UMass Amherst: Massachusetts flagship of higher education
As I pointed out on Friday students enrolled in the Amherst public schools emanating from UMass tax-exempt family housing costs Amherst taxpayers "over $1 million" annually to educate.
Well now I have a more exact figure for number of students and their cost to the town: 56 students at a cost of $1,267,200.
Click to enlarge/read
Notice too that one student (at a cost of $18,200) does not even attend Amherst Public Schools, but that money still comes out of their budget for Charter reimbursement.
Safe to assume that facts from this memo will be used by the Finance Committee in their report to Amherst Town Meeting concerning the school budget, so perhaps a long overdue discussion will take place about fair reimbursement from UMass for these serious costs.
The Amherst and Regional School Committees should also take a strong stand, and the Amherst Select Board should direct Town Manager Musante to use these figures to get a (much) better deal out of UMass in the next "Strategic Partnership Agreement" -- already almost three years overdue.
One tiny piece of the pie that should be looked at and adjusted to help with town costs. I find it hard to understand how we let this develop into such a burden for the town.
ReplyDeleteStop saying that! It doesn't cost $1,267,200 to educate 56 students. If we added 56 more students the school budget wouldn't go up $1,267,200! The 56 students are spread out across a whole bunch of grades and classrooms.
ReplyDeleteGod you really are a Nitwit.
ReplyDeleteIf all 57 of them leave for a Charter School this coming September it does cost $1 million.
That's all 56. (one already left)
ReplyDeleteActually, Larry and Anon 4:18 p.m., I think that you're both right.
ReplyDeleteYeah, but he's still a Nitwit.
ReplyDeleteThe entire point of my first report was that we have this "Strategic Partnership Agreement" with UMass where they clearly said in writing they would reconsider reimbursing the town if Mark's Meadow School closed.
Which it did. Pay up!
UMASS owes Amherst nothing...and that is what they should get.
ReplyDeleteYour UMass IP address is showing.
ReplyDeleteAssuming the remaining 56 are not all equal in the services needed for satisfying the state's educational requirements, using an average cost per child is appropriate for this discussion.
ReplyDeleteAs for UMass making the public school's budget whole...
For the students that require less, or no special services(translator, one on one aide, resource support, etc...), the cost per child is less.
Conversely, students that need that extra support will cost more than the average. In some cases much more, depending on the educational needs of a student with severe challenges.
With all of that, if the average student costs $18.2K, do we know the approximate minimum/maximum student costs to be?
In looking at the UMass example, we know 28 out to the 56 are already enrolled in the ELL program(Extra Service).
What is the profile of the other 28? If A SINGLE one of them requires any special service, then the cost of educating a UMass housed child is actually HIGHER than average.
Your UMass IP address is showing.
ReplyDeleteMine isn't and I'd love to see UMass treat the town with the charity that it treats it's own students. As in "screw you."
OK, "reconsider" -- fine, and conclude that Amherst isn't owned a damn cent. But any ARHS grad will get hit with a $5000 surcharge because, well, whatever.
Don't like it? sue -- but are you aware of "Sovereign Immunity"?
Sucks to be you....
No Ed, sucks to be you. A guy obsessed with a town he doesn't live in. Obsessed with a university that has long since forgotten about him. Endlessly pontificating when nobody cares about a word you say.
ReplyDeleteWhat about all the frreloading parents that do pay taxes....but far less than the $20k they use per kid.
ReplyDeleteI would he amazed if even one parent in Amherst pays in $20k per kid in taxes.
The system has encouraged most parents, rich or not,to be on public assistance.
I don't see a big difference between those that pay for 5÷ of their burden in town paying taxes and a umass student that contributes 0÷.
The town does not tax each new house $20K per kid that moves in, how could you justify this for umass. Someone is not a nitwit for talking about it.
You could solve this by only providing education welfare for the poor in stead of everyone just for popping out another baby.
Larry are you poor, why should your family not pay its full share this year like you want umass to?
Are you channeling Ed?
ReplyDeleteNo, but why do you get to pay less than 20k a year and feel justified asking others to.
ReplyDeleteIt honestly sounds like you just want more money for your town buddies from your umass enemy, but you are not willing to ask for it from your rich townfolk or pay up yourself?
You even suggested it would be ok to take it from local businesses....
If I am channelling ed, you are channelling the whole of ignorant soccer moms. In stead of insults when people are kind enough to engage you silly posts, how about engaging back...actually answering questions.
That's you cue to deflect and insult.
Let me make this very simple so even you can understand:
ReplyDeleteI pay (exceedingly high) property taxes on my house. As does all the other "rich townfolk".
UMass being tax exempt (and the 2nd largest property owner in town) DOES NOT PAY PROPERTY TAXES.
bs larry, you do not pay the full cost as you expect others to...this is the definition of a hypocrite. I know I pay more than you and cost the town less. All of us that do tollerate your parental freeloaders.
ReplyDeleteLarry you honestly come off as ignorant in stead of just greedy.
Why doesn't the school just send out bills and then people can pay or APPLY for assistance. Works for healthcare....
I will point out you are still not engaging the discussion, just expressing your wants from others....very weak.
Well at least I have the courage of conviction, and the courage to sign my name.
ReplyDeleteAt the end of the day, the specific dollar figure is debatable, but Umass clearly is not picking up its fair share of the costs. How a meaningful number is calculated would be very challenging. I think if the local colleges and university pay property taxes like everyone else, that would be the most fair way to calculate it.
ReplyDeleteAnon 7:51,
ReplyDeleteYour argument has slipped over into the bizarre. Based on your logic then each of use should have specifically allocated taxes on our property. Taxes for police, fire, schools, roads, etc. During those years we have kids in the schools we would pay crazy high taxes and much lower taxes when our kids move on. By that same metric if I don't use the fire department or police then I should not have to pay those taxes in a given year either.
If that happened many many people would opt out of public school for private. The special needs kids costs that are subsidized by the regular kids cost would sky rocket and no parent could afford it.
The whole idea of a general tax fund is to spread the cost of creating and operating a community. Clearly that idea is lost on you. If you really feel that way then go hang out at a Tea Party rally, you will feel right at home. Enjoy.
"UMass being tax exempt (and the 2nd largest property owner in town) DOES NOT PAY PROPERTY TAXES."
ReplyDeleteNOR DOES THE MWRA (to Pelham, for the half of Pelham that is under the Quabbin).
Larry, repeat after me: "Massachusetts is a Commonwealth, municipalities exist under a grant of authority from the Commonwealth and hence lack the power to tax the Commonwealth itself."
It's the same sort of thing as
your daughters demanding you buy them something -- you don't have to if you don't want to, no matter how legitimate the argument the may may be. Nor how many temper tantrums they may throw.
Technically, land owned by UMass is "reserved" from that allotted to municipalities -- that's why Quabin is officially the "Quabbin Reservation." and there is a very real question of if UMass is actually "in" Amherst at all.
In other words, the current concept of Amherst ending at the Hadley line is actually wrong -- Amherst's borders should be the land it has control over with UMass being in neither Amherst nor Hadley (nor any other town).
This is currently the case with the Mass Pike -- their land is not only outside the jurisdiction of the 37-or-so towns it goes through -- for-profit telephone companies such as Sprint only have to negotiate with (and pay) the MassPike in order to run a cable along the MassPike.
That's why Sprint has a major switching station in Charleton, and never forget that Sprint stands for "Sputhern Pacific Railroad Internal Telecommunications Network" -- that it evolved out of those miles upon miles of copper wires which once ran along railroad tracks, carrying first telegraph and then telephone traffic within the railroad itself.
(Railroads come under Federal law which supersedes municipal authority in a different manner.)
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't Amherst Inspectional Services deal with all the inspections at Amherst College, while either UM EH&S and/or the State Building Inspector deal with UMass? Likewise, doesn't Amherst college have to get building permits and such?
Amherst College is tax exempt but under the jurisdiction of the Town of Amherst. UMass is not.
"During those years we have kids in the schools we would pay crazy high taxes and much lower taxes when our kids move on.'
ReplyDeleteNo, just like with higher education, you would be billed for tuition if your children were attending school (as you are if they are in the hospital) -- with you then having the ability to seek assistance of paying the bill if you aren't able to do so yourself.
I'm not justifying the model, I'm explaining it.
"By that same metric if I don't use the fire department..."
In some states, you don't have to. If you don't, and your house catches on fire, the FD comes and makes sure no one is trapped inside, and then does *nothing* while your home burns to the ground.
"If that happened many many people would opt out of public school for private."
That's what "vouchers" are all about -- give the parents the choice as to which school spends the allotted money the best.
"The special needs kids costs that are subsidized by the regular kids cost would sky rocket and no parent could afford it."
We can afford these costs NOW?!?!?
If parents of a SPED child had to make even a token co-pay for their child's SPED expenses, we would quickly see a far more realistic approach at IEP meetings. Particularly from those wealthy parents who have no problem hiring the attorneys that demand the uber-expensive out of district placements....
My personal favorite story (not in Amherst) involved a girl who was so disabled that she HAD TO go to an out-of-district school -- until the first day she was eligible to try out for the High School Girl's Ice Hockey team -- at which point she had this miraculous recovery and now could attend the town's high school....
I heard on the radio today that in Germany a college education is provided at no cost because that is what the voters have decided is important. According to the internet Germany has the 3rd highest tax rate in the developed world at 45% and Germans are emigrating at levels not seen since before WWII. Maybe this explains why Amherst has a hard time keeping young families in Amherst when our taxes are double those of Hadley right next door?
ReplyDelete[edit: please excuse the convenient leaps of logic here, lol as if that's ever a problem]