Come Again, Commissioner?

On Monday, March 3, 2008, Commissioner Susan Gendron announced that the State of Maine could save $57 million if schools in School Unions “would behave more like” School Administrative Districts.  Her statement was supported by more research from David Silvernail showing a disparity between per pupil expenditures in Unions and those in SADs. 

Commissioner Gendron’s statistical wizardry ignores several basic points.  First, were the School Unions and the SADs in the analysis comparable?  Were they similar enough in size, wealth, adult education levels, rurality and the like to make a comparison justifiable?  Second, was the analysis sophisticated enough to establish that the type of district a student is in “causes” the difference in cost?  Or might the differences be rooted in other things?  Third, the expenditure differences among SADs themselves are large enough to make the identical argument the Commissioner makes, but with radically different conclusions. 

To wit:  The average total per pupil expenditure (PPE) for the 17 highest-spending SADs in 2006-7 was $12,027 per pupil.  The average total PPE for the 17 lowest-spending SADs in 2006-7 was $8,245.  The difference in expenditures between top and bottom was $3,782 per student.

Using the Commissioner’s logic, if the top SADs were suddenly “reorganized” into bottom SADs, the 17,666 students enrolled in the bottom SADs (as of 10/06) would save the towns and state $60.7 million.

Seventeen School Unions (most of the Unions in Maine) on average expended $10,723 (06-7, using weighted calculations to reflect constituent unit enrollments and costs).  Using the Commissioner’s logic, if we suddenly “reorganized” these School Unions into top-spending SADs, the 15,137 students currently educated in those Unions would cost the towns and state $19,7 million dollars.

Does the solution to the state’s woes lie in converting School Unions to SADs?  If so, precisely which ones, Ms. Gendron? 

Gordon Donaldson

University of Maine

March 4, 2008