Leiglative Priorities for Hartford Public Schools

The State of Connecticut’s financial crisis is threatening to hold back the rate of progress that Hartford is making to close the worst-in-the-nation achievement gap between low-income urban students and their suburban counterparts.

Our challenge in the coming year will be to weather the state’s economic predicament while maintaining the promising but fragile measures and capacity that have led to the recent learning improvements of Hartford students.

According to the Connecticut Coalition for Achievement Now (ConnCAN), Hartford secured more than three times the gains in the percentage of students within goal range on the Connecticut Mastery Test than the statewide average.

The threat to our progress is based on the fact that Hartford has the highest rate of poverty and one of the lowest amounts of taxable property per capita among Connecticut’s 169 school districts. As such, Hartford depends on state revenue for about two-thirds of its operating budget, more any other district in Connecticut. The vehicle for state support is the Educational Cost Sharing grant (ECS).

Hartford’s dependence on ECS funding means that the district experiences the greatest volatility in times of economic recession.

Like every school district, about 80 percent of the budget for Hartford schools pays for salaries and benefit costs. Most of the remaining 20 percent is fixed costs. Short of operating fewer days, it is unrealistic to think that an adjustment to a lower percentage of state revenue can be made without a significant reduction in personnel. Such a reduction will, by extension, reduce General Budget allocations that directly impact our reform efforts.

In its 2009-2010 proposed budget, the State Department of Education made three optional proposals to deal with the fiscal crisis: a) Reduce the ECS grant by 12.3 percent; b) Reduce the ECS grant by 6.5 percent and reduce categorical grants by 18.81 percent; c) Reduce categorical grants by 37.62 percent.

It is estimated that Proposal A would lower the district’s general budget by at least $23 million, while Proposal B would lower the budget by at least $12 million.

Hartford Public Schools has followed up the state’s proposals with its own set of legislative priorities for 2009-2010:

1) PROTECT THE ECS “HOLD HARMLESS INCREASE – Under ECS, the district budget increases 4.5 percent per year to cover wage and benefit cost increases in its 12 collective bargaining contracts and operating contracts such as transportation. The estimated increase for 2009-2010 is about $7.5 million or $333 per student. Without it, the district must reduce personnel and services to fund wage and benefit increases.

2) SUPPORT ECS FUNDING OVER CATEGORICAL FUNDING.

3) TIE REDUCTIONS IN ECS FUNDING TO A REDUCTION IN THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF OPERATING DAYS REQUIRED OF DISTRICTS – Operating for fewer days is the highest-value lever in reducing operational costs. In Hartford, a $13.8 million shortfall could be absorbed by operating eight fewer school days, about 4 percent of the academic year.

4) FULLY FUND “PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES” (PILOT) – The intent of PILOT programs is to compensate cities and towns for real property tax losses due to exemptions applicable to state-owned property, private colleges and general and free standing chronic disease hospitals. The value of PILOT to Hartford is significant, considering that 50 percent of all real property in the city is non-taxable. Full funding of PILOT translates into an additional $10 million for Hartford.

5) SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT OF A GREATER HARTFORD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT -- The issue of rising costs and diminished revenues is exponentially magnified in Connecticut because the state has 169 municipalities, all raising revenue to support education at the same time. That is a good starting point for regionalization. The creation of a Greater Hartford Unified School District would allow neighboring communities to create economies of scale that would: a) Reduce unnecessary duplication of programs and services; b) Remove duplicative administrative structures and excessive administrative costs; c) Provide volume purchasing power; d) Allow for decreased costs in transportation through a consolidated system; e) Provide a larger health care benefits pool; f) Reduce economic and racial isolation for students; g) Equitably distribute resources.

The state of our reform requires stability to be sustained. We believe abovementioned set of legislative priorities offer the best possible means of continuing our progress toward closing the achievement gap while enduring the state’s financial crisis. We invite your comments on our recommendations.