Events Calendar
In This Section
Most Read Stories
Family found dead in Ohio home
Robbers order bar patrons to empty pockets
Man gets 3 years in prison for having sex with horse
Sex-toy study at Duke University raises some eyebrows
Akron man turns himself in after authorities turn up heat
Get ready for detour, delays on Route 8
Man appears alive at own funeral
Blogs:
Pets:
Not 101 Dalmations…but close!
The Heldenfiles:
Friday Notebook
Patrick McManamon:
Saturday entertainment, one more time …
Akron Zips:
No. 1 UA soccer remains perfect, Zips football defeats rival Flashes
Tribe Matters:
Tribe makes roster moves
Cleveland Browns:
Lewis doesn't like boycott
Kent State Sports:
Kent State falls to Akron, 20-28
Cleveland Cavaliers:
Gameblog: Cavs at Knicks
Buckeye Blogging:
Weekly ‘B’ Deck Report – New Mexico St.
Varsity Letters:
Wrestling, bowling teams prepare for season
All Da King's Men:
Bigger And Better Boondoggles
Blog of Mass Destruction:
The Shooter
Akron Law Café:
See Jane Style:
Muffle Your Muffler
Car Chase:
Perfect Weather for an Autumn Drive
Let's Talk Real Estate:
RUMORS: Downtown Restaurant Explosion
Ohio Travels with Betty:
Jack is looking for a trip to Southern Ohio the week of November 16.
Sound Check:
The Black Keys to perform benefit concert at Musica on November 27
HRLite House:
Personal Rant – Why People Do Not Live in Northeast Ohio
Akron Gamer:
New 'Call of Duty' could set entertainment record
School funding details hidden from scrutiny
By Dennis J. Willard
Beacon Journal Columbus Bureau
Published on Sunday, Mar 29, 2009
Ted Strickland and his administration's inclination to work secretly and privately have backfired regarding the governor's plans to overhaul Ohio's unconstitutional school funding plan.
As the governor and his aides met with group after group to construct his ''evidence-based model'' for education funding, it became clear to his invited guests that the conversations would be one-way.
The governor and his staff would listen attentively, seem to agree accordingly and then usher everyone out the door without providing any insight into the administration's true thoughts.
Fellow Democrats were shown documents and then told they would be collected at the meeting's end.
In a year-end interview in 2008 with the Beacon Journal, Strickland explained why no one except a few within his inner circle would be privy to the plans.
''The reason we are playing it closely to the vest is because we think it is going to be more comprehensive than people expect and we don't want people to start taking a piece of it and distorting it. We don't want to lose the battle before we even enter the fight,'' Strickland said.
''We spent quite a bit of time asking ourselves how to give people some sense of inclusion, while at the same time not giving out information that will make it almost impossible for us to convey how everything fits together.''
The governor unveiled the plan and his worst fears were realized. His problems were exacerbated because the governor failed to vet much of the new formula with the groups and individuals that trekked to his office to supposedly work on the plan.
No one bought into the plan early because no one knew the details.
More importantly, the governor did not foresee glaring weaknesses in the new funding formula because he didn't trust anyone enough outside his small circle to speak truth to power.
The result was a disaster.
For example, the computer simulations that show how much each district would get under the new funding formula indicated a number of the wealthiest districts in the state would receive large increases while some of the poorest districts in the state received no increase or a decrease in state money in the next two years.
Critics asked how this could possibly address the inequities in the unconstitutional school funding formula.
But there were more problems with the way teacher salaries were assessed to drive money to school districts, the components of the so-called Instructional Quality or IQ Index, and an eight-year phase-in that appeared to require districts to pay for more smaller class
rooms, more school days and all-day kindergarten immediately.
Last week, the Associated Press reported that the governor steered an end run around the state's open records law by relying on a private consulting firm to work on the nuts and bolts of his new funding formula rather than his own budget office or the Ohio Department of Education.
Any work performed by the latter two agencies would be open to the public, while the analysis completed by Driscoll & Fleeter could be shielded.
Strickland and his aides have essentially dug a moat around his Statehouse office to keep enemies out and protect the king.
Unfortunately, this has isolated the leader and reinforced the echo effect within his office walls, where everyone seems to be patting each other on the back and exclaiming, ''Great idea and job well-done.''
On the other side of the moat, the picture is much different. State Rep. Seth Morgan, R-Huber Heights, continues to fight for information about the governor's evidence-based model while decrying Strickland's exclusionary tactics.
And Strickland now must rely on his fellow Democrats, who control the majority in the Ohio House, to make the needed repairs to his funding plan before the Republican majority in the Ohio Senate begins work on the proposal.
State Rep. Stephen Dyer, D-Green, who chairs the House Finance standing subcommittee on primary and secondary education, commended Strickland for proposing a truly revolutionary approach to school funding.
Dyer said the governor's plan requires the state to determine the cost of educating a child rather than using ''residual budgeting,'' which means education gets what is left over after other programs are funded.
''An entire generation of kids have gone through school with an unconstitutional funding system and I think it's time for us to take this opportunity to really address the issue,'' Dyer said.
Dyer outlined to the Beacon Journal on Friday a series of steps he and his colleagues are preparing to take in April.
For example, many wealthy districts are receiving more money than poor districts because the governor's plan is rightly reducing the ''charge-off,'' or the amount each district must raise in local property taxes, from 23 mills to 20. This is being done to address a phantom revenue problem that plagues local districts, in which the state assumes property taxes are being assessed and collected and reduces state aid in equal amounts.
The taxes are often not being collected, however, so districts are losing real dollars. The effect of reducing the charge-off will be to reimburse districts up to three local mills, so obviously wealthy districts that collect more with three mills than property poor districts do would benefit greatly.
We don't know what Strickland or his advisers were thinking when they developed this idea, because those records are private, but the result was embarrassing and undermined the credibility of his entire plan.
Dyer, whose subcommittee listened publicly to 300 witnesses in about 50 hours of open testimony, said House Democrats are planning to phase in a reduction in the charge-off to help avoid spikes in state funding to wealthy districts.
Legislative leaders and former Gov. George Voinovich increased the charge-off gradually by three mills in the mid-'90s in an attempt to steer more funding toward poorer districts.
Strickland's plan moves so much money to wealthy districts that the governor capped increases at 15 percent in the first year and 16 percent in the second.
Dyer said he is looking at possibly capping money to wealthy districts at a lower rate to move more funding toward poorer districts.
House Democrats are also going to have to tinker with the IQ Index. According to Strickland's plan, districts receive an IQ index between 0.9 and 1.6 based on student poverty, property wealth and the education level of the parents in the community, with a higher number indicating greater needs in the schools.
The IQ Index is basically driven by a multiplier, which is the average teacher salary in the state that the governor's plan calculated at around $52,000.
This average salary, however, has been criticized for being too low and unrealistic by the very education officials who should be backing the governor. While a lower average teacher salary saved the governor money that he would have had to put into the formula, it once again worked against his credibility.
Dyer said he plans to use a median teacher salary that will attempt to identify what the average teacher makes in an average district. He wants to continue to base the IQ Index on student poverty and parental education level, but Dyer said he believes the property wealth indicator could be detrimental to the formula because it doesn't necessarily reflect the needs in a given community.
Instead, Dyer is looking at spreading the IQ index across a number of school services to provide more funding to districts with greater needs based on the types of children they are being asked to educate.
''The index should reflect the challenges that face districts,'' Dyer said. ''The index is working powerfully, but it can work more powerfully.''
Dyer also wants to provide flexibility to districts to phase in new mandates from the state to match the increase in funding from Columbus while giving districts that are meeting high academic standards more freedom.
''Generally, we are looking to be more prescriptive with districts that are struggling, and acknowledge when districts are making steady improvements,'' Dyer said.
And Dyer wants to expand on another idea of Strickland's.
The governor's plan creates an advisory council to revisit the evidence-based model.
Dyer wants to broaden the scope and research arm of the council to continually examine the funding formula.
''There are moments when you have a chance to make a difference and this is that moment,' Dyer said.
There are also times when you have to lower the drawbridge, fill in the moat, throw open the curtains and let in the sunshine.
The irony is Strickland should be hearing cheers rather than jeers right now because despite the problems in his plan, he is the first governor in 18 years — make that Ohio history — to propose a sincere remedy to the unconstitutional school funding plan.
Dennis J. Willard can be reached at 614-224-1613 or dwillard@thebeaconjournal.com.
Ted Strickland and his administration's inclination to work secretly and privately have backfired regarding the governor's plans to overhaul Ohio's unconstitutional school funding plan.
Get the full article here.
Comments
Click here to post your comments
Akron, OH
Posted 07:39 AM, 03/29/2009
Sorry Willie, but until Teddyboy actually enacts one of his proposals, it's jes' another broken promise.
Mebbe the money should be broken down to a level where more money goes to areas where they have smarter students. Dumb kids don't need a lot of money. They're stoopid after all.
Akron, OH
Posted 09:29 AM, 03/29/2009
Why don't school boards and superintendents take the lead on this problem? I have never read about any board or super trying to raise awareness or contacting state reps for help or input. Here at the Revere district, our board spends all its time looking for a new super every 2 years. We have a growing district but we don't get new tax revenue until a new levy is passed. The state keeps it and of course screws around with it. Our super and board are happy keeping their thumbs up their butts while the parents do all the work.
Another revenue source that boards and supers ignore is the lottery. The lottery gets away with advertising that it's for education, but it's actually a shell game where the funds eventually end up in the state treasury. Seems that boards and supers could concentrate on that too.
The obvious problem is that there are too many self serving individuals no matter where you turn for an education plan.
Sagamore Hills, OH
Posted 09:43 AM, 03/29/2009
No matter what issues we deal with, it could be worse. You could have been born in Pittsburgh and had to live in that filth.
Akron, OH
Posted 12:54 PM, 03/29/2009
The Emperor's new clothes look really good....
Wheaton, IL
Posted 12:58 PM, 03/29/2009
Here's a solution.
If you want to attend a public school outside your district, you have to pay tuition.
Make EVERY student pay tuition for the school they attend.
BUT, the state then gives every student a voucher that would cover the cost of a typical public school.
All problems solved. No complications.
Posted 12:52 PM, 04/09/2009
@Paul,
You are spot on with your observations.
Just remember, when our last governor, who was a convicted felon, was found to be in contempt of court FOUR times for not funding the schools of Ohio. But being the governor, he ordered that no one was to press the issue of school funding no matter what the court system says.
Now he is collecting a nice pension from the taxpayers and never even told us to bend over.
Maybe Stricjland may not have come up with a plan yet, but at least he is trying. How he does it, I really don't care, but as long as he just does it. If he doesn't fix it, then he is no worse than his predecessor.
But, if he does fix it, then he deserves all the credit.
