Guest Contribution by Arthur Green
The official Cost per Pupil report from the Department of Education is now out. (DOE web site . Thanks to an alert resident who located the document even though it has not been linked from the usual DOE summary page.)
Timberlane’s Cost Per Pupil (2016/17) was $16,780. That’s up by more than $1,000 from the previous year. Since 2008, the Per Pupil Cost is up 59%.
Let’s contrast that with the comparable school districts.
It’s concerning that Timberlane is $1,400 per pupil more expensive than the state average.
It is appalling that Timberlane is $2,500 per pupil more expensive than districts of similar size and school configuration.
Taking an example – Salem is similar in enrollment, school configuration and demography to Timberlane. It has stronger SAT scores in both English and Math. Its Per-Pupil cost is $1,934 less than Timberlane. If our per-pupil cost were the same as Salem, our budget would be lower by $6.7 million.
The apologists for open-ended spending are irritated that I continue to argue, with evidence, that Timberlane is grossly overstaffed. Here’s the consequence of the overstaffing – gross overspending. If you think we are getting value for money, you can review Timberlane’s disappointing 2017 SAT results
It appears that Timberlane’s Budget Committee is trying seriously to come to grips with the issue. Last week they approved a flat-line budget to be sent to public hearing.
Tonight the School Board will be determining the Default Budget.