5 ways to begin fixing insufficient school funding
A judge confirmed Tuesday what most rational people surmised a long time ago — Pennsylvania’s system of funding public education stinks.
Officials haven’t met their obligation under the state Constitution to provide all children with a “thorough and efficient” education, Commonwealth Court Judge Renee Cohn Jubelirer ruled. Kids in poor school districts aren’t treated as well as those in prosperous communities.
In her voluminous opinion — at 786 pages, it’s about half the size of the opus “War and Peace” — Jubelirer said funding is insufficient. She highlighted the inequities caused by the state’s relying heavily on local property taxes to pay for schools. She cited data such as test scores that show a correlation between student outcomes and funding.
Pennsylvania ranks near the bottom nationwide in the percentage of school funding that comes from the state. The bulk of the money is raised locally. That results in students in Allentown not receiving the same opportunities as students in Parkland.
The judge, without offering specific directions, ordered state officials to fix the problem.
A lot of educators and advocates are popping champagne bottles. They are being overly optimistic.
Don’t expect immediate upheaval. Republican legislative leaders staunchly defended the state’s system during the trial in the school funding lawsuit, which was filed nine years ago by school districts — including Panther Valley and Shenandoah Valley — parents and students.
House Republican Leader Bryan Cutler of Lancaster County issued a lengthy, scathing statement Wednesday in response to the ruling.
“Many of our public schools often lack real accountability and have become captured by special interests and bureaucrats who put their needs above that of the students,” Cutler said (pot, meet kettle). “Unfortunately, many public schools remain reluctant about increasing parental involvement in how their children are educated. In fact, some schools have lost their core mission of providing an education and, instead, focus on newer buildings and non-educational endeavors at the cost of meeting standards.”
Expect the matter to be appealed to the state Supreme Court. It could be a year or more before there is a final word from the courts.
And don’t expect the state to suddenly dump a Brinks truck full of cash into education.
During the trial, which occurred in late 2021 and early ’22, experts testified the state was more than $4 billion short of sufficient funding. Funding will never be increased by that much. Nor should it be.
Throwing more cash at the problem isn’t the full answer. More money is desperately needed by some school districts. But there are other ways to reduce inequities, and to redistribute some of the money that’s already there.
This problem must be attacked on multiple fronts.
Property tax reform
A few weeks ago, I called on homeowners to get angry and pester their state lawmakers to change how tax money is raised for schools. Tuesday’s opinion offers new ammunition for that fight.
Property taxes must be done away with, or become a significantly smaller part of the equation, I argued. Raising education funds through sales taxes and income taxes, and distributing them from the state, would be an education equalizer.
Fair funding formula
The money that comes from the state now isn’t doled out as it should be. The state’s “fair funding formula” is a farce.
Enacted in 2016, it is designed to send more money to schools that need more support because of factors such as poverty, low tax bases, charter school costs and having students who don’t speak English as their first language.
The formula has failed because it covers only the “new” money allocated since the law was passed. In 2021, that was a meager 11% of the total.
All state money should be distributed through that formula. If that causes wealthier districts to give some back, so be it.
Consolidate school districts
Pennsylvania does not need 500 school districts. Consolidation should not only save money but should improve performance.
In 2009, during his budget speech, Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell triggered an earthquake when he proposed eliminating 400 districts.
The idea was dead the minute it left his lips. Lawmakers refused to buy into it as school officials in some communities freaked out.
Consternation is natural. But consolidation has happened before on a large scale. It just happened so long ago that most people don’t remember it. In the 1960s, the Legislature ordered a statewide consolidation. At the time, there were more than 2,277 districts. By 1970, there were 669.
It’s time for Round 2. Dropping to 100 districts might be a stretch. But certainly there should be far fewer than exist today.
Cut the fat
Every school district, just like every family and every business, can find ways to save money. Government at all levels is notoriously inefficient. School districts need to take a look at every penny of their budget.
What can be cut or reallocated to better uses? How can buildings be made energy efficient? How can transportation costs be reduced? Are we being too generous with our contracts for teachers and staff — they deserve good pay, but if they’re making good money, why are taxpayers paying for them to continue their education?
Charter school funding
I also wrote recently that Wall Street bankers would be envious at how the savings of some cybercharter schools have grown in recent years. Their vaults are brimming, yet they’re still siphoning tax dollars from struggling school districts such as Allentown.
My column drew the same tired response from charter school cheerleaders: “This dude says parents shouldn’t have a say in where their kiddos go to school!”
Charter school cheerleaders consider any attack on charter schools to be an attack on school choice. No criticism is warranted in their mind.
The existence of charters isn’t the problem. The problem is how they are funded. They get paid too much for special education students. And there is no reason for a cybercharter to receive the same level of funding as a brick-and-mortar school.
Fixing Pennsylvania’s education funding system must include rethinking how charters are paid.
Tuesday’s court ruling should spark discussion about how to make Pennsylvania schools better. Pennsylvania has a new governor and Legislature. This is an opportunity for them to make their mark.