4 ms·
That’s a very interesting read, thank you. It’s a shame that the law only applied in full effect for 10 years. That’s barely enough time to fix a generation of
by throwaway284534 5y ago
That’s a very interesting read, thank you.
It’s a shame that the law only applied in full effect for 10 years. That’s barely enough time to fix a generation of students.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 5y agoThe Wikipedia article makes it sound like it was thrown out. That is very much not the case. It is still in effect today. What happened in 2005 was that local jurisdictions were given more leeway to set their tax rates in lieu of state minimum requirements. Local residents in richer districts got more power to decide whether they should be taxed more to give more funding to their own school. And in reality it works the same after 2005 as before. The spirit of the law remains in effect today. People like me who currently own a home in the Austin, TX area pay a lot of money via property taxes. School taxes very often make up over half of the property tax burden here, which is already quite high since there is no state income tax and the state has to make money somehow. Almost all of that money is effectively swept up and redistributed to the rest of the state due to the recapture laws. Here's an article that discusses its current impacts in more detail: https://www.texastribune.org/2019/01/31/texas-robin-hood-recapture-villain-texas-fix-school-finance/ https://www.texastribune.org/2019/01/31/texas-robin-hood-rec...
- curryst 5y agoIt's not solely isolated to funding. Baltimore is the 3rd highest per-student spender in the US, and has terrible outcomes. I don't doubt that funding is part of it, but there's definitely some more nuance to it.