Skunk at the garden party time

They're kind of cute, though, aren't they.

 It is time again for one of my periodic skunk at the garden party posts.

The press release headline is: 

From the Governor

You can read the filing letter to the Legislature--because this is just a bill (just a bill) filed for consideration by the Legislature as a supplemental budget--along with the proposed legislation. 

Offhand, I see three things at issue:

1. No one is "retaining" anything in July. School committees were legally required to have their budgets voted by June 30 (and did); notification deadlines for staff for layoffs were much, much earlier. That is done. It has happened.
   Could people maybe possibly be called back, assuming they haven't taken positions yet? Maaaaybe. But let's not pretend this is a save.
   
   
2. This is money we think is coming, only; per the press release, this is from "projected, unbudgeted Fair Share surtax collections in FY27." That "projected" means we do not have it yet. 
   We probably will! We've been running ahead of projections on Fair Share about every year. 
   I have over and over again said that we should budget what we're actually projected to get for Fair Share, which we manifestly have not been doing, instead having these supplemental budgets in which gift-wrapped earmarks come through.
   BUT if there is a year in which we maybe should be sitting on Fair Share, it's looking ahead at this coming FY28! The Student Opportunity Act increases are DONE. We have no cover for inadequate inflation increases! What we have seen this year and last is going to be worse next year, as it hits the districts that have been seeing increases from the state through SOA.
   I should better understand than I do what can be carried over and not--there are ways some things can--but it seems pretty clear that no one seems to be thinking like this, which is really worrying. 
   
   
3. "Everybody gets some" is a terrible way of distributing education funding. It makes no acknowledgement of differing needs or different abilities to cover them; this just gives every district (and charter school) $112 more per pupil. It's the Oprah "you get a car and you get a car" meme. That is not a thoughtful way to fund schools. 

Notes on the bill language:
It will not count towards "base aid," so it doesn't become part of hold harmless for next year. That's both good and bad. You won't get it again next year, so don't plan on it. On the other hand, it won't make the distance between received state aid and the actual foundation budget calculation that much greater for many districts.
It also has the language that sends it straight to school districts without action from the appropriating authority, which is a relief to municipal districts, of course. 

Local note: as of the time I posted this, the Worcester Telegram & Gazette coverage gives the impression that this is an allocation that Healey announced (aka: it's a done deal). She has filed legislation. She does not have the power to unilaterally make this allocation.