Legislative Update And View On S13/School/Funding

We take the safety of children very seriously and our schools will take on a greater role in identifying, protecting, educating, and preventing sexual abuse and sexual violence. But schools are not where the problem lies or where the solution will be found. Ninety percent of sexual perpetrators are known and trusted by the victim and their families. One-half of the offenders are other children. Over one-quarter involve incest. Children are at the greatest risk in their own neighborhoods and homes. Schools are where children are the safest and where children will have a chance to develop relationships with responsible adults. And children are in school daily. The schools’ increased role will involve adaptations to their P-K-12 health curriculum, training for staff, an outreach to parents and guardians, and enhanced record checks on employees, contractors and their employees among others.

These are costly unfunded mandates at a time school districts are being asked to reduce expenditures. The education committee has worked with the Judiciary Committee to make the efforts of schools as efficient and effective as possible given the additional demands placed on schools and the lack of funding for this purpose as evidenced by budget cuts to the very social services that do the most to help build strong families. I supported this bill as a step toward a solution and one that is much improved over the version that came to the House.

Increasing the burden on schools seems to become a necessity and acceptable when social services are being cut (probation, mental health etc). Something is not right when we require the educational community to do more yet, hold them accountable for the failure to control costs.

In a recent editorial Tom James, Chair of the State Board of Education, supported “the Governor’s recommendation to level fund per pupil spending and categorical grants to schools for FY 2010, with the understanding that applicable statutory changes will be required.” This statement recognizes that the proposal is inconsistent with current law. He also acknowledges that districts have “have statutory requirements, such as tuition payments, special and technical education costs, which will limit reductions only to areas over which they do have control.”

What he fails to recognize is that schools in Franklin County have already made reductions in the areas that they can control. His comments are not helpful to local school boards when he uses his own district to illustrate how one board will be presenting a budget with a decrease of $592,768. His example district spends thousands of dollars more per pupil than do most of the districts in my County. My districts cannot cut to the extent he suggests because they have already done that. My districts already spend below the state average per pupil. Yet they are being painted as wasteful spenders by the example he cites. My district school boards are doing a good job to control spending, they have been doing a good job, and will continue to do a good job. I urge the voters to support these very serious efforts to produce a responsible budget by participating at their local School District Meeting and casting a vote.

Representative Gary L. Gilbert
Fairfax/Georgia
House Education Committee