Recently the morning newspaper reported that the Clark County School District plans to create a job — costing $117,000 — whose purpose will be to slow the number of students bailing out of the district and opting to attend charter schools.
“When a child leaves the school district for a charter school, the state per-pupil funding and some local revenues that would have gone to Clark County departs as well,” the story explains.
Some local revenues, but not all. If the district unloads the entire expense of educating the departing student but retains some of the local revenue, how is that a drain?
Back in December the newspaper reported that the district issued a statement saying 1,400 more students enrolled in a charter school than projected, and this higher-than-expected charter school enrollment would cost the district $9 million in lost revenue.
According to CCSD, the district’s 2016-17 budget had per-pupil expenditures at $8,512, meaning the exit of 1,400 students would reduce spending by $11.9 million. Lose $9 million in revenue but cut spending by $11.9 million, sounds like a savings of $2.9 million.
Spending $117,000 to avoid saving $2.9 million? Where’s the logic in that?
“This is a position that is expected to raise money for the district by bringing children back in. It will pay for itself,” School Board member Carolyn Edwards was quoted as saying. “In essence, it’s not a cut, it’s actually an increase to the budget.”
Besides, what would the job entail? Cajoling? Badgering?