By Leslie Collins
Northeast News
Feb. 2, 2011
All good things must come to an end, including free pre-kindergarten programs in the Kansas City, Mo., School District.
Pre-kindergarten will now cost some parents $6,000 per year in tuition for each enrolled child. Parents of children who qualify for free and reduced lunches or Head Start will not have to pay.
KCMSD’s website cited several reasons for charging tuition, which included depleted stimulus funds and the anticipation of state aid cuts for the 2011-2012 school year. In addition, Missouri does not fund “costs associated with non-special education early childhood programs.”
Both the KCMSD Board of Education and Superintendent Dr. John Covington, are receiving criticism for the decision and it’s caused the board to rethink its policy regarding the treatment of students, parents and guardians.
“We need the superintendent to listen to people before making significant decisions,” KCMSD Board of Education member Derek Richey said during a Jan. 26 meeting. “There were several instances this year where this didn’t happen, one being (pre-kindergarten) tuition.”
Board member Arthur Benson said the board received numerous complaints regarding the decision.
“If parents had known about it (pre-kindergarten tuition), he (superintendent) would have been requested to listen to their concerns before we imposed it,” Benson said in reference to the proposed policy revision. “The complaint is the action was posted on the (school district’s) website without any prior advance notice.”
After further discussion, board members Airick West, Benson, Kyleen Carroll, Duane Kelly, Crispin Rea Jr. and Ray Wilson voted to adopt the amended policy regarding the treatment of students, parents and guardians. Board members Richey and Joseph Jackson voted against the amended policy. Member Marilyn Simmons was absent.
The amended policy reads, “Where an administration action or decision affects an entire school or more than one entire school, where reasonable, the administration shall not fail to confer with the affected school communities in a special meeting called for that purpose before the decision or action is adopted.”
TIF negatively affects district
Founded in 1990, Tax Increment Financing (TIF) aims to encourage economic development in blight areas and promote job creation. However, it hasn’t been positive for KCMSD.
“It’s really taking a toll on us,” said Chief Financial Officer for KCMSD Dr. Rebecca Gwin.
This year, the district would have received $887 in expenditures per pupil, but due to TIF, the district only received $76 per pupil, she said.
Through TIF, property taxes are frozen for a maximum of 23 years on approved projects. Any city and county tax increase due to construction, rehabilitation and infrastructure upgrades from the project are abated for up to 23 years.
Instead of paying normal ad valorem taxes, property owners make Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILOTs) for the amount of abated taxes and pay 50 percent of local Economic Activity Taxes (EATs).
Kelvin Perry of the TIF commission said TIF and other tax abatement incentives by the city “seriously erodes the local property tax revenue for the district.”
This year, ad valorem taxes accounted for 58 percent of the district’s budget, he said.
Perry quoted findings from a 2007 fiscal impact study of economic development incentives on education in Missouri.
Of the 115 Missouri counties surveyed, Jackson County ranked No. 1 in the total diversion and abatement of taxes, losing out on $43 million for education.
KCMSD ranked No. 1 in the most adversely impacted school district with more than $32 million in diverted and abated tax revenue. The school district continues to lose that much and more every year, he said.
However, several steps have been taken to alleviate this problem, he said.
“In 2008, the board of education adopted an economic development incentive policy to encourage development in the city that would strengthen the local tax base and provide support for the local district,” Perry said.
The policy, he said, has become a platform to refute the economic impact of various projects.
KCMSD has a right to review the projects and ensure the projects are in compliance, he said.
“Tremendous progress” in negotiations has been made in the last four years to reduce abatement terms and amounts on certain projects, he said. Some of the negotiations resulted in terminated contracts, he added. As a result, the district secured nearly $9 million in supplemental payments, he said.
Teacher effectiveness draws debate
Board members spent a majority of the meeting analyzing the 11-point definition of an “effective teacher.”
In an effort to improve the school district, the board proposed that the superintendent could only hire, re-hire or retain teachers who met the objectives of an “effective teacher.”
“This is highly aspirational,” Benson said. “There’s nothing more important than having the right personnel who meet our definition of effective teaching.”
Earlier in the meeting, Kansas City American Federation of Teachers President Andrea Flinders cautioned the board that the wording discriminates against first-year teachers.
“Our first and second-year teachers are still learning their craft and we have to give them the support and resources to do that,” Flinders said.
The proposed personnel policy would limit the superintendent’s ability to hire first-year teachers, she said.
Carroll questioned how certain items on the “effective teacher” list could be measured.
Carroll referred to item No. 9, which states a teacher “is connected to the community, technology and real-life experiences.”
“I think you should be connected to your community, but whether that should be part of your evaluation as an effective teacher and the performance of the students in your class is a little objective,” Carroll said. “What community are we talking about? How do you demonstrate being connected to your community?”
Richey responded.
“You don’t have to wait for there to be a way to measure it before you pass it,” Richey said. “Don’t let the decision of how you monitor it stop you form codifying those values. Don’t worry about it; let the superintendent figure it out.”
After further discussion, the board voted to accept the definition of effective teaching.
However, the board tabled the personnel standards policy dictating who the superintendent may hire, re-hire, fire or retain.