I know I pick on Lucy Ricardo of I Love Lucy fame from time to time, but no other character so easily embodies ridiculous thinking when it comes to money. Lucy Ricard math is: the reasoning process by which Lucy justifies a faulty
fiscal policy in order to finagle what she wants out of Rickey.
Currently, some Elmbrook administrators and board members are engaging in what I call, Lucy Ricardo math by thinking that by boosting enrollment, we can ease our budget woes.
Tomorrow the board votes on keeping or discontinuing 4K. The board and administration admit there is not much real academic gain to a 4K program but tout it as a way to boost revenue.
In a recent article, Gibson said, "...finances are the key reason [for 4K]" and "...the main motivation for adding 4-K was financial..." and "If the board does not approve 4-K, members will need to find other ways to 'shore up' enrollment and revenues to avoid major budget cuts, he said."
Bob Borch, in the Elmbrook Link last January, urged increasing all possible enrollments for the same reason. We can see this desire to recruit every possible student in the district's reluctance to limit enrollment to resident students.
Board President Meg Wartman, however, seems to "get it"; that adding more students to the Elmbrook School District is not the way to ease budget problems. (Meg does not buy into the Lucy Ricardo Math scenario.) She appears to understand that every student added means added expense for Elmbrook taxpayers and added burden on facilities, faculty, and services.
In a recent article, Board President Wartman commented that raising the revenue cap instead of starting a 4K program to generate
income for Elmbrook was a better solution. I would agree...to a point.*
I
think her statement about raising the revenue cap leads me to believe
that she understands that while adding 300 4K students will increase
Elmbrook's income, it would be at a
huge expense to the taxpayers. She is also factoring in the
increased burden 4K will place on facilities, faculty, and
services--none of which are cost free. .
Adding 300 4K students would generate approx. $1,950,000 for
Elmbrook's budget, but the majority, about $1.5 million of this comes directly from the
Elmbrook taxpayers. Only about $450,000 comes from state aids.
Since the 4K program is
estimated to cost Elmbrook around $860,000 out of their school budget,
(the Journal recently stated $2 million) it seems foolish to burden Elmbrook's
taxpayers with another $1.5 million just to get the $450,000 of "free" state
aid money for a program that costs nearly twice that amount.
We cannot enroll our way out of our budget problems. Lucy Ricardo might do that, but intelligent people in the real world would not.
While
I would favor some practical budget cuts to reduce the dollar amount
needed from the raised revenue cap, Meg's method, in the long run, of
raising the budget cap would still save the district taxpayers money
and reduce the "student footprint" on the district.
Since the 4K plan could include up to 500 students at some
time and we don't have the facility space at present with our current 200, it
is not difficult to see that more elementary school additions are in
our future.
The High School needs should be the board's top priority right
now as far as facilities go. Adding 4K would only add to classroom
shortages first at the elementary schools and then telegraph up to the
high schools.
If the board wishes the community to take them seriously about
our high school needs, then the board must act responsibly now and
discontinue 4K. Since it has shown no real academic gains, this 4K
program is more of a financial burden to the taxpayer than a benefit.
Be sure to
contact the board (Patrick Murphy must be called--he does not use email) and come to the meeting tomorrow night at 7pm.
We may all Love Lucy, but not as Elmbrook's financial adviser!
*I agree...to a point. Simply raising the revenue cap with no effort to cut out the fat in the budget, is not something I would advocate, but even that may be more cost effective than increasing student populations which will prompt the need for more classrooms, teachers, support staff, and services. In a budget as large as the Elmbrook School District's certainly there are places to make thoughtful reductions.
