Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4

Cape Flattery Crescent. Eatonville.. Elma. North Mason Port Angeles. Rainier Taholah Ephrata. Grand Coulee Dam. Granger. Methow Valley. Moses Lake Mount Adams Prosser Consolidated. Quincy. Richland, Royal Sunnyside Toppenish. Wahluke Wapato. White Salmon Valley Yakima. Almira. Cheney Joint Consolidated Cusick Kettle Falls. Mead. Medical Lake Newport Consolidated Joint. Pasco Pomeroy Walla Walla. Wilbur. Bremerton 100-C. Central Kitsap Fife Peninsula South Kitsap Steilacoom Franklin Pierce. Lake Washington. North Franklin.

149, 241.85

4, 692.51 29, 346. 38 316, 974.00 67, 636.00 55, 742. 17

7, 765.80 102, 844.29

32, 831. 72 205, 762. 75 64, 009. 31 34, 339. 15 272, 229.77 216, 752.06 30, 977.60

15, 606.55 715, 558.00

18,939.14 38, 054,50 143, 784.38

2, 390.47 266, 680.22 27, 294, 41 72,018.55

10, 519.04 289, 660.34 23, 139.02 18, 120.20

832.05 708, 778.00

8. 822. 38 126,314.95 20, 235.09 91, 875.64 21, 856.56 829, 388.23 854, 464.54

46, 772.35

3,682.09 23, 454.03 316, 974.00 43, 031.00 54, 797, 38

5, 448. 37 101, 637. 19

24, 709,50 161, 494. 15 59, 849. 19 26, 195.61 212, 476.35 232, 075. 46 23, 485. 87 14,047.59 525, 160.00 18, 108.54 33, 142. 37 130, 337,77

1,919. 82 226, 244.97 20.612. 28 51. 707.56

6, 548.65 274, 414.00 21, 657.32 13, 444.01

713. 20 696, 258.00

5,752.41 90,633.44

6, 732.05 68, 122.26 16, 584.22 651, 351.95 751, 549.41

(2, 470) 1. 258, 645 62, 932 (1,010) 293,052 1 14,653 (5, 892) 1,113, 900 155, 695

0 1,270, 037 63, 502 (24, 605) 1,227, 702 161, 385

(945) 4,648, 710 1232, 435 (2, 317) 449, 223 122, 461 (1,207) 413, 141 20,657 (8, 122) 1,839, 828 191, 991 (44,269) 1,416, 060 1 70, 803 (4,160) 1,039, 344 51, 967 (8, 144) 704, 619 135, 231 (59, 753) 4,853, 199 1 242, 659 +15, 323 1, 155, 811

57, 791 (7,492) 1,571, 795 178,590

(1,559) 1,699, 887 1 84, 994 (190, 398) 7,689, 298 384, 465 (831) 813, 304

1 40, 665 (4,912) 3, 386, 000 1 169, 300 (13,447) 2,783, 077 1 139, 154 (471) 86, 358

14,318 (435) 3,028, 347 151, 417 (6, 682) 1,148, 948 157, 447 (20,311) 13, 315, 211 1665, 761

(3,970) 260, 672 1 13.034 (15, 246) 3, 140, 430 157, 022 (1, 482) 479, 513 123, 976 (4,676) 564,587 1 28, 229

(119) 4, 305, 261 1 215, 263 (12,520) 2,509, 725 125, 486 (3,070) 1,008, 958 1 50, 447 (35, 682) 4,901. 540 1 245, 077 (13, 503) 605, 540 1 30, 277 (23, 753) 6, 242, 352 1 312, 118

(5,272) 519, 395 125, 970 (178, 037) 7,606, 877 380, 343 (102, 915) 4, 453, 415 222, 671

(3, 816) 2, 240, 789 1 112, 039 (18,098) 4,089, 194 1 204, 459 (165, 850) 6,028, 663 3C1, 433 (17, 058) 524, 887 26, 244 (29, 505) 9, 168, 375 1 458, 418 (19,752) 21, 516,515 11,075, 826 (2, 636) (*)

5

5 5 5

5

6

[blocks in formation]

(12, 469) 2, 702, 710 1 135, 136 (20, 346) 2, 185, 358 1 109, 267 (49, 122) 1, 187, 616 59, 380 (1, 789) 3,623, 485 1 181, 174 (1, 620) 643, 900 132, 195

(51) 2,048, 485 1 102, 424 +190, 348 147, 980, OCO 17,399,000

(5, 767) 1,696, 232 1 84, 812

+310 628, 048 131, 402 (1, 348) 2, 330, 047 1116, 502 (14, 029) 949, 228 47, 461 (1,935) 1,575, 634 178, 782 +2, 278 1,904,983 195, 249

14, 666.27 75, 994: 10 633, 461.81

94, C76.41 206, 570.28 113, 999.70 17, 139.57

10, 850.57 57, 896. 40 467, 612.05

77,018. 10 177.065.03 94, 247.45 14, 503.84

6
6
6
6
131
137
Not
avail-
able.

WEST VIRGINIA

Randolph County

2. Tucker County Board of Edu. 2..

cation.

97, 441.84
32, 205.80

100, 348. 49
24, 499.06

WISCONSIN

19,448.50

6, 979.09

94, 375.00

74, 029.73

Portage Public School,

2 Junction School District No. 1City of Sparta.

3. Tomah Public School Consoli

dated School District No. 1. 3. Richland Public Schools

3 Norwalk-Ontario, Sheldon 3 Junction District No. 2..

3 Milw. Public Schools

4,5. Junction School District No. 1-Mauston

6 Washburn Public Schools

7. Ashland

7 Crandon Joint District No. 1. 8 Sturgeon Bay

8 Joint School District No. 2. 8.

See footnotes at end of table.

191, 634.08

6,547.23
6.062.50

709.66
185, 309.00

142, 522.82

4, 758. 37 4, 442.75

658.55 375, 657.00

15, 805.49

5,757.59 69,529.85 80, 903. 30 11, 640.00 29, 219.03

10,037. 76

6,068.03 68, 181.71 66, 874.83

9, 705. 45 31, 497.00

1

[blocks in formation]

363, 093. 15
852, 312.65

31, 950 444, 436

366, 413.43
964, 677.94

19,050.78
216, 097.73
286, 249. 33

13, 745.77 55, 334.00 53, 901. 72

14,785. 11
219, 277.79
288, 388.64

10,853.29
35, 077. 45
44, 720.43

129, 700 28, 785 29, 471 1 40, 397

26, 861 159, 272

157

No. 14 Freemont County

157 Laramie County School District 157.

No. 1
No. 2 Fremont County.

157 No. 38 Fremont County

157 No. 21 Fort Washakie.

157 No. 1 Sheridan County

157 No. 6 Uinta County

157 Lander Valley High School, 157

Fremont County
No. 9 Fremont County,
No. 6 Fremont County

157 No. 1 Hog Springs County 157 No. 1 Fremont Couniy.

157 No. 2 Laramie County.

157 No. Sublette County

157 NO. I Natona County

157 No. 2 Carbon County

157 No. 1 Carbon County.

157 No. 1 Albany County

157 No. I Sublette County

157 No. 1 Teton County

157 No. 2 Sweetwater County

157 No. 4 Uinta County

157 No. 2 Sheridan County

157 No. 1 Lincoln County.

157 Sweetwater County School 157

District No. 1.

[blocks in formation]

(3, 320) 639,000 (112, 365) 8,888, 729

(4,266) 594, 000 +3, 181 575, 691 +2, 139 589, 422

(2,892) 807, 942 (20, 257) 537, 221 (9, 181) 1, 185, 445 (7,350) 275,000 (35, 452) 819, 377 (30, 017) 1, 702, 211

(5, 233) 1,323, 910 (1, 948) 1, 302, 982 (24.918) 944, 500 (33,221) 12,989, 816 (52, 150) 2, 434, 450 (20, 309) 2, 886, 289 (13, 005) 4,644, 181 (4,849) 750.000 (12,586) 1,824, 244 (34, 827) 2,061, 300 (5, 750) 560, 923 (16, 614) 3,459, 475 (10, 161) 3,212, 639 (19,615) 4, 744, 976

13, 750 1 40, 968

85, 110 166, 195 165, 149

47, 225 1649, 491

121, 723 1 144, 314 1 232, 209 137, 500 191, 212 1 103,065

128, 046 1 172, 973 1 160, 618 1238, 748

1 Indicates total program elimination under administration proposal
? No information available
• No qualifying student

Chairman PERKINS. I want to say that Congressman Ford is here and he will preside over these hearings a little later. He has always worked very hard on the impact legislation.

Mr. Goodling is here, of course, representing the minority. He is a great friend of education. He served on the board of education a long, long time in Pennsylvania.

Go ahead.

STATEMENT OF DR. H. DAVID FISH, SPECIAL PROJECTS

DIRECTOR, SAN DIEGO CITY SCHOOLS

Dr. Fish. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am glad to see a former member of the school board. We work with school board member's all the time, of course.

I am David Fish. I am director of special projects for the San Diego city schools and president-elect of the Impact Aid Organization.

I have prepared written testimony and would like to request permission to enter it for the record.

Chairman PERKINS. Without objection your prepared statement will be inserted in the record.

Dr. FISH. And also in response to a rather strong plea from the Douglas School District No. 3 at Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota, they have prepared a statement. I would like to request

Chairman PERKINS. Without objection that statement will be inserted in the record.

Dr. Fish. Thank you, sir.

[Statement referred to follows:]

Douglas SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 3, ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE, S. DAK.

FOREWORD

This material is presented to the House of Representatives, Education and Labor Committee, to apprise them of the potentially dangerous situation that exists for the Douglas School District #3, Ellsworth Air Force Base, South Dakota, under the provisions of Title III, FEDERAL IMPACT AID PROGRAMS, PUBLIC LAW 93–380.

The Douglas Board of Education has the responsibility of providing a viable educational program for the students of this district. Consequently, there is an urgent need to resolve the financial uncertainties associated with the provisions of P.L. 93–380 which threaten the continued existence of that educational program and the District,

The Douglas School District is a heavy impact district with more than 80% of the student population composed of dependents of military personnel assigned to Ellsworth Air Force Base. The following table provides a summary of students by category for the past three years.

TABLE 1.-ENROLLMENIS, DOUGLAS SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 3 BY AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE

[blocks in formation]

With this degree of impaction the Douglas School System relies heavily on P.L. 81-874 for its educational revenue.

The figures on the following page given a breakdown of this support and a comparison of Douglas and State per pupil average daily attendance expenditures,

Since local and state support is already at the maximum limit established by law, it is apparent that Federal revenue in the form of l.L. 81-874 is vital to the operation of this district. Provisions of the old law were designed to provide a level of support comparable to the average per pupil cost in the State. As revealed in Figure I this has not been accomplished. A restricted educational program for all students of the district has resulted from the diminishing level of federal funding.

Public Law 93–380 with proposed tier funding now brings a new threat into focus.

Full funding of Tier I and II is obviously needed by this district if it is to operate at all. Douglas School would lose 40% of its total revenue without Tier II funding. But, even if these were funded, there remains another serious problem involving funding of Section 2, section 2(c)(4) and 3(e). Funding under these

[blocks in formation]

sections of the old law provided this district with a significant portion of the total operating revenue. This is shown in the following table and figure.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

3B

Sec 2

3(c)(4)

3ler

ЗА

Fiscal Year 1974

(Projected)

« PreviousContinue »