Page images
PDF
EPUB

TABLE 9 B.-Estimated current expense and capital outlay, 1954–55

[blocks in formation]

Alabama
Arizona.
Arkansas
California.
Colorado
Connecticut.
Delaware.
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia.
Idaho.
Illinois.
Indiana.
Iowa..
Kansas.
Kentucky
Louisiana.
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan.
Minnesota.
Mississippi.
Missouri
Montana
• Nebraska
Nevada.
New Hamsphire.
New Jersey.
New Mexico.
New York.
North Carolina.
North Dakota.
Ohio.
Oklahoma
Oregon..
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island.
South Carolina.
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas.
Utah.
Vermont.
Virginia
Washington.
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming-

$100,000

47,000 45, 100 770, 000 77, 400 94, 500 18, 200 26, 500 134, 308 120.000

28, 811 390,000 i 179,000 142, 000 90, 518 78, 550 128, 000 1 32,000 110, 028 175,000 320,000 168, 449

59, 243 148, 000 37,000 61,000 10, 508 20, 901 253,000

44, 254 760, 000 153, 265 131, 000 340,000 98, 091 97, 700 469, 800 33, 000 81,500 32, 000 99, 630 365, 570 40, 500 15, 000 120,000 133, 797

75, 173 143, 000 22, 000

$164.00 280.00 125.00 341.00 293.98 318.00 335.00 285.00 230.00 160.00 227. 57 305.00 1 255.00 285.00 265.00 150.00 217.00 1 205.00 2 242.00 2 251.00 266.66 320.00 131.00 242.00 2 309.00 250.00 276.00 2 253.00

349.00 1 280.00 360.00 168.00 1 260.00 2 250.00 225.00 340.00 298.86 315.00 176.00 275.00 151.00 253. 27 230.00 240.00 185.00 304.00 178.00 291.00 1 380.00

$7, 700 15, 000 13, 500 320, 000 28, 000 34, 500 6,000 4,000 63, 000 30, 000

4, 500 150,000 122, 000 1 48,000

6, 615 9,000 40,000 14,000 45, 888 40,000 145,000 84, 031

3, 500 30,000 10,000 10, 000 6,000 2, 990 49,000

7, 589 275,000 27, 500 16,000 130.000 25,000 40.000 200.000

2, 800 55,000

5,000 28, 500 85,000 14,000

4,000 50.000 43, 000 22, 000 40,000 12, 500

73. 7 27.0 49.8 48.8 17.1 17.4 85.0

0 51.7 73. 3 24. 5

10.9 1 38.4

9.5 19.7 41.1 67.7 117.2 34.6 16.0 60.7 39. 2 56. 2 32.4 23.7

4.4 42.0

4.1 18.0 81.9 37.0 72.2 1 23.8 34.4 30.5 29.6 33.1 11.4 74.4 12. 2 59.1 54.4 38.1 26.1 32.1 53.4 62.3

19.5 1 34.1

Total.

7,022, 696

261.68

2, 316, 113

37.9

1 Estimated by NEA research division. Please note that 3 zeros should be added to amounts listed in columns 2 and 4.

2 Per pupil in ADM.

TABLE 10.—Estimated pupil enrollment and percent not attending regular full

time school day

1954-54 enrollment

1954-55 enrollment

State

Percent

not in full-time attend

ance, 1954-55

Elemen

Second

ary

Total

Elemen

tary

Second

ary

(1)

(8)

[ocr errors]

Alabama.
Arizona.
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut.
Delaware
District of Columbia.
Florida..
Georgia.
Idaho.
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa..
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana.
Maine.
Maryland.
Massachusetts.
Michigan
Minnesota.
Mississippi.
Missouri.
Montana
Nebraska..
Nevada.
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico.
New York.
North Carolina.
North Dakota
Ohio.
Oklahoma
Oregon.
Pennsylvania.
Rhode Island.
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee.
Texas.
Utah..
Vermont.
Virginia.
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin..
Wyoming-

686, 021
188, 100

421, 674
2, 261, 800

266, 534
340, 373

56, 340
102, 810
648, 609
862, 761

136, 376 1, 398, 990 1

755, 353 525, 300 361, 735 593, 218 552, 441 1 170,000 427, 475

672, 000 1, 254, 466

559, 134 540, 157 710, 000 112, 779 245, 000 39. 215 80, 272 807.000

173, 268 2, 315, 900

965, 742 1118, 307 1, 419, 449

522, 970

312, 564 1, 749, 634

108, 500 539, 437 128, 439

716, 295
1, 591, 534
183, 164

67, 905
695, 277
458,
451, 991
554, 000
68, 271

1.0 3.0 3.0 6.5 13.0 0 2.5

..9 4.0

1.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0

1.0 1.0 0 19.4 3.0

.3 1.0 1.0

..0 2.0 .2 .0 8.7

.5 4.0 12.0 4.0

.1 1.5 1.5 2.0

.15 5.8

.5

[ocr errors]

.03

.02

0 0 1 7.0 1.0

.7 0 10

Total..

21, 029, 384 17,887, 319 28, 916, 703 21, 923, 770 8, 255, 587 30, 179, 357

2.3

tary

Total

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

437, 297
151, 600

268, 674
1,778, 400

204, 165 224, 764 35, 905 65, 369 415, 909 650, 882

101, 613 1, 058, 524 i 550, 630 400, 300 270, 311 484, 837

443, 214 1 132, 000 279, 514 468,000 832, 438 355, 053 450, 110 556, 000

84, 829 186, 000

31, 267 2 61, 269 643.000

138, 155 1, 473, 900

759, 419 1 90, 597 978, 734 399, 392

236, 745 1, 140, 634

73, 000 398, 019

97,884 580, 200 1, 256, 130 114, 386

49, 998 521, 112 351, 820 297, 564 397, 000 52, 821

248, 724

36, 500 153,000 483, 400

62, 369 115, 609 20, 435 37, 441 232, 700 211, 879

34, 763 340, 466 1 204,723 125, 000

91, 424 108,381 109, 227 138, 000 147, 961 204, 000 422, 028 204, 081

90.047 154, 000 27, 950 59, 000

7, 948 19, 003 164, 000

35, 113 842, 000 206, 323 1 27, 710 440, 715 123, 578

75, 819 609, 000

35, 500 141, 418

30, 555
136, 095
335, 404
68, 778
17, 907
174, 165
106, 303
154, 427
157, 000
15, 450

448, 970 254, 677
158, 000 39. 500

271, 000 155, 000
11.910. 0001 520, 000

224, 000 68,000
231, 000

126, 000
35, 372 22, 549
66, 103

38, 388 444, 000 252, 000 1 663, 800 1 221, 200

103, 176 35, 883 1, 132, 400 357, 600 1 569, 400 1210, 600 411,000 130,000 285, 225 92, 822 494, 534 115, 968 460,000 115, 000 1 134, 940 138, 060 289, 037 164, 763 472, 000 226, 000 879, 000 445, 500 368, 945 210, 357 451, 000 91, 000 575.000 157, 000

89, 614 29, 028 195, 000 60,000 33, 289 8, 898 59, 290

2 24, 443 670, 000 169, 000 149, 207

38, 273 1, 556, 000 860,000

798, 417 219, 650

1 93, 555 1 27, 945 1,031, 827 469, 580

410,000 125, 000

249, 287 78, 611 1, 171, 868 637, 000

75, 710 37, 290 410, 698 142, 791 101, 000 31.000

599, 643 140, 657 1, 313, 733 351, 096 119, 799 72, 033

52, 500 18, 057
1 540,000 1 180,000
372, 43 112, 368
298, 000 159, 000
401, 000 160,000
1 54,000 1 16,000

703, 647
197, 500

426, 000
2, 430,000

292, 000
357,000

57, 921
104, 491
696, 000
1 885, 000

139, 059 1, 490, 000 1 780,000

541, 000 378, 047 610, 502 575, 000 1 173,000

454, 800

698, 000 1, 324, 500

579, 302 542, 000 732, 000 118, 642 255, 000 42, 187 83, 733 839, 000

187, 480 2,416, 000 1, 018, 067

1 121, 500 1, 501, 407

535, 000

327.898
1, 808, 868

113, 000
553, 489
132, 000

740, 300
1, 664, 829
191, 832

70, 557 1 720,000 484, 799 457,000 561, 000 170,000

! Estimated by NEA research division. Column 8 should indicate percent of total enrollment on halfday sessions or any plan providing less than full regular school day.

2 Includes grades 7 and 8 of junior high schools.

Senator ALLOTT. I will ask you: Were there any suggestions in that wire as to what your opinion was that this bill would not do?

Dr. FULLER. I analyzed very briefly the four titles, calling attention to the things which were contrary to the council's policies and those were noted; yes. That is what I was asked to do.

Senator ALLOTT. I notice in your answers there was quite a repetition almost in the same words in the answers, and I was wondering whether you had suggested what the answers should be, at least from the standpoint of your associations.

Dr. FULLER. I haven't suggested what the answers should be; not at all. I called attention to the parts of the bill which violate the policies of the Council of Chief State School Officers and indicated them in the wire. Again I would say the chief State school officers think for themselves. They have to know every school building in every State. They have to put their staffs to work.

Senator ALLOTT. Let me take up on that question. You made the statement that they were forwarding this to their staffs and put 5 to 6 men to work.

Dr. FULLER. In some States.

Senator ALLOTT. That might be true, but I mean, let's keep it to the facts. You do not know that any of them did it, actually.

Dr. FULLER. Yes; I do.
Senator ALLOTT. Were you there?

Dr. FULLER. You will have a witness this afternoon who told me that. You can ask him yourself. It will be the superintendent from Ohio.

Senator ALLOTT. You were not there. You don't know.

Dr. FULLER. Superintendent Eyman from Ohio tells the truth. He will be before you later.

Senator ALLOTT. You don't know of your own knowledge that they all put their staffs together.

Dr. FULLER. I haven't said all.
Senator ALLOTT. You do not know.
Dr. FULLER. I did not say all at all.
Senator ALLOTT. I want to keep this on a level situation.

With respect to the wire that you have from the man in Maryland, or maybe a woman I am not sure which—the chief official there

Dr. FULLER. It is a man.
Senator ALLOTT. Is that an elective or appointive office ?
Dr. FULLER. That is an appointive office.

Senator ALLOTT. Do you know whether or not he speaks for the legislature or the Governor?

Dr. FULLER. He speaks for the State board of education.

Senator Allott. Have you seen Governor McKeldin's recent statement on 968 ?

Dr. FULLER. I saw that.

Senator ALLOTT. Are you aware that he said he is in complete accord with the principles of this bill?

Dr. FULLER. Yes.

Senator ALLOTT. Except for the State of Nebraska—and I am going by memory, as you read them through, and I am subject to correction myself, sir-except for the State of Nebraska, I find no reference whatever in any instance to consultation with either the educational committees of the legislature, or the governors; is that correct? Do I recall your statement correctly?

Dr. FULLER. I think that is right, although there are 2 or three, I believe, references in the letters, parts of which I didn't read in, where it was mentioned that there had been consultations with the governors.

Senator ALLOTT. Let's assume, here, if I may that we all have an interest in education and as sincere and as deep an interest as I am sure

you have.

You referred several times to financing schools by the property tax. Do

you have in mind that some other tax should be exerted to finance schools?

Dr. FULLER. As a matter of fact, Senator, at the present time the support of public education in the United States comes approximately 40 percent from State funds and almost all of that 40 percent, amounting to $3,500 million a year is from other than property taxes.

Senator ALLOTT. That is right. That is what I was getting at. I can speak for my own State and I know that is true.

Dr. FULLER. That is right.

Senator ALLOTT. But on the local level, it is usually taxed by an ad valorem tax, the taxes are raised by an ad valorem tax. Do you think that is wrong, that local schools should be taxed on an ad valorem basis?

Dr. FULLER. No, I do not think it is wrong, but I am convinced from the surveys made in all the 48 States and from first-hand information and studies made in individual States over a period of years, that the property tax is an inadequate fiscal base for education in numerous places.

Senator ALLOTT. I am not going to argue about that because it is. If

you had attended the first 3 days of these hearings, I asked many questions touching upon that at that time. But if a community in the school district is unwilling to do one of several things—by way of suggestion, but not total inclusion-equalizing the basis of the property tax, increasing their bond limit indebtedness, whether it is by constitutional means or other means, depending upon the State, and showing a willingness to do something for the schools, then I get back to the question that I asked of you this morning: Do you feel that the Federal Government should step in in such places and make a determination that their school facilities are inadequate and go ahead and build schools anyway?

Dr. FULLER. No. We not only oppose the Federal Government doing that, but we oppose the State school building agencies doing it. That is the point I am making. Under these other bills which I am afraid are not very well understood, these other four bills which are before this committee, the determinations would never be made by the Federal Government.

Senator ALLOTT. Can you show me where they would be under the Hill bill?

Dr. FULLER. Yes. The underlined portions of my testimony where the discretionary power is placed in a Federal official. There is one place I didn't even mention which is even more objectionable than any that I did. That is, that under title III on the approval of the small grants for local school districts, in order to enable them to come

а

up to the starting line and qualify under title I or title II, there would have to be project by project approval by the United States Commissioner of Education.

Senator ALLOTT. In any case, where there have been grants from the Federal Governments, isn't that true?

Dr. FULLER. No.
Senator ALLOTT. What about the Hill-Burton Act?

Senator DOUGLAS. Would the Senator yield for a minute to me? Was the Senator's inquiry addressed to the Hill bill, S. 5?

Senator ALLOTT. I didn't refer-not unless I did
Senator DOUGLAS. The answer was in reply to 968.

Senator ALLOTT. They tell me I inadvertently referred to that. I was talking about S. 968, and I think Dr. Fuller replied to that.

Dr. FULLER. I was talking about the bill you mention, S. 968 is the one that has been mentioned. S. 968 is the one that has this project by project approval for the funds which would be the small grants under State plan to enable these districts to begin to qualify under title I or title II.

Senator ALLOTT. Do you know how you are going to have Federal grants without having qualifications set up and controls set up? It is true in the Hill-Burton Hospital Act, for example.

Dr. FULLER. Senator, S. 5, S. 480, S. 522 and Ŝ. 686 provide for Federal funds for school construction. The way that would work would be that each State would make up a plan which would include a system of priority among local school districts, taking into account their present and past efforts, taking into account obsolete buildings, overcrowding and lack of physical capacity generally. That plan would have to be approved by the United States Commissioner of Education. This approval is mandatory, and the bills introduced ever since 1948, when I had the privilege of participating in the drafting, has called for that. Each State plan would cover its own State problem in its own State way after that. The local districts would make their applications to the State agency. The priorities in a State of, say, a thousand districts would probably exclude 300 or 400 districts from sharing in Federal funds. The poorest districts would get the funds. There would be a list and you would have a system of priorities. Then it becomes a matter of State administration from that point.

Senator ALLOTT. It is my opinion, and I am sure it is the opinion of others, that the same thing is true under S. 968.

Dr. FULLER. No. Each local project grant under title III of S. 968 would have to be approved by the Commissioner.

Senator ALLOTT. Under title III only, not under the others. It is left completely in the States.

Dr. FULLER. No. The Federal controls on the State school building agency would not leave State school buildings free like the Maine authority is.

Senator ALLOTT. Let me ask you this: When you speak of Federal standards—and on page 4 of S. 5 it calls for State plans—that in effect is criteria. Those represent criteria for Federal aid. What should those plans be confined to? Should they be confined to simply criteria of construction?

Dr. FULLER. They have nothing to do with that.

« PreviousContinue »