xt7v6w96b729 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7v6w96b729/data/mets.xml Kentucky. Department of Education. Kentucky Kentucky. Department of Education. 1936-02 volumes: illustrations 23-28 cm. call numbers 17-ED83 2 and L152 .B35. bulletins English Frankford, Ky. : Dept. of Education This digital resource may be freely searched and displayed in accordance with U. S. copyright laws. Educational Bulletin (Frankfort, Ky.) Education -- Kentucky Educational Bulletin (Frankfort, Ky.), "The Present Status of Local Support of the Public Schools", vol. III, no. 12, February 1936 text Educational Bulletin (Frankfort, Ky.), "The Present Status of Local Support of the Public Schools", vol. III, no. 12, February 1936 1936 1936-02 2021 true xt7v6w96b729 section xt7v6w96b729

L 0 Commonwealth of Kentucky 0

EDUCATEONAL BULLETIN

I THE PRESENT STATUS. OF
L LOCAL SUPPORT
OF THE PUBLEC SCHOOLS

I . .m-

g LIBRARY

; umvmsnv OF KENTUCKY

Published by

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

1 H. w. PETERS
, Superintendent of Public Instruction

Entered as second-class matter March 21, 1933, :at the post offlce at

t _ .
] ISSUED MONTHLY
r
I Frankfort, Kentucky, under the Act of August 24, 1912.

Vol. III 0 February, 1936 O No.12

LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY

FOREWORD

This bulletin on “The Present. Status of. Local Support of the
Public Schools”, was prepared by Mr. Charles A. Maney of the
Division of Finance. ,

Data pertinent to the problem of local support of Kentucky
schools has been displayed in tabular form and summarized. The
discussion, based upon the statistical facts presented, aims to call
attention to disparities in the support of the public schools of the
state, as well as to point out the inadequacy of the present Proportion
of state support.

Detailed information on the salaries of teachers in the County
school districts is given in Tables 9 and 10. The figures assembled in
Tables 11 and 12 include the basic facts on local support for each
school district in the state. These tables provide material useful for
reference purposes.

The facts contained in this bulletin should be of value not only
to school people, but also to citizens interested in the welfare of the
public schools of the Commonwealth. The bulletin is timely in that
it presents up-to—date information on school support at a time when
appropriation measures for the schools are under consideration by
the General Assembly.

HARRY W. PETERS,
Superintendent of Public Instruction.

vide
So I
mea
tion
syst‘
(1ng
tion

on 1
am;
schc

mai
feds
sch<
tota
SUPI
tion
by '
It i
zati

dist
sou:
ﬁed
rate
Ca}
enu

the
dist
Sin
pro
the
wit
ent

of the
1f the

1tucky

The
:6 call
of the
iortion

lounty
)led in
r each
Eul for

)t only
of the
in that
a when
ion by

7%. ,

._.. _..__._‘_.._._. ._.. __._....____-__.

~. . _.___ __.x

LIBRARY ,
tJNlVERSITY OF KENTUCKY

THE PRESENT STATUS OF LOCAL SUPPORT OF
THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Introduction

“The General Assembly shall, by appropriate legislation, pro-
vide for an efﬁcient system of common schools throughout the state”.
So reads Section 183 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth. The
meaning of this mandate is clear, and it needs little if any ampliﬁca-
tion. It should be pointed out, houeve1 that an “efficient” school
system for the state is one that makes possible a reasonably uniform
degree of educational opportunity for all of the children in all sec-
tions of the Commonwealth.

The material of this Bulletin is devoted to a presentation of data
on local support of the public schools of Kentucky. It is believed that
ample facts are displayed to illustrate the present inadequacy of
school support in large sections of the state.

The money for the support of the public schools comes in the
main from three sources, represented by the local, the state, and the
federal governments. In normal times, federal support of the public
schools in Kentucky constitute slightly less than one per cent of the
total. This means, therefore, that in substance the problem of the
support of the public school system is narrowed down to a considera-
tion of the portions of the support that must be assumed respectively
by the two agencies of government, the state, and the local district...
It follows that where adequate local support is not possible of reali-
zation, the state is under obligation to provide.

The Sources of School Support

Examination of the classiﬁed revenue receipts of the public school
districts as displayed in Table 1 shows the proportions from various
sources of the income of the schools. In this table receipts are classi-
ﬁed as to source for county districts and independent districts sepa-
rately. Four general classiﬁcations are employed: the “State Per
Capita”, the “Total Property Tax”, “Tuition” revenue, and rev-
enue from all “Other Sources” - -

The 1eceipts from the “State Per Capita” , of co’uise, represent
the state support. The total per capita receipts for the county school
districts are practically twice those £01 the independent d1stricts.
Since the total per capita receipts for the two types of districts are
proportional to the school census ﬁgures, these two amounts reﬂect
the fact that there are twice as many children of school age residing
Within county school districts as live within the borders of independ-
ent districts. As a matter of fact, the county districts or essentially

rural areas of the state, include 517,083 of the 1935 school census
total of 762,810.

The receipts from the ad valorem tax on general property and
franchise corporations, and the tax on bank shares are from district-
Wide local taxation. The receipts from subdistrict taxation are for
supplementary support of programs within special subdistricts which
desire additional educational service to that provided by the district
as a whole. These four sources have been grouped together and their
totaled receipts labeled “Total Property Tax”.

Receipts from “Tuition” are largely the payments from one dis-
trict to another. It should be noted incidentally that more than four
per cent of the revenue received by independent school districts is
from tuition paid largely by boards of education of county school dis-
tricts to provide for the education of county pupils not afforded ade-
quate school opportunities by their own districts

“Other Sources” of 1evenue include leccipts from district poll
taxes, receipts from the federal government for vocational education,
receipts from private foundations, and miscellaneous other revenue
receipts.

It is apparent from an inspection of this table that for the state
as a Whole the ad valorem taxation of local property constitutes the
laigest source of revenue £01 the suppo1t of the schools. However,
an especially signiﬁcant fact to be observed is that whereas in the
independent school districts of the state as a group, 26.00 per cent,
or scarcely more than one-fourth of the total revenue is state aid, in
the county school districts 50.63 per cent or fully one-half of the
total receipts is from the state per capita. This, of course, means
that the county districts as a group, receive considerably less local
revenue per pupil than do the independent districts. It also means
that the county districts are as a group more dependent upon the
state for the support of the program of the public schools.

Regional Differences in Ability to Support the Public Schools

The problem of school support may be regarded from the con-
sideration of the differences in property wealth of the large geo-
graphical areas into which the state is naturally divided. In a former
Bulletin“ of the State Department of Education, use was made of a
sevenfold division of the enti1e area of the state, each section includ-
ing from seven to thir—ty three county political units. The geograph—
ical a1eas deﬁned in this former study and made use of here ale (1)
the “Blue Grass”, including 33 counties between Covington and Dan-
ville; (II) the “Pennyroyal”, including 25 counties in southein Ken-
tucky from the Tennessee Rive1 to the edge of the “Blue Giass”
(III) the Eastern Coal Fields 0r “Mountains”, including 27 counties
comprising the entire southeastern portion of the state; (IV) the
“Western Coal Fields”, including 10 counties in western Kentucky
north of the “Pennyroyal”; (V) the “Louisville” area and adjacent

1935‘ See pages 55 and 73-75. Educational Bulletin, Volume II, No. 11, January.

44—.__)___.___._________..‘____.__ A

Mis
Gra
cha
1ch
clu<
the

sess
vall
ical

‘ ‘ M
and
ave:
of t

stitt
stat
gua
tam
wea

red1
sion
in 1
sari
dis1:
of t
atio
ind(
wit]
citic

atio
870.
for

48 i
tric
tion
valt
stat
tion

schc
com
dist

15115

and
riot.-

for
hich
2rict
heir

dis-
Eour
s is
dis-
ade-

poll
ion,
511116

itate
the
ver,
the
sent,
1, in
the
sans
ocal
sans
the

con-
geo-
mm
of a
dud-
aph-

(1)
Dan-
:{en-
SS J 1 7
ities

the
icky
cent

nary,

1. .
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
J
l

Mississippian plateau, including 10 counties between the “Blue
Grass” and the “Western Coal Fields”; (VT) the Jackson “Pur-
chase”, including 8 counties in the western. tip of the state, that is,
west of the Tennessee River; and (VII) the “Eastern Knobs”, in-
cluding 7 counties lying east of the “Blue Grass”, and northwest of
the ‘ ‘ Mountains ’ ’.

In Table 2 are included school census totals for these areas, as-
sessed valuation of property totals, and quotients giving the assessed
valuation of the property per census child for each of the geograph-
ical areas, and the mean or average value for the entire state.

Inspection of this table shows that the property per child in the
“Mountains” averages for that entire region, holding 236,958 boys
and girls of school age, $949.00, or somewhat less than one—half of. the
average for the entire state of $:2, 1.18 00 and approximately one—fifth
of the mean £01 the‘ Louisville” area.

Against the facts here displayed, the mandate of the State Con-
stitution to “provide 101 an efﬁcient system .throughout the
state”, becomes of great import. The challengeis for the state to
guarantee adequate school supp01t for the children of the‘ ‘Wloun-
tains ,the “Pennyroyal’ , and the other a1eas of low pe1 capita
wealth. .

Differences in the Ability of Individual School Districts to
Support the Public Schools

Extremes in individual situations are masked by the .device of
reduction to a small number of groups. Thus, the preceding discus-
sion of regional differences in ability tosupport the public schools
in which the entire state is divided into seven separate areas, neces-
sarily can not reveal such extreme ditterences as are portrayed by a
display of data for the entire group of 305 separate school districts
of the Commonwealth. Table 3 shows a distribution of assessed valu-
ations of property for the 120 county school districts, and the 185
independent school dist1icts, sepa1ately by classes of cities. togethei
with median values for each of the types of dist1iets and classes of
cities. 1
Thus for the county districts the median average assessed valu-
ation of property is $1,380.00; for Louisville the valuation is $5,-
870.00; for the 5 second class cities, the middle valuation is $4,177.00;
for the 8 third class cities, the median valuation is $2,500.00; for the
48 fourth class cities, $2,083.00; for the 123 other independent dis-
tricts, including many ﬁfth and sixth class cities, the median valua-
tion is $1,830.00; for all of the 185 independent districts, the median
valuation is $1,958.00; and for all of the 305 school districts of the
state (existing at the time of securing this data) the median valua-
tion is $1,775.00. 1

A little inspection of Table 3 shows that the group of county
school districts has a preponderance of relatively low valuations as
compared with the‘independent districts. The mode for the county
districts is the class interval $500.00 to $999.99, which includes 34

. i1}
[:3-

cminties or more than one-fourth of that groiip. The modal value
for the independent districts, on the other hand, is the class interval
$1,500 to $1,999.99, which includes 42 of the 185 independent dis-
tricts.

Because of the fact that the county school districts as a group
include slightly more than two—thirds of the total school census pop—
ulation, and because of the relatively low property valuation of a
large proportion of this group of school districts, special considera-
tion is given to the county figures. Table 3 shows that. in 10 county
districts of the state the amount of taxable property back of each
child is less than $500.00; in another 5 county districts it is greater
than $5,000.00. The two extremes are presented by Woodford
County district with an assessed valuation of property of $11,114.60
per census child compared with Clinton County district which has
but a meager $354.00 per child. The ratio between these two ﬁgures
is more than 31 to 1.

Table 4 is a two-way frequency tabulation of ad valorem tax
rates for school purposes versus ﬁgures of the assessed valuation of
property per census child for the 120 county school districts. The
signiﬁcance of relating tax rates to property valuations is that. there
is thus displayed whatever of correspondence that may exist between
“effort”, as represented by size of tax rate, versus “resources”, as
represented by taxable property. As an illustration, 48 counties levy
the seventy-ﬁve cents maximum tax rate for school purposes, as per-
mitted by‘ the law. Of the 36 county districts whose assessed valua-
tion of property is in excess of 2,000.00 per census child, only 4, 01'
one-ninth, levy this maximum rate. 011 the other hand, of the 84
county districts whose assessed valuation of property is less than
$2,000.00 per census child, a total of 44, or more than one-half, levy
the maximum rate allowed. This observation, then, shows that many
of the poorer counties are putting forth greater eti'ort than the richer
counties in attempting to provide educational facilities for their chil-
dren.

The Local Per Capita of County School Districts

Table 5 displays a distribution of the amounts of local revenue
per census child for the 120 county districts for 1935-36. The ﬁgures
are calculated upon the basis of the approved budget estimates for the
current ﬁscal year. The local revenue per census child may properly
be termed the “local per capita”, as it corresponds to the unit of
measurement of state support termed the “state per capita.”

Inspection of this table shows that 36 county districts have a
local per capita of less than $6.00, and that 61 of the 120 districts
have a local per capita of less than $9.00. On the other hand, 9 coun—
ties have a local per capita greater than $24.00. It is of interest to
note that at one extreme there are two county districts with a local
per capita less than $3.00, and at the other extreme two counties with
per capitas between $33.00 and $36.00.

The rectiﬁcation of the inequalities of local educational oppor-
tunity as represented by these divergent ﬁgures may lie in a state per
capita of substantial amount.

n.‘_______,___-_____‘ __. __,___.___.___

exis
in '
last
acct
whé
fr01
est

per

thcs
pre:

Mez
EX}

tien
tric
giw
for
498
for
333
dist
the

the
gi W
per
$25
the
£011
all

rats
ﬁgu

uné
ere]
tric
qua
lic

'alue
erval
dis-

roup
pop—
of a
dera-
unty
each
eater
lford
14.60
. has
gures

. tax
>11 of
The
there
ween
", as
levy
per-
alua—
4, 01'
c 84
than
levy
nany
icher
chil-

'enue
gures
r the
oerly
it of

W a
;ricts
:oun-
st to
local
with

mor-
e per

4
l.
l
l
l
l
1
r
l
l
l
l
l
1

Current Expenditures per Pupil in the Separate School Districts
of the State in 1934-35

The present differences in the unit costs of the public schools
existing among the several school districts of the state are set forth
in Table 6. The current expenditure ﬁgures are those given in the
last Biennial Report" and are for the year 1934-1935. Taking into
account the entire 305 districts of the state, it is to be noted that
whereas the current cost of education for the lowest one-fourth ranges
from scarcely more than $12.00, up to $24.30 per pupil, for the high-
est one-fourth, it ranges from $41.19 per pupil to more than $130.00
per pupil. ‘

The striking inequalities of educational opportunity reﬂected by
these divergent ﬁgures emphasize all too well the inadequacy of the
present proportion of state support of the public school program.

Mean Values of Property per School Census Child and Total Current
Expenditures per Pupil by Types of Districts and by Classes of Cities

Table 7 provides a summary of totals and averages. The quo-
tient of the total assessed valuation of property in the county dis-
tricts, $774,771,620.00, divided by the school census ﬁgure 517,083
gives $1,498.00 as the mean or average value of property per child
for the county districts. Other ﬁgures corresponding to the $1,-
498.00 for the county districts are $5,870.00 for Louisville; $3,895.00
for the second class cities; $2,162.00 for the third class cities; $2,—
333.00 for the fourth class cities; $1,894.00 for other independent
districts; $3,421.00 for all independent districts; and $2,118.00 for
the entire state.

The quotient of the total current expenditures, $9,512,940.73, in
the county districts, divided by the average membership 377,233
gives $25.22 as the mean or average value of current expenditures
per pupil for the county districts. Other ﬁgures corresponding to the
$25.22 for the county districts are $66.70 for Louisville; $65.93 for
the second class cities; $41.77 for the third class cities; $39.96 for the
fourth class cities; $35.99 for other independent districts; $48.81 for
all independent districts; and $33.02 for the entire state.

The arithmetic mean averages given in Table 7 depict more accu—
rately than the median district averages given in Tables 3 and 6, the
ﬁgures for the typical child in each of the groups included.

The Inadequacy of Teachers’ Salaries

Substantial evidence of the meagerness of school support even
under the present per capita ($10.95 in 1935-36) is furnished by ref-
erence to the salaries of teachers, particularly those in the county dis,
tricts. Salaries of the teaching force of the public schools, inade-
quate as they are, constitute by far the greater part of the cost of pub
lic education.

Table 8 displays the distribution of disbursements by classiﬁca-
tion in the main items listed on the ﬁnancial reports, of the county

‘Educational Bulletin, Volume III. No. 10. December, 1935,

school districts for the ﬁscal year ending June 30, 1935. The only
disbursements not included in the table are those for refunds and tem-
porary loans under “Debt Service”, which, in fact are merely book-
keeping ﬁgures and not in any sense part of the actual expenses of
the year. Other “Debt Service” and “Capital Outlay” are included.
Incidentally, there is an element of duplication involved in reporting
expenditures both for school buildings under “Capital Outlay”, and
money used to retire bonds, under “Debt Service.”

By this table it is seen that 67.27 per cent of the total net dis-
bursements in county school districts goes for teachers’ salaries. It
should be noted in this connection that fully two-thirds of the expend-
itures for “Transfer Tuition” may be regarded as assigned to teachers’
salaries. By far the greater proportion of tuition disbursements are
payments 'by cottnty‘boards to independent districts; the salaries of
teachers in independent districts are thus in part paid. It may be
stated then that in round numbers, 70 per cent of the total net dis-
bursements in the county school districts are for teachers’ salaries.

For the year 1934—35 there was a total of 18,126 teachers in all
of the public elementary and secondary schools of the state. Of this
state total, there were in the elementary schools of the county districts
10,297 teachers, or practically 57 per cent of the total number.

.Table 9 displays ﬁgures for all of the county school districts of
the state, showing the number of full—time elementary teachers in
each district; the monthly salaries paid, within $5.00 intervals; and
the length of term of employment of the teachers. A cursory inspec-
tion of the data here supplied provides all the evidence needed to
show the inadequacy of teachers’ salaries in the county school dis—
tricts of the state as a group, and thus shows the inadequacy of the
present state per capita.

The state totals supplied at the bottom of this table show that
there are employed the number of 10,834 full—time elementary teach-
ers in the county school districts of the state. Of this group the num-
ber of ‘l,055 full—time teachers are employed for seven months at a
salary of less than $60.00 per month, or an annual salary of less than
$420.00 a year. A total of 5,550 elementary teachers in the county
districts receive less than $75.00 a month.

Another way of pointing out the present inadequacy of teachers’
salaries is to state that a total of 7,070 or 68 per cent of the full-time
elementary teachers in the county school systems of the state, this
year, under the present per capita, actually receive annual salaries of
less than $600.00.

Other statements of figures may be employed to describe condi-
tions; but they point to the one inescapable conclusion—the present
per capita is inadequate to provide living wages for teachers and
hence is not large enough to make possible the carrying out of the
mandate of the State Constitution, to “provide for an efficient system
of common schools throughout the state.”

Tab

men
schc
Scht
Fig
thai

Ta'

port
schc
the

pots
actt
The
havi

. TBSC

vah
the
of n
in t

was

only
tem-
nook-
:s of
,ded.
ting
and

dis-

It
end-
iers’
; are
>s of
y be
dis-

n all
this
ricts

ts of
’s in
and
spec-
d to
dis-
? the

that
3ach—
111111-
at a
than
unty

hers ’
-time

this
es of

ondi-
esent

and
f the
stem

Tables 9 and 10 on Teachers’ Salaries in County School Districts

Tables 9 and 10 supplying data on the salaries of full-time ele-
mentary teachers, and high school teachers respectively, in the county
school districts have been compiled from the Teachers’ Salary
Schedules for 1935—36. The data are relatively accurate and complete.
Figures for the few part-time teachers and those teaching for less
than 7 months (the legal minimum term) have not been included.

Tables 11 and 12 Including Data by School Districts on Local
Public Support for 1935-36

Table 11, “Data by School Districts on Local Public School Sup-
port for 1935-36” supplies in detail, information from every public
school district in the state respecting local support. The ﬁgures in
the ﬁrst two columns under the caption “Pupil Load” include the
potential pupil load represented by the 1935 school census, and the
actual pupil load represented by the average membership for 1934-35.
The data under the general caption “Local Resources and Tax Rates”
have been compiled from the 1935—36 General Budget reports. Local

,resources are represented by the taxable prOperty, including assessed

valuations of non—corporation and corporation property, subject to
the ad valorem tax; assessed valuations of bank shares; and numbers
of male citizens subject to a poll or capitation tax. The local tax rates
in force this ﬁscal year are supplied.

Table 12, “Data on County Subdistrict Taxation for 1935-36”
was compiled from the Subdistrict Budget reports for 1935-36.”

TABLE 1. Revenue Receipts of Public School Districts in 1934-35.

Independent

Source County Districts Districts State Totals
of
Revenue Amount of Per Amount of Per Amount of Per
Revenue Cent Revenue Cent Revenue Cent
State Per Capita .......... $ 5, 630,215.25 50.03 $ 2,766,058.80 26.00 $ 8,396,274.05 38.59

l | I
General Property Tax 1 $ 3,441,340.56 l 30.95 $ 5,911,353.89 55.57 $ 9, 352, 604.45 42.98
Franchise Corpora— |
tions ................................ 1,226,145.80 11.03 933,728.14 8.78 2,159,873.94 9.93
Subdistrict Tax 253,996.13 2.28 24,904.90 0.23 278, 901.03 1.28
Bank Shares .................... 15,532.82 0.14 153,677.87 1.44 169,210.69 0.78

Total Property Tax. $4,937,015.31 44.40 $7,023,664.80 66.02 $1,960,680.11 54.97

Tuition .................................. $ 57, 744. 93 0.52 $ 432, 916. 69 4.07 $ 490,661. 62 2.26
Other Sources .................. 494, 954.55 4.45 415, 934. 98 3.91 910, 889.53 4.18
Totals .................................. $11,119,930.04 100.00 $10, 638,575.27 100.00 $21, 758, 505.31 100.00

TABLE 2. Comparison of Assessed Valuations of Property Per School Census
Child by Geographical Areas for 1935.

Propert
Geographical Number School ‘0SSCSSed per y

Area* 1 Of. Census \_ :llurzttwn Census

Lount1es 0L l’ruperty Child
1. Blue Grass 33} 152,351 $ 5138,5'15,037.00 $1}, 534.00
II. Pennyl'oynl l 25 122,442 138,053,12000 1,127.00
111. Mountains | 27 230,058 1 224,783,23100 040.00
1V. \Vestern CO l 10 00,211 | 101,0(i0,744.00 1,473.00
V. Louisville l 10 112,000 5 400,203,208JJO l 4,419.00
VI. Purchase l 3 ‘10,l54l l 78,030,51100 1 1,043.00
VII. Eastern K110 )s . ] 7 28,006 34,017,001.00 | 1,208.00

| - l

State Totals and Mean ........................ 120 762,810 $1, 015,289,23S.00 $2,118.00

*See pages 55 and 73—75, Educational Bulletin, Volume IT, No. 11, January, 1935.

TABLE 3. Frequency Distribution of Assessed Valuations of Property Per School
Census Child in 1935 for County School Districts and by Classes of
Cities for the Independent School Districts.

Indemrndent School Districts
Assessed Valuations m m , M
of Property per > *5 H .. 4:: 334;: State
School Census Child u‘E-Z u m E, m ,j v f :3 V U, :4 V 5.7 E 53—. Totals
1935 :01 was, owl) ~15“ who: maﬁa: Ha:
36.2 1-9.: 895 5:15 as: 5292 :52
OmQ [:00 0100 sou e50 0:2“: «an
I | l | l
o—$ 499.99 | 10 l l | 4 14
9 509— 999.99 34 | 1. l 2 12 15 49
1, 000— 1,499.99 21 1 7 27 35 59'
1,500— 1,999.99 19 1 13 23 01
2, 000— 2,499.99 12 1 1 12 m 42
7 | 2 0 1-5 30
4 1 1 4 9 1s
5 3 (5 14
2 2 3 7
1 1 2
2 1 1 4
1 1 2
1 1
2 2
1 1
1 1
11,000— 11,499.99 1 l 1
l __Z
I _
Total Districts .. 120 1 5 8 48 123 | 30D
I I
. | | l l |
Medians .................... $1,380 $5,970| 94,177 $2,500! $2,033; 91,8301 $1,958} $1.775
I I | l l

______.._1-__. ...._._____.__.___.__.1 ._.._.___..___.4 __

mol

1119
ms

l.
1
l
l
1
1

______.._1-__. ...._._._..‘__.___.__4~1_.._.___..__.z __

‘rABLE 4.

Tax Rates Versus Assessed Valuation of Property Per Census Child.
County School Districts 1935-36.
Assessed Valuation 1:; :3: 3:1 3:. I: 5:";
01’ 1"'01“J"W 5' a .7. c’ 1;: . <7: .— .9
Per Census. Child :5; E ,1; If, :2 2; .g [E 3, 7—2:
,___d at.— 9:. <1: a? m 6/: El: )9? €F: :2
Tax Rates 1 ‘ é: ' ‘ l l ' ‘ g ' l
per $101) of O :53 8 g § § E § § 1% § §
Property "" a 51 3; $2— I. E, £2 5% i S
99‘
l |

l | l 1 1

1 1 1

1 1 1 1 3

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 3

1 S 5 7 ii 4 1 I 33

l 1 | 1

I 1 | 1| l 2

1 :1 :2 1 1 1 1 1 11

1 2: 1 1 1 1 2 1 | 1 11

1 1 1 1 2 1 | I:

7 21 11 .3 1 2 l l 1 ‘18

I 1 -1 1 1 1 .,

Totals ............. 1 10 I1 :14 21 1‘) 1| 12 7 4 i a i 2 | 1 Z 1 1 1 1-0

| l

TABLE 5. Frequency Distribution of Values

of Local Revenue Per Census Child
-for‘ County School Districts According to Budget Estimates for 1935-36.

Amount 01' Local Revenue per

Census l‘upil

Number

01' Counties

—$ 219:) 1 2
g 3.00— 5.5)!) 1 3}
1:.00— 8.9:) 1 25
51.00! 11.111! 24
12.01}— 1~1.!lU El
1500— 6
18.00— 7
211(10— ‘1
21.00— 5
27.00% 1
”100* 1
33.00— * 2
Total ................................................................ 120

TABLE 6.
Average M

Frequency

embe

by Classes of

Distribution of Total Current Expenditures Per Pupil in

rship in 1934-35 for County School Districts and
Cities for the Independent School Districts.

Independent School Districts
Curgent ,,, m , m
,, Expen itures > *5 ,5 ,. *4 *5 ,E.’ *4 3 State
er Pupil +37% ' ~ :._ “ =1 Tot 1
p1934—35 g3: 52>, 52E 23$ Egg $131: .533: as
05.21. :11”. 89.3; :53: 05,}: 5335-9 :52
. OmQ F1200 0200 E01) [nob OH 99‘ 4m:

5 12.00—$ 14.99 2 2
15.00—- 17.99 10 1 1 11
18.00— 20.99 21 2 2 23
21.00— 23.99 24 1 11 12 36
24.00—- 26.99 17 1 2 12 15 32
27. 00—- 29. 99 11 1 4 16 21 32
30.00— 32.99 6 9 12 21 27
33.00— 35.99 8 8 15 23 31
36. 00— 38. 99 7 1 5 13 19 26
39.00- 41.99 7 1 5 9 15 22
42.00—- 44.99 3 1 1 4 13 19 22
45.00—- 47.99 1 3 4 4
48.00—- 50.99 1 1 2 5 8 9
51.00— 53.99 1 l 1 3 5 6
54.00— 56.99 2 1 2 3 5
57.00— 59.99 1 4 5 5
60.00—- 62 99 1 1 2 2
63.00—- 65 99 1 1 1
66.00— 68 99 1 2 3 3
8100—8399 2 1 3 3
9000—0209 1 1 1
0020033550 1 1 1

13570031521200 I ' 1 1 1

Total Districts...... 120 1 5 8 | 48 123 185 305

Medians ................ $24. 53 966 . 70 $61. 22 $46. 50 $36. 00 $34. 50 $35. 67 $31. 83
TABLE 7. Property Valuations Per Census Child and Total Current Expenditures

Per Pupil for

County school Districts and for Independent
School Districts by Classes of Cities.

it
w 55
I 11
5:? a 3 m 1.25
Type of District 0 2 ,C, g :53 ﬁg. m3 u 2::
3‘3 .083 93% .1 “E 55 ”5'73
m mpg 0:,“ 00'5ng D‘O’U 265:5
16:32:: w'sgw 3?” $33& 27% :5ng
d.) 03 .
250 S