please spend it wisely. no wasted trips to la la land.

How’d we get from closing schools due to a shortfall of funds to having a surplus?

Schools were closed due to a shortfall of students, not funds.

No, the closures were due to a lack of funds, which in turn was triggered by declining enrolment. See this article, for example, which refers to a $7 million shortfall: http://www.opinion250.com/blog/view/15287/3/school%20%20district%2057%20moves%20forward%20to%20consider%20closure%20of%20schools.

Don’t present “facts” billposter, JohnnyBelt doesn’t like that!

Without going into huge detail, schools were merged (closed) because it didn’t make sense to have several schools open at 50% capacity.

Funding per student today is higher than it’s ever been. It’s the students that are missing, not the money.

Oh Taxed Out, am I keeping it too real for you? Sorry about that.

The funding received by the school district depends on the number of students enrolled. If enrolment declines significantly, total funding decreases even if the amount per student increases. As the article I quoted says, there was a substantial shortfall in total funding, in response to which schools were closed. They were not closed merely because “it doesn’t make sense” to operate schools below full capacity. There was considerable resistance to closing the schools that were closed, for good reason: pretty much everyone agrees that, other things being equal, it is best for children to attend schools in their own neighbourhood.

bp: “pretty much everyone agrees that, other things being equal, it is best for children to attend schools in their own neighbourhood.”

I would agree, but not when schools are at half capacity or less and dropping. It’s not sustainable. Parents of kids who went to these schools were in some serious denial. Check the enrollment figures for this district for the last ten years. It doesn’t paint a pretty picture.

Per student funding did rise but so did the costs for operating these schools, including the schools that are running at student capacity. Costs for heat, lights, maintenance, administration wages all have gone up. This rise in per student funding has not gone to teachers, students, or programs for kids, it has gone entirely to operating costs not directly related to students. JohnnyBelt has been shown this in many posts on opinion 250, it just doesn’t support his Pro BC Liberal agenda.

Taxed, once again quoting from the BCTF handbook I see.

Yes, operating costs have gone up like everything else and we are struggling to keep up on all fronts. Education takes up like 25% of the provincial budget. Everyone has their hands out asking for more and more. People are saying they are ‘taxed out’. What’s your solution to that?

We know one thing for sure. With the huge decrease in student enrolments, and the closure of schools in District 57, there was not a corresponding reduction in taxes to reflect the savings.

So, where did the money go????

Here is one thing that no politician has ever heard of, SAVE IT FOR NEXT YEAR.

The solution Johnny is to return the corporate tax rate to 15%….didn’t anyone notice how corporate property taxes were cut again??

It’s impossible to keep up with inflation if you keep cutting your income, does anyone have any idea how much tax revenue the Gordon Campbell government lost when they reduced corporate income tax from 15% to 10%?? Its no wonder the banks profits are sky rocketing…