Ah, Boston

Photo via Wikipedia Commons; jug is in the Worcester Art Museum
For why see: http://twonerdyhistorygirls.blogspot.com/2010/09/crooked-town-of-boston.html

Boston, I love you, but you sometimes drive me straight over the edge.
I see the updated version of the Boston Globe's "everybody is angry with the House" article includes this:

It remains unclear what role Boston’s concerns about the bills factored into the stalemate. Representative Chynah Tyler, a Boston Democrat, said she could not support a bill that pumped millions into other systems but would shortchange Boston. 

“I am concerned that several schools in my district that are currently failing our students, including Madison Park Vocational Technical High School . . . would not have received the resources for those schools to move beyond the category of failing,” she said in a statement.

Please note that I am not particularly singling out Rep. Tyler here ('though she is the only one arguing against the bill in the article), as her sentiment is not that uncommon (and it used to be more common).
I'm not going to get into Madison Park here--Madison Park is complicated!--beyond noting that there are lots of vocational schools operating with substantial urban populations that aren't seeing the same difficulties as Madison Park. (As I've said in the past, I'm not going to hold Worcester Tech up as a model to follow here, because I don't advocate for moving to admissions requirements due to their incredibly segregationist outcomes.)

The notion that Boston is somehow being "shortchanged" by the funding system is the issue we need to tackle here, and that's going to involve a bit on how this all comes together.

There's a decent chance you've seen one of these before; this is the Boston Public Schools FY19 foundation budget spreadsheet. This is the calculation of how much it costs to "adequately" (scare quotes intentional) fund the education of the children in the Boston Public Schools.

You can always click on these to make them bigger.

The argument for Boston usually goes something like "Boston Public School students have a lot of needs. Many of them are poor, many are learning English, and many need additional helps." Since Madison Park is cited, we can also add "and vocational education costs more money."

All true. All also included in the calculation of how much the Boston Public Schools need to run for next year: 63% of BPS students are economically disadvantaged, and there's additional funding for that (all the way over on the right). The new ELL model with a range of additional funds is in the pink in the middle. And vocational is just to the left of the heavy black line; BPS is serving 1371 vocational students, and that is calculated in.
Yes, the Boston Public Schools have high need kids! AND the Boston Public School students' high rate of need is included--just like every other district in the state--in their foundation budget! We entirely acknowledge that in the calculation.

Now, set that aside and turn the page, because now we have to come up with that $861,999,612 that the Boston Public Schools need to run next year.
That would be this series of calculations which asks and answers the question: how much of that can the city of Boston afford to fund itself?

Boston is a wealthy city. The kids who attend the public schools are not, as a group, wealthy, but the city is wealthy. While the city is no longer number one in income inequality--it's number seven--those at the top are still making 15 times what those at the bottom are making.
Thus the city of Boston, with $145 billion in property valuation (FROM ACTUAL TAXES in 2016, so, no, the non-profits don't count against you!) and $433 billion in income (2015, again, actual revenue numbers), can afford to spend--by the same calculation they use for every community in the state--$961M on schools, in that green box above...
...which you might note is more than the foundation budget for the Boston Public Schools next year.

So, one might ask, why is are the Boston Public Schools getting any aid at all?
Well, because everyone does; the target is for every district to get no less than 17.5% of their foundation budget in state aid.

But that isn't all Boston--and lots of other districts--get.

If all Boston was going to get was that 17.5%, next year the state would kick in $150M (see the green box) next year to funding the Boston Public Schools.
But last year, the state contributed $218M towards the Boston Public Schools (check the top left line). And nobody wants to tell their constituents that they're getting less aid than they got last year.
So Boston not only gets the $218M from last year again, they also get an additional $1.9M in a minimum aid increase.
In total, then Boston gets $220M in state aid through Chapter 70, of which nearly $70M is not foundation aid.
So:

• The Boston Public Schools serve many kids with many needs, which is included in their foundation calculation. 
• Boston can afford to fully fund its schools by the same state formula as everyone else.
• Boston gets 17.5% of their school budget in state aid, anyway, like all other wealthy communities.
• In addition to this, Boston gets hold harmless and minimum aid increases, so everyone gets more than they did last year, regardless of need.
• Next year, that aid totals nearly $70M.

Again, I don't say this to spot anyone in particular: Boston has a lot else going on, with where schools are and aren't, and which kids go where, and hidebound historians watching every move. And it's clear to me that from the ground up, what sounds like a lot of money is instead resulting in budget cuts at schools.

I also know it's a whole lot easier to yell at the state than to yell at the city. 

When we're talking about OUR money and how best to serve ALL our kids, accuracy matters.

Let's be accurate about Boston. 

UPDATED TO ADD: But what about the Foundation Budget Review Commission? Wouldn't it hurt Boston?
Well, if by "hurt" you mean "would require that the city spend more on their schools by increasing the foundation budget," I guess. Boston doesn't immediately get additional aid in an implementation of the recommendations, since it already gets so much hold harmless aid. It would have to eat through all of that before it gets more aid.
Boston already spends well over foundation on its schools, however: the BPS budget for FY19 is $1.1 billion. There's about a hundred million in transportation in that (that's outside of foundation), but even so, we're looking at spending towards foundation that, while it's bounced around a bit, is generally over ten percent.
(I'd like to look at how Boston spending over foundation compares with districts comparable in their wealth to schools ratio.)
So, no, unless you object to the city possibly having to spend more on schools OR on Boston not just getting a boost in state aid "because," implementing the Commission's recommendations doesn't hurt Boston (or its schools).