VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 08:40:03 12/29/04 Wed
Author: No name
Subject: Wrong, wrong, wrong!
In reply to: 's message, "Because he didn't "take" anything..." on 15:57:54 12/28/04 Tue

Perhaps you do not know anything about educational finance, so I won't be too hard on you.

First of all, the state subsidy for education does not even come close to paying for the entire cost of educating a child. Not for traditional students, special education students, charter students or cyber-students. The average daily membership of a school district is merely one factor in determining how much money a school receives in state subsidy. The school district itself incurs the remaining costs associated with educating a child. The Penn Hills School District certainly incurred expenses beyond their increased state subsidy by educating the Santorum children.

While it is debatable whether the Santorum children were permitted to be educated by the Penn Hills School District, it is beyond debate that the Penn Hills School District did educate the Santorum children at additional expense to them. To argue otherwise is to look for an excuse by claiming something that just is not true.

>The biggest misconception in this scandal is that Penn
>Hills has to pay $38,000 / year to that school to
>educate Santorum's kids.
>
>The fact of the matter is that they don't pay
>onesingle dime. The state deducts that $7500 (or
>whatever) per child from the subsidies they provide to
>the school district. If the school district is not
>educating his children, why should the state have to
>pay them for someone they are not educating?
>
>Where this gets confusing hs that the state pays the
>per-child subsidies based on residency, then asks for
>a refund for the "alternative schooled" from the
>districts.
>
>But by demanding $100,000 from Santorum to "repay the
>district" what they are really asking for is $100,000
>they were never entitled to in the first place.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-6
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.