On Tuesday, September 14, Des Moines voters will have the opportunity to vote on whether to renew the Physical Plant and Equipment Levy (PPEL) imposed by the Des Moines Public School District (DMPS). PPEL raises nearly $4.5 million dollars to fix buildings and buy certain equipment. The levy is set to expire June 2011 and, should voters approve the ballot measure, it will be renewed for ten years. I plan to vote “yes” to renew and I have asked others to do the same, but in explaining the importance of PPEL, I have been reminded how confusing the DMPS budget is. It doesn’t have to be this way.
As a former school board member, I have reviewed a number of DMPS budgets. I know how frustrating the document can be. Many of the numerous funding sources for public education come with restrictions. The Instructional Support Levy is restricted to instructional purposes like elementary counseling, class-size reduction, and reading, writing, and math recovery. Yet another levy is dedicated to playgrounds, community education and middle school athletics. And, the sales tax revenue is dedicated solely to construction costs. These sources and PPEL represent only a few of the funding sources that finance our schools. This dizzying array of sources and the rules which restrict them make the budget anything but simple, but the document does not have to be as complicated as it is currently.
Superintendent Nancy Sebring recently said in Cityview that the budget is “complex and every year’s final result is a jigsaw puzzle pieced together from an assortment of sources. That’s why we hold public forums and meetings with employee groups and create opportunities for explanation and input throughout the process.” I would urge her to consider that the problem is the budget document itself. There is a better way to write it.
This year’s budget can be found here. Its eighty-one pages provide the information that is legally required of a school budget, but it is difficult for most people to get their arms around. It would make far more sense to create a section for each funding source that provides all information relating to that source.
The Instructional Support Levy and every other source would have its own section. The section would include: when the source was first approved, by what entity (state, federal, vote of the people, etc.), when it was renewed, how it was renewed, when it is set to expire/renew, the amount of revenue it creates, and how that revenue will be specifically spent. Links to additional information such as the Iowa Statute that established the source, vote totals when it was approved, information for specific expenditures, etc. would all be provided in each section. Each section’s total revenue and total expenditure would be carried through to the broader budget document so readers could follow a clear trail from the source to the overall budget and back. This would take much of the mystery out of what is now a baffling document.
Before the next budget season commences, the School Board and Dr. Sebring need to dedicate themselves to making the budget easier to understand. If they do, DMPS will spend less time explaining the budget and more time gaining consensus about how to move forward as a community to protect and improve our schools.
(Contact Graham Gillette at grahamgillette@gmail.com)
This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.
No comments:
Post a Comment