AUSTIN — The Texas Education Agency is taking back millions from school districts because of a glitch in its system and an interpretation of state law that an organization specializing in school finance said should not apply.
State Rep. Jose “JM” Lozano, R-Kingsville, said he came across the situation when the Orange Grove Independent School District faced a $1.8 million reduction from the TEA. Its 2014-2015 budget is about $17 million, meaning the reduction would be about 10 percent of its total budget, federal fund and state funds included.
According to the TEA, the agency overpaid certain state funds.
“This overpayment occurred because your district reduced its interest and sinking fund tax effort following the district’s successful tax rate ratification in September 2009,” a letter from Lisa Dawn-Fisher, the associate commissioner for school finance, states. “Unfortunately, the Texas Education Agency failed to detect the overpayments to your district and other districts that had insufficient tax Our failure to detect the problem earlier was caused a lack integration between multiple systems used to record and calculate those payments previous years. We have completed upgrades our payment system that have now resolved that problem so that cannot occur again.”
Lozano offered legislation that would have cleared interpretation of school finance law so the districts wouldn’t have to pay.
“I think of this little girl … when I toured the school whose family I know because I grew up in that county,” Lozano said at a committee hearing. “I think about one of our agencies asking that little girl to send them money because of their mistake. I can’t believe that.”
The legislation, House Bill 2607, was entered late and got a committee hearing, but it carried a price tag, also called a fiscal note, of $81.4 million the first year and then $18.4 million after that.
“The fiscal note killed it dead,” said Wayne Pierce, the executive director of the Equity Center, a nonprofit that analyzes school finance in Austin.
Pierce said the calculations the agency used aren’t rational, because certain funds that the state was counting against the school districts weren’t actually generated by the districts, and the law requires actual generation.
Lynn Burton, the superintendent of Orange Grove ISD, said “it appears that TEA has chosen to interpret … in a way that retroactively penalizes.”
“There are things in the budget (like facility improvements) we would like to do that we’re not going to be able to do,” Burton said.
Other docked school districts include San Benito CISD, Luling ISD, Brownsville ISD, La Joya ISD and Wolfe City ISD.
Pierce said the options for districts include waiting two years for the next legislative session, asking for the Texas Attorney General for a ruling on what the statute means, having Education Commissioner Michael Williams step in, or possible file a lawsuit.
Burton said his school district has an agreement with the agency in place to essentially pay back the money.
“Nobody wants to do that,” Pierce said about the suit. “We would rather work it out with reasonable people.”
State Rep. Jose “JM” Lozano, R-Kingsville, said he came across the situation when the Orange Grove Independent School District faced a $1.8 million reduction from the TEA. Its 2014-2015 budget is about $17 million, meaning the reduction would be about 10 percent of its total budget, federal fund and state funds included.
According to the TEA, the agency overpaid certain state funds.
“This overpayment occurred because your district reduced its interest and sinking fund tax effort following the district’s successful tax rate ratification in September 2009,” a letter from Lisa Dawn-Fisher, the associate commissioner for school finance, states. “Unfortunately, the Texas Education Agency failed to detect the overpayments to your district and other districts that had insufficient tax Our failure to detect the problem earlier was caused a lack integration between multiple systems used to record and calculate those payments previous years. We have completed upgrades our payment system that have now resolved that problem so that cannot occur again.”
Lozano offered legislation that would have cleared interpretation of school finance law so the districts wouldn’t have to pay.
“I think of this little girl … when I toured the school whose family I know because I grew up in that county,” Lozano said at a committee hearing. “I think about one of our agencies asking that little girl to send them money because of their mistake. I can’t believe that.”
The legislation, House Bill 2607, was entered late and got a committee hearing, but it carried a price tag, also called a fiscal note, of $81.4 million the first year and then $18.4 million after that.
“The fiscal note killed it dead,” said Wayne Pierce, the executive director of the Equity Center, a nonprofit that analyzes school finance in Austin.
Pierce said the calculations the agency used aren’t rational, because certain funds that the state was counting against the school districts weren’t actually generated by the districts, and the law requires actual generation.
Lynn Burton, the superintendent of Orange Grove ISD, said “it appears that TEA has chosen to interpret … in a way that retroactively penalizes.”
“There are things in the budget (like facility improvements) we would like to do that we’re not going to be able to do,” Burton said.
Other docked school districts include San Benito CISD, Luling ISD, Brownsville ISD, La Joya ISD and Wolfe City ISD.
Pierce said the options for districts include waiting two years for the next legislative session, asking for the Texas Attorney General for a ruling on what the statute means, having Education Commissioner Michael Williams step in, or possible file a lawsuit.
Burton said his school district has an agreement with the agency in place to essentially pay back the money.
“Nobody wants to do that,” Pierce said about the suit. “We would rather work it out with reasonable people.”
No comments:
Post a Comment