If you think that Minnesota’s education funding formula is complex and perplexing in good times, then you will not be surprised that the projected deficits, proposed budgets cuts and federal stimulus funding are making things even more complicated.
In March, the Governor submitted his revised budget proposal, and last week the Senate E-12 Education Committee approved its version of the K-12 Budget. Next week the House K-12 Education Finance Committee will submit its version of the budget for education.
The Governor’s proposal
The Governor’s education budget proposal does a 10% shift in each of the next two years - basically it would require school districts and charters to use reserve funds or borrow money, unless they make cuts, but it would provide additional funding for Q-Comp and a new Pay for Academic Performance Program.
The Senate’s proposal
In the Senate, the E-12 Education Committee Omnibus Education Bill cuts education funding by approximately 3.5% each of the next two years and imposes limits on the growth in the rate of funding increases in a number of program areas, including lease aid. Lease aid would be pro-rated if the growth in enrollment exceeded the limitation of the annual increase in lease aid funding. The plan would not do any shifts and, with the increase in Title 1 and IDEA funding, many school districts and charters would actually have the same or more funding than this year, except that federal funds are dedicated funds for particular purposes. Commissioner Seagren spoke forcefully against the limits on the growth in the rate of funding increases for lease aid in her comments shortly before the Committee’s vote last Thursday evening.
The House’s proposal
The House Education Finance Committee members met this past weekend and completed the framework for their education funding plan. Indications are that the bill will be significantly different than the Senate bill.
Final Comment
Nobody expects any one of the three education funding proposals to be the final word on the budget. From the proposals already on the table and the House plan that is yet to be revealed, it is clear that there are vast differences in philosophical thought, values and priorities – so the two houses and the Governor have a lot of work ahead of them in the six weeks that remain before adjournment.
So, the real work on education funding will come in the Conference Committee --- that will be appointed after both chambers adopt their own budget plans. It should get quite interesting and exciting as the clock ticks away on which vision for education funding becomes the governing philosophy for 2010-2011.
What is clear in the discussions and debate so far is that the legislature needs to have a serious debate on a long term funding approach and philosophy for funding education in Minnesota. Whatever is done this year is only going to be a short term solution for a serious long term issue.
Eugene Piccolo