The Providence School Board approved a $325 million budget, which still has a $4 million short-fall.  President Robert Wise hinted at the possibility of legal action under the Caruolo Act.  This could be a way for the School Board to balance its budget, but it would then create a hole in another part of the city's budget.  It would be good for them, but still bad for the taxpayers.

     Board member Mail Touray brought up an excellent point:


"We cannot feed our kids," School Board member Mail Touray said, "and yet we give money to the parochial and private schools."

Dunham told the board that the cost of funding the private schools, including busing, textbooks and special-education services, totals more than $3 million, prompting Touray to ask what would happen if the board decided against paying for services to private and parochial schools.
.
Dunham said that the district would lose $189.4 million in aid from the state. He also noted that previous efforts to petition the General Assembly for relief from the private school mandates have been unsuccessful.


     Obviously, the city can't cut funds for private and parochial schools.  Doing so would turna $3 million savings into a $189.4 million hole.  Despite failed efforts in the past, cities and towns should continue to lobby for an end to this mandate.  I assume this mandate hits Providence the hardest, but there probably isn't a city or town that wouldn't save money if the mandate were dropped. 

     The unions would probably fight the change tooth and nail, since it might mean fewer jobs for their members, or at least union jobs.  As taxpayers, we are subsidizing private schools.  Why?  I know that many would argue that paying for transportation and special education services is cheaper than having the children in the system, but this is a poor argument.  Take a look at all the schools owned by the Catholic Diocese.  It's a school system unto itself, yet they expect even more subsidies besides all the savings they already receive at our expense (ex. property tax exemptions).

     By the way, if opponents of my argument feel it is more cost efficient to pay for services at private schools, then why not take the next leap and support vouchers?