Many differences are noted, but an $11M increase in charter funding with a $146M reduction in funding to neighborhood schools stands out. Within Karp's report, mayoral puppet Emily Bittner calls such comparisons "apples to oranges" because of projected versus actual spending.
Forrest Claypool, feeling the apples to oranges deflection insufficient, has a tantrum in the Letters page. He whines:
"A column published in the Sun-Times this week from the Better Government Association uses faulty math to make wild and inaccurate generalizations about charter and neighborhood school funding."
Faulty math? Perhaps Claypool hopes readers will overlook the city's pension theft and botched contracts.
Wild and inaccurate generalizations?Claypool mustn't have read any comments to any article published about the CTU's contract negotiations in the Tribune
"Using flawed analysis, the story also falsely claims that neighborhood schools citywide will receive $146 million less than last year."
Claypool never specifices what is flawed about the analysis, nor does he provide a figure he feels is accurate.
He states the fucking obvious:
"...funding is increasing at both neighborhood and charter schools experiencing rising enrollment and declining at schools with fewer enrolling students."
Thanks for providing the definition of Student-Based-Budgeting, Sherlock.
He parrots Rahm's talking points:
Parent choice. Check! Budget deficit. Check! Pension mandates. Check!
Claypool then has the stones to moralize about transparency:
"In fact, Chicago Public Schools has a transparent and navigable database of school spending information online so that any member of the public can evaluate the data themselves..."
Sure, we trust whatever is online.
Repeat after us: We. Are. Not. Idiots.