Coralwood rather than Henderson MS, is that it is not an additional cost as you mentioned in your email. It is simply moving one bus from HMS to begin its route at Coralwood. If executed properly, this change should save the district money. Additionally, this is a greener, more efficient and congestion minimizing location for the shuttle.
Chamblee MS families were notified twice on Sunday, August 12th, the day before school began, with conflicting facts about the Coralwood shuttle. They received two emails; (1) one sent at 1:15pm from DCSD’s Magnet Program director telling parents to pick up bus #1680 at 8am at Coralwood and (2) one sent at 5:55pm from the principal indicating that there would not be a shuttle originating from the Coralwood location. Clearly, these parents were not given ample time to prepare their transportation plans.
Thank you for your concern about this issue. As always, I am grateful for the opportunity to provide clarity.
Yours in service,
–Nancy