November 18, 2017 - 9:00 pm
Thursday’s article, “CCSD must cut another $22M,” repeatedly refers to “lost” revenue which is the result of reduced demand for their product. While the school district lost state funding for different reasons — all a result of fewer students in various categories — did it suffer loss of funding from other sources?
Reduced demand also reduces costs. So if the district keeps some of the money flowing from those alternative sources after the state funding losses, ultimately the district is ahead. But only if district officials actively cut the expenses associated with the loss of those students.
What is the likelihood of that happening?