This is an exact quote from the working paper of a senior adviser to Straus:
Year 1–50% reduction from target revenue & 50% reduction from regular program
Year 2–50% reduction from target revenue & 50% reduction from regular program
Provisions sunset 8/31/2-13
Interim Committee to study school finance
Year 1 – proportionate reduction under current funding structure (Eissler)
Year 2–implementation of 1st year of SB 22 (Shapiro 25%/75%)
Estimate $4 billion owing FYs 2014 and 2015
Provisions sunset 8/31/2013
Interim Committee to study public school finance
There is an “understanding” that House Appropriations and Senate Finance can set the rates.
Everything that I have written here comes from two documents that I have seen, one from Sylvester Turner, the other from the senior Straus adviser.
* * * *
These were the two options that were on the table. The conferees chose to go with Option 2.
Eissler (pro-ration) is a 6% cut for all districts, including low target-revenue districts. In other words, the poorest districts get hurt the most.
SB 22, which I believe was the best of all options, is much better for poor districts.
The House insisted on a Sunset provision in two years.
- 1 week