Would $250M help Oregon schools?

Cool Texan · 05-13-2003, 08:10 AM

Yes or no question coming up. Please respond, for now, with only a Yes or No.

Question:

If there were another $250M available for spending on Oregon schools this year, would this solve the problems our schools/kids are facing? Lets assume I found $250M buried in a hole in the ground, and can find the same amount every year, and can give it to the OR gubment for school funding.

Yes: Yes, by in large the problems would be solved.

No: The gap is larger than that...and while it would certainly help, it would not solve the problem.

Your answer? (remember, Yes or No only...for now please)

Straydog · 05-13-2003, 08:16 AM

Can't do it........ no comment.

Simplification of the issues is a big part of our problem and questions such as this merely fuel the confusion.

Cool Texan · 05-13-2003, 08:21 AM

Get off the fence Stray. Yes or No?

Straydog · 05-13-2003, 08:55 AM

Don't have time for your silly games Cool....

Don't you have work to do? Hope you are either commissioned or self employed, otherwise you are draining someones payroll if you are at work as you claimed to be this time of day yesterday........

Gotta go sell something. Have fun with your "what if" game.

clearview2u · 05-13-2003, 09:09 AM

yes

Cool Texan · 05-13-2003, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Straydog:
Don't have time for your silly games Cool....

Don't you have work to do? Hope you are either commissioned or self employed, otherwise you are draining someones payroll if you are at work as you claimed to be this time of day yesterday........

Gotta go sell something. Have fun with your "what if" game.

Cool Texan · 05-13-2003, 09:45 AM

Here is where I am coming from on this post.

Oregon lottery profits:

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (21%) or $149.2M
PARKS & NATURAL RESOURCES (15%) or $99M

$250M a year of lotter profits go to these areas, when in fact, they should all go to schools (obviously in my opinion). The other spending areas should be covered by other monies.

For example:

* Revenue to the State of Texas. Between 1992 and 1997, about $4.9 billion in lottery revenues went to the General Revenue Fund. Effective September 1, 1997, legislative action dedicated lottery revenue to the Foundation School Fund. Approximately $5 billion since 1997 has gone to the Foundation School Fund, used for school districts public education services at the local level. In FY 2001, lottery contributions equaled about eight percent of the Foundation School Fund ($835.8 million out of approximately $10 billion.)

Would be an easy solution to the school problems.

clearview2u · 05-13-2003, 09:47 AM

where in Texas did you go to school? and do you feel you received a fairly good education?

Cool Texan · 05-13-2003, 10:02 AM

Tom C Clark High School in San Antonio. Yes, I think I received a very good education. Aside from studying harder, I cant imagine it being better.

The Fishing Geek · 05-13-2003, 10:04 AM

Let's keep the personal attacks out of the debate please.

clearview2u · 05-13-2003, 10:15 AM

actually I went to school in Texas, Port Neches Groves High School and received a good education. I have a teenager in the Beaverton District and not very happy with the education she is getting.

Thumper · 05-13-2003, 10:16 AM

See Lashback's excellent post on the other thread. To answer the question --- Nope, $250 million is a drop in the bucket, and just forestalls the day of reckoning. The only answer to the school funding problem is to surgically reduce cost increases to 3% or less annually, rather than the 13% that apparently exists now.

And that will take both creativity and courage. Neither traits appear to be in excess in Salem or among the various factions.

You just can't throw enough money at this problem to ever solve it piecemeal.

Cool Texan · 05-13-2003, 10:17 AM

Geek, there's only one contributor to this thread that needs to be told that. The rest of us (well, the other 2 of us) are simply having a discussion.

clearview2u · 05-13-2003, 10:18 AM

actually I went to school in Texas, Port Neches Groves High School and received a good education. I have a teenager in the Beaverton District and not very happy with the education she is getting.

Cool Texan · 05-13-2003, 10:23 AM

Thumper...I agree. More money is not an answer in a state with poor fiscal responsibility. Thus the post. My thoughts are that the lottery profits should go 100% to schools. The extra $250M wont fix problems, but it certainly helps if coupled with a rebalancing of spending as it relates to the educational system.

I agree 100% with you that we need creativity in Salem. We also need discipline, focus, and a balancing of priorities. So far it seems that our change in the governors office wont bring that...unfortunately.

Clearview...sorry to hear about your teens education quality. My wife and I are working on kids...and it will be interesting to see how involved we get in their education. Quite a bit I'd imagine.

And to clear up and mystery, yeah, I'm at work right now. Aint it great?

clearview2u · 05-13-2003, 10:36 AM

I know we spend a lot of time at home working with her to make she stays up to par. The best way to make sure any child gets the best education possible is for the parents to be involved.

The Fishing Geek · 05-13-2003, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cool Texan:
I agree 100% with you that we need creativity in Salem. We also need discipline, focus, and a balancing of priorities. So far it seems that our change in the governors office wont bring that...unfortunately.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Elaborate, please. I thought that Kulongoski had laid out some pretty respectable priorities so far.

Hoosier Daddy · 05-13-2003, 10:46 AM

Sure it would help. For awhile......

Cool Texan · 05-13-2003, 10:52 AM

Geek, the point I was getting at is that I havent seen or heard much that would indicate that the Oregon gubment is doing anything to change the structure of the revenue/expense picture. The state is hiring, despite a huge revenue shortfall, and in the meantime the social programs are being cut. If there are significant positive changes that are being made, I'd love to hear about them. Its quite possible there are things going on that I am not aware of due to not being in the right loops, not reading the paper every day, etc. Any insight you have on this matter would be appreciated by me.

Cool Texan · 05-13-2003, 12:07 PM

You can view the state budget online. You'll see headcount by different areas for last budget cycle versus the new budget. There are additions/increases all over the place.

trap50 · 05-13-2003, 12:17 PM

They are hiring at the State hospital. My job is is going to be filled in the next couple weeks. Just had another new hire each of the last 2 weeks.That's 3.

[ 05-13-2003, 01:20 PM: Message edited by: trap50 ]

The Fishing Geek · 05-13-2003, 12:52 PM

Are those new positions are filling of vacancies?

trap50 · 05-13-2003, 01:17 PM

Filling of vacancies.

The Fishing Geek · 05-13-2003, 01:34 PM

The filling of vacancies shouldn't be a problem then. Those monies are already budgeted.

It's not always a fair assumption to make that when there are vacancies that the position didn't need to be filled. In a lot of positions others have to work overtime to keep the department treading water, and even then it may not keep the workflow going at the rate it needs to go. I say this from experience, as my office hasn't been allowed to fill vacated positions for almost two years, and it's hurting our claimants. It's not pretty.

Cool Texan · 05-13-2003, 01:38 PM

Headcounts...1999-2001 actuals versus 2003-2005 "Governors Balanced":
http://www.bam.das.state.or.us/pub/GBB0305/

Administration:
From 2789 to 2852

Education:
From 13658 to 15280

Human Services:
9910 to 9856 (reduction)

Public Safetey:
8357 to 8017 (reduction)

Economic and Community Development:
1997 to 1969 (reduction)

Natural Resources:
5532 to 5651

Transportation:
4951 to 4860

Consumer and Business Services:
1670 to 1587 (reduction)

Legislative:
732 to 734

Judicial:
2034 to 2260

This comes out to the addition of 1,436 jobs. What is an average salary for gubment work? Lets say $30k (random amount). That is adding $43M in expenses to the state payroll. Nice.

However, if you go to:
http://www.bam.das.state.or.us/pub/G...hedule_VII.pdf
that gives a different headcount summary. It says we're only adding 985 jobs (odd that it doesnt tie out). Assuming the same $30k salary, its $30M added expense.

If I'm missing something, or if I am reading all of this wrong, someone please tell me.

TheRogue · 05-13-2003, 05:01 PM

Businesses cut back, generally, because of lack of business!! (ie.. customers). Hate to tell you this, but unless there's a mass exodus leaving this state, state agencies do NOT have less customers!! In fact, with a poor economy and high unemployment, many agencies have MORE "customers".

I hate it when people compare government operations to business. Apples to oranges.

BTW, $250M is a drop in the bucket, but it would be appreciated. But, yanking the money from Economic Development (lack of jobs the big problem here) and from Parks (remember, we're supposed to be focusing on TOURISM??), don't make a darn bit of sense!

TR

Cool Texan · 05-13-2003, 05:31 PM

Rogue, fair enough. I am simply pointing out that people can not really complain about the school crisis while being accepting of such a large number of increased jobs in the state government. Its all about choices...that is my point.

Straydog · 05-13-2003, 09:17 PM

Cool,

It's after 10:00.

I have driven 160 miles and serviced several accounts in the process since my last post. I then spent 2 hours in a School District budget meeting getting beat up from all angles. Crammed down a salad and hung with my 8 year old for a few minutes before she had to go to sleep. I am just now checking back in here.

My point of saying this? To show that I "don't have time for your silly games." Sorry to offend but it is a fact.

Now that you got to your point, my off the fence answer is no, I don't think that would do the trick. I don't know your plan to backfill Ec. Development and Natural Resources but they need at least partial funding.

Good night.

True · 05-13-2003, 09:57 PM

No.

lost_sailor · 05-13-2003, 11:18 PM

no

The Fishing Geek · 05-13-2003, 11:41 PM

I hadn't heard that the state was hiring. All that I've seen is the proposed budget cuts. Who are they hiring, other than police?

Straydog · 05-14-2003, 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cool Texan:
....in Salem.... We also need discipline, focus, and a balancing of priorities. So far it seems that our change in the governors office wont bring that...unfortunately.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Cool,

This statement makes the most sense of anything anyone has said on this topic to date except, it isn't just the Governors office that is dropping the ball. The Governor is but one part of the puzzle.

All through the previous regular session and five embarassing special sessions our Legislature has avoided the real problems and issues like a patch of poison oak in spring.

We are darn near done with this session and still they have not had the guts to seriously tackle this budget but rather have wasted our time bickering over petty issues and playing party politics.

"We have to all tighten our belts." is a worn out ineffective sound bite. They need to do their jobs and actually Legislate. [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img] They have not shown the fortitude to do that and there in lies the foundation of our problem in my mind.

[ 05-14-2003, 06:07 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

Cool Texan · 05-14-2003, 06:21 AM

Nah, I'll take the high road.

[ 05-14-2003, 07:27 AM: Message edited by: Cool Texan ]

Digifish · 05-15-2003, 07:04 PM

I would like to express my opinion about the state education funding crisis by voting in your poll but I think the over simplification of your question is symptomatic of the whole debate. It reduces the issue to a level of trite dialog and meaninglessness.

I believe several things lead to our current situation and the most damning is the inability of the people of this state to produce leaders (legislative, executive or judicial) that can provide the strength of character, commitment and intellect to see ways to the other side. I believe the people produce good leaders by supporting the right ideas.

In addition, the fundamental tax structure of Oregon relies too heavily on income and property taxes. I believe income taxes are too economically sensitive, meaning incomes fluctuate too much between the good times and the not so good times. In addition they discourage, in a back handed way, personal savings. I believe there are better ways which include a sales tax (with the addition to a lower income tax rate). Sales taxes collect from a wider base including visitors. And property taxes are a stable funding source unless you gorge yourself on them like we did in the 1990's (and still doing to an extent) with the double digit inflation on real property. Unless the tax code changes we will continue to suffer more than is necessary in a poor economy.

I believe we need major change in this state but the current perceived need for every person and organization to have their finger on the pulse of government by its nature does not allow it to move concisely nor swiftly.

Clackman · 05-15-2003, 09:33 PM

i would say no but not because its not enough i beleive 11000.00 prox. per student spent now is to much for what we are getting.the problems this state faces are not from bad times but gross overspending in good times.