GolfHos

Interesting article on how the current economy is threatening the future of high school sports.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/andy_staples/07/10/schools.economy/index.html?eref=T1

High School sports have survived much worse economic times that what we have now.  I think we're dealing with changes in our social climate in addition to budget woes.  So many people complaining about sports funding that only benefits a small percent of the school population - basically the people that suck at sports and were picked on in high school themselves  ;)

Anyway, schools are paid for in large part by property taxes - the housing crash has dropped values, hence dropping taxes on them.  They are dealing with their own bubble bursting as a result and are unsure of how to dial it back to pre-boom budgets.  If the housing market crash was not part of the current economic ills, I don't think we'd be hearing too much about this.  Alas, its a fight for funding in a world that increasingly views sports and music as extravagant pastimes rather than beneficial to an education  :sad3:

Can't remember whether you own a home or not ...

Houses I've owned, the taxes were assessed on the tax value of the home, which wasn't updated anywhere near real-time.  Any idea how long it takes for the tax value to come into line with the actual market value (assuming you aren't selling it for that metric to hit the county office)?

That's a good question. My "property value" number has never dropped. Any amount, let alone crash. Funny how that works.

Should be busy this fall at the government center when 2009 numbers come out. A lot of folks are going to be wondering WTF? if values don't drop somewhat.

I do own - they are not real-time - however, late last year a large percentage of Missouri home-owners challenged their assessments... successfully.  Not sure what the cycle is for other states.

And if the property tax revenues have not come down, would they have such budget problems?  Its not like school districts are subject to the DJIA - their revenue is rather stable and based upon unchanging tax rates.  Housing value seems to be the logical explanation for any significant loss of revenue.  There could also be funding from other sources that have been affected - property taxes is just the one that I'm aware of that makes up a significant portion of school funding.

What other sources would be affect so rapidly?  I may not be up to date on school funding.

sure their revenue might be 'stable' but just like everyone else, their costs are going up.  cafeteria, bus, etc. at least they dont have to pay big salaries to teachers lol

No doubt, but that is explained by inflation.  You do not need a 'bad economy' to have inflation - and you can have a 'bad economy' without inflation.  They are not tied at the hip.

In any case, high school sports survived the 70s stagflation and we're not even close to that right now.  So I'm wondering what makes the problem so different right now and my only thought was the changing social climate.

From the article.

I'll throw out one example of where some of the money is going.

In one of the large suburbs of Minneapolis - 90,000 people, two large public high schools plus middle schools, elementary schools - the classroom teacher to non-teacher/administration ratio was 20:1.

Five years ago it was 9:1.

Our district needs a building the size of two of our elementary schools to house "district headquarters". Oh yeah, and we got a nicely produced DVD for parents of children entering kindergarten, middle school and high school on what changes they can expect. I know what these cost. They could have easily hired two teachers for that waste of money.

The money is there. The "we're all about the kids" crowd are anything but when it comes time to cut. Then it's the teachers and activities that affect the kids first because that's where they get the emotional response.

One of my dream jobs would be dictator for a year or two in a school district.

edit - the above applies to my observations in the Mpls-St. Paul metro area. YMMV

But it's for the children Fuzzy :'(

I think you bring up a great point. The money is there it's just wasted on all these "programs" where money is allocated for that program only. If they don't spend the money they lose it. I played sports when I was in high school and I don't think my parents paid a dime. Of course I didn't have to take any mandatory "touchy feely" classes about diversity or why Johnny has two mommy's. The school system has to get back to the 3 Rs.

Thank you for your support but....to the best of my knowledge there are no mandatory classes about diversity or why Johnny has two mommy's. Now my oldest is just entering 6th grade so perhaps there is something coming but I highly doubt it.  ;) :)

And tax money for schools is not a use it or lose proposition. They can move it around, cut programs, etc. but they don't technically lose it. Once they have it, there's no getting it back.

My whole point was the money is there. How and who they spend it on can be debated.

edit - Again....personal observations of my school district, and neighboring districts. YMMV

Well I'm out here in what is referred to as a suburb and I have one going into 10th and one going into 8th and they both have had diversity training in grade school. I know the school doesn't lose the money, but if it's not used for the purpose it is intended for it is budgeted some where else. So I'm concerned that the education our children are getting doesn't always have the children's best interest in mind. They want to perpetuate the programs and the jobs. I still think we're on the same page.

Money is wasted. On what, I guess doesn't matter.

Clearly the blame lies with vouchers.

chit disturber.

You may consider this money wasted if your own kids don't need this type of training, but certainly there are kids out there that could use it. In that way, it could still be benefit from all.