IBJNews

IPS says it must cut $27 million from budget

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indianapolis Public Schools said Thursday it will need to cut $27 million from its 2012-13 budget due to declines in state funding and local income restrained by property-tax caps.

The cuts represent about 5 percent of the school system's current budget. IPS Superintendent Eugene White said he will detail his spending-reduction plan on May 24 at the IPS central office building.

In a statement released Thursday afternoon, IPS officials said they would cut staff and find savings in contracts for supplies and services, such as bank fees, professional services charges and travel expenses.

IPS emphasized no cuts would be made in art, music and physical education programs.

"IPS has pledged to keep cuts as far away from the classroom as possible, and this budget proposal does that," White said in a prepared statement. He added, “We've cut administrators, secretarial staff and police officers to ensure our classrooms have the funds they need to provide a quality education to our students."

IPS said it has cut its general fund budget by $120 million over the past five years as its enrollment as steadily declined and the state government chopped per-student funding in 2010 and 2011.

The district is still the state’s largest, with nearly 32,000 students, but that's down more than 5,000 students from five years ago. Its budget this year totaled about $540 million.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • 540 million for 32,000 -- $16,875 a student

    Wow....how can this article be correct. At $16,875 a student a school year???? 540,000,000 dollars / 32,000 students = $16,854 a student a year!! I would like to see the cost per student for "normal" against the cost per student in "special needs". Are we spending too much for mandated "special needs" while underfunding students that would otherwise have a chance to become productive citizens? How much money is being (invested/squandered) for costly education given to illegal residents that our working-citizen-hating government requires taxpayers to fund?

    Before one can make any decision, we need more, much more information.

    Dupree
  • Why bother?
    Why bother coming to the public meeting? According to White's comments Tuesday night, it doesn't matter what the public thinks because it's already a done deal. They'll also be voting on the cuts the Tuesday before the public meeting.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT