Letter to the Editor, Posted: 3/24/04
To the editor:
In a Jan. 29, 2004, press release, ìSchool Funding,î Rep. Peter Nelson wrote of a visit he and Steve Swiggim made to a third-grade class at Lakeside Elementary School. In the release Mr. Nelson claimed that, ìWhile most areas of the budget were being cut we managed to insulate the general fund K-12 basic classroom from any reductions.î
Two weeks earlier, Mr. Nelson was even more succinct, claiming that ìnot single dime was cut from K-12 spending.î
Both claims are false.
According to the Fiscal Review of the 2003 Legislature Session, prepared by the Minnesota State Office of Senate Council and Research, there was a ìnet reduction of 622 million in the General Fund to the education budget for the 2003-2005 biennium,î and of the net reduction, ìonly 184.9 million is from actual program cuts.î
The balance of reductions ìcomes from delaying a portion of the education appropriations from FY 2004 to FY 2005.
These are the infamous ìonetime education shifts,î which move the debt burden forward to future legislatures and taxpayers.
According to the Fiscal Review, ìThe shifts do not result in any net decrease in actual revenue for school districts, however it may require districts to use short-term borrowing for cash flow purposesî such as local districts being given the following authorities: 1) Conversion from state aid to local levy and 2) an increased cap on the amount of referendum revenue that can be raised by school districts, both of which save the state from fulfilling its responsibility to fund public schools and place the burden squarely on local taxpayers.
Rep. Nelson states in his Jan. 29 release that ìeducation funding is very complex. Not really.
Scott Wrobel
Lindstrom
©ECM Post Review
6448 Main Street
North Branch, MN 55056
Telephone: 651-674-7025
Fax: 651-674-7026
E-mail: editor.postreview@ecm-inc.com