Taking a gamble on taxes

As a companion to his State of the City address last night Boston Mayor Marty Walsh unveiled a proposal for reforming education financing in Massachusetts and, perhaps not surprisingly, the legislative plan leans heavily on increased school spending.

In fact one section of the plan anticipates that the state will soon have even more money to dole out to cities and towns for spending on schools.

But that scenario immediately brought to mind chickens — and the advice against counting them before they hatch.

Sure, there is a lot of talk on Beacon Hill about reforming the state’s education funding formula; we are warned by the tax-and-spend alarmists that Massachusetts cities and towns are suffering grievously for the state not having updated the formula in years.

And reform, to many of those demanding it, automatically means higher taxes. Some are pinning their hopes on a proposed ballot question that would impose a higher income tax rate on millionaires, the revenue from which supporters insist will be earmarked for education and transportation.

But that proposal wouldn’t go on the ballot until 2018, so in the meantime they’ll offer other ways that the state can drum up new funds. (Less often discussed are the accountability measures that should accompany any funding boost.)

Walsh knows what’s on the agenda — and clearly wants in on the ground floor.

“If new state revenue is identified for education aid,” his team wrote in a summary of his funding plan, cities like Boston, which have more low-income students and are already spending above the foundation budget set by the state, would get a bigger chunk of it.

Planning for that possibility is fine. But taxpayers ought to keep in mind that “identifying” new state revenue is progressive-speak for raising taxes — and on that there are no guarantees.