Personal Input for Part 5:
The 2010 Local District Property Value (DPV):
District 1: $ 145,968,635
District 2: $ 2,916,187,709
I&S Tax Collections:
District 1: $ 94,871
District 2: $ 8,836,256
Chapter 46 (EDA) Totals:
District 1: $ 572,716
District 2: $ 0
The district that has the most funds available to make payments on existing debt/school facility bonds would definitely be District 2 with a collection of more than 8.8 million dollars. There is a reflection of a three year tax collection rate of 98% for the district as well. Thus, a minimum of 8.6 million dollars are collected annually to pay towards annual bond payments.
District 1 has less funds available, and has applied for Existing Debt Allotment (EDA) funds due to low property values; therefore, reflecting not enough I&S funds being available to pay for existing debt on bonds.
District 1: $ 145,968,635
District 2: $ 2,916,187,709
I&S Tax Collections:
District 1: $ 94,871
District 2: $ 8,836,256
Chapter 46 (EDA) Totals:
District 1: $ 572,716
District 2: $ 0
The district that has the most funds available to make payments on existing debt/school facility bonds would definitely be District 2 with a collection of more than 8.8 million dollars. There is a reflection of a three year tax collection rate of 98% for the district as well. Thus, a minimum of 8.6 million dollars are collected annually to pay towards annual bond payments.
District 1 has less funds available, and has applied for Existing Debt Allotment (EDA) funds due to low property values; therefore, reflecting not enough I&S funds being available to pay for existing debt on bonds.
I remember back in my graduate studies for principal certification, we conducted a curriculum audit, and part of the audit focused on the physical plant of the school. Just as you mentioned earlier Jason, facilities affect how students can learn. Looking at the textbook and the understanding that District 1 is limited in its funding, and has a large population of economically disadvantaged students is a reflection upon the community. We could add in our discussion the information that Dr. Nicks shared in his article about seeking out opportunities for shared partnerships.
Group Response to Part 5:
Based upon the given information, there is probably a vast difference in the quality of the facilities between the two districts. The property value for District 2 is much higher than District 1; therefore, the facilities in District 2 would most likely be in better condition than District 1. We all know that facilities can affect learning in many ways. With this being said, District 1 should consider developing partnerships for shared programs and facilities. These partnerships have been known to bring in extra funding and collaboration with the community.
No comments:
Post a Comment