|
By Don Heinzman
It’s time that the federal government pay for special needs programs it mandated.
Former State Representative Phil Krinkie has opened a boil by claiming
that school staffs are “baby sitting” children with special needs in
the Minnesota public school system.
Local special educators
disagree with Krinkie and contend mainstreaming and having individual
education plans for each special needs child have had many successes.
And, they contend mainstreaming special needs children, while
difficult, it is better than isolating them in special schools, as it
was done.
This education, however, also is expensive because the
staffing ratios are so low, and because some students with special
needs require costly extra care.
Cost of special education is
being subsidized in part by the school district’s general funds,
because the state and federal government are not living up to their
duties to fund their mandate.
In the 2006-07 school year, there
were 121,511 students from Minnesota in special education programs, at
a cost of $1,449,000,000. Of that amount, $169 million came from
federal funds and $645 million came from state funds.
The
shortfall of $537 million was made up by local school districts’
general funds. It is no wonder there are special levy elections.
Since the Minnesota Legislature increased special education funding
this year, the state is putting $832 million into special education
funding in 2007-08 and will put in $994 million in fiscal year 2008.
Even
with the additional funding this school year, 29 percent or $435
million will be spent by local school districts to subsidize special
education programs.
The bottom line is subsidizing federally
mandated programs for expensive special education is resulting in
higher class sizes, terminating teachers, higher fees and students
walking longer distances.
Go back to the basics.
The
federal government has mandated that every student determined to be
special needs is entitled to have an individual education plan and the
local school system has the obligation to fund it. That subsidy is
draining some school districts’ operating funds, which are fed by the
property tax.
No one likes to talk about this inequity, because
it involves programs for special needs kids. Parents of special needs
children understandably fight fiercely for every benefit their children
can get.
The federal government, which once said it would provide
40 percent of the cost of local special education programs now provides
between 16 and 17 percent of the programs it mandates.
While few
agree with Krinkie that all this funding is just baby sitting, his
observation focuses on the success and critical lack of funding.
Imagine what local school districts could have done with $537 million
last year.
Next year is an election year when voters need to
challenge those running for the congress to have the federal government
pay more for programs it requires by law.
It’s time for the federal government to pay the special education funding it promised when it mandated the program.
|
