Measuring school districts by what they spend doesn't really capture inequities. Poorer school districts typically spend [[and receive) more, because of Title I funding for extra programming. This is done by school--so there are Title I schools in some very affluent districts.

The amount received from Title I also depends on how thorough the administration is at finding those funds.

DPS? They spend a ton on debt, for sure. But they also spend a ton on administration. No one would argue that spending on either of those directly impacts students.

In districts across our state, personnel costs make up 80-90% of total expenses. For every dollar a district spends in personnel, it must pay MPSERS another $0.30 or so. By far, the highest non-classroom expense is paying back underfunded pensions.

Articles like the NPR one cited bother me, because they make it seem like teachers and programming are where the money goes. That's not even close to true. But the truth [[pensions) doesn't make an interesting story.