Originally posted by Rockne: We've seen this cropping up in different spots across the country.
It's a tricky debate.
The school district I'm sure is thinking they don't want one school where the kids have a brand new playground and more/better field trips and where the teachers get 3x or 4x the support funds.
But there's the very real issue of whether this Robin Hood rule will wind up resulting in fewer total funds for the district. I suspect it will. Who does that help? Certianly, the parents giving to the first school aren't doing anything wrong. Hate to discourage that giving.
Tricky.
As far as "can the district make us". Technically, no -- they can't 'take" your money. But if you don't follow their rules/requests they can (take your pick):
a. Not allow you to meet at school;
b. Not allow you to use the backpack express for your messages;
c. Not allow you to recruit members/promote events through the school; etc.
By the same token, you can (take your pick):
a. Not fundraise;
b. Not provide volunteer help for events;
c. Not support teachers, etc.
Cooperation and communication is the key, since you both have real power. Hopefully, both sides have the best interests of kids at heart.
I would be opposed to having to give a percentage of our hard earned money away. However, if these other schools are really in desperate need of help I would come up with another way to raise some money for them that everyone knows is going to a less fortunate school in the area. Something perhaps like a coin drive for 2 weeks. I have no doubt that the parents and students would contribute change to local less fortunate kids and schools. our school of 300 ran a coin drive for 2 weeks last year and raised $2,500.
Jennie, can you give more info? Is the $$ that the district asking for supplementing their budget or helping out the other schools PTO/PTA? I understand about schools that are less fortunate, but I'd really find out why. Are they in a low income area? Their PTO/PTA is unorganized? No parent/community participation?
Could you work out a deal that when you upgrade/change items, that you could donate them to those schools?
If it's a case of low participation or not being organized, could your school offer to help them with the issues they are facing with out giving up your money?
Sadly it's a fact of life that some schools are "better off" then others. As a parent that gives my time and money, I would be hard pressed to help out other schools unless we had a surpluss of money or they could prove to me that they are in dire need of it and have done everything under the sun to raise it.
I know legally our principal can take a percentage of our fundraising funds for his budget. He can say 10% or whatever of the profit goes directly back to the school funds. We give so much back directly to our school that this probably won't come up. I can't imagine that a district can mandate that you give part of your funds to them. They need to have some sort of PTA/PTO get together. Let the PTAs/PTOs talk with each other about what works and doesn't work, have fundraising companies come in and do presentations, etc. I think that would be a good first step in helping those PTAs/PTOs that are having a difficult time.
I don't think the original poster is talking about funds going to one particular PTO. I think they are being required to give a percentage of their revenue to the school district who in turn will distribute it at less-priveleged schools that either don't have a PTO or don't have a very successful PTO.
We are in a large, urban school district in Southern California. A small percentage of the schools in the district are in affluent areas (including the four in my area) and most of the rest are in less-affluent and in many cases very poor areas. I have talked with teachers that transferred from those schools to ours and they feel like they have gone to heaven. A school where they are given money each year to buy classroom supplies, where there are volunteers in the classroom, where they get new computers, books for their classrooms, etc. We supplement our school's budget with over $50,000 per year just for basics - not including technology upgrades, special programs, grade-level grants, etc.
Having to give a percentage of our fundraising efforts to the school district for those less-fortunate schools would be a nightmare for me. How could I ask parents to give $100 in our annual pledge drive knowing that a percentage would be going out of our school? We would lose a significant amount of support from our parents if they thought that money that they give to our school actually goes somewhere else.
It's not that I'm cold-hearted. I do feel for those schools. In the past we have adopted schools and donated books and school supplies, coats, shoes, etc. But it's one thing to give voluntarily and another to be forced to give. And I could see a big problem in getting volunteers to help out.
We've seen this cropping up in different spots across the country.
It's a tricky debate.
The school district I'm sure is thinking they don't want one school where the kids have a brand new playground and more/better field trips and where the teachers get 3x or 4x the support funds.
But there's the very real issue of whether this Robin Hood rule will wind up resulting in fewer total funds for the district. I suspect it will. Who does that help? Certianly, the parents giving to the first school aren't doing anything wrong. Hate to discourage that giving.
Tricky.
As far as "can the district make us". Technically, no -- they can't 'take" your money. But if you don't follow their rules/requests they can (take your pick):
a. Not allow you to meet at school;
b. Not allow you to use the backpack express for your messages;
c. Not allow you to recruit members/promote events through the school; etc.
By the same token, you can (take your pick):
a. Not fundraise;
b. Not provide volunteer help for events;
c. Not support teachers, etc.
Cooperation and communication is the key, since you both have real power. Hopefully, both sides have the best interests of kids at heart.
