RIDE Commissioner Gist (far right) testifies at HFC.

The RI House Finance Committee held hearings on education funding formulas today, and the chamber was standing room only, with over fifty people signed up to testify. The committee is chaired by Rep. Steven Costantino, who introduced the funding formula developed by the RI Dept. of Education, and they were the lead presenters this morning, with Comm. Deborah Gist and Brown consultant Dr. Kenneth Wong headlining.

In addition to the Costantino/RIDE bill (H8094), the committee considered also considered bills by Rep. Edith Ajello (H7555) and Rep. Arthur Corvese (H7123).

"I am confident that the framework in 8094 will take us from no formula to the best in the country," said Gist in her opening statement. "It is based in data and solid educational research," said Wong.

Rep. Doug Gablinski asked the question I've raised here before: "You're assuming that the money in the system is sufficient."

"[Many] Districts that are overfunded are above the state average," said Gist, arguing that many of the districts being defunded had per-pupil spending above the state's $13K average. For those districts who were spending too much, she said, "We will help them make adjustments with the Uniform Chart of Accounts."

Ajello had the opportunity to speak to her bill, and she was blunt about what she saw as deficiencies in the RIDE proposal. "I find it obscure and puzzlijng," she said. "It boggles my mind to see weights eliminated for English Language Learners (ELL) and special education." Her proposal includes separate multipliers for a variety of factors (ELL, special ed, free lunch, reduced lunch).

Executive Dir. of the RI association of School Committees (RIASC) Tim Duffy spoke to the Corvese bill, which includes new state-level purchasing and oversight proposals, but which actually defers any funding formula to a point in the future where there are two successive years of revenue increases in the state.

When the presentations were done and the committee asked questions, Rep. Ray Gallison asked what is on the minds of many in the East Bay: "There are 14 communities that lose funds," he said. "You're going to force those communities to raise property taxes. How is that fair and equitable to the kids in those communities?"

"I disagree that adjustment would result in any increase in property taxes," said Gist. (See my previous reaction to this line of argument.)

After a bit more poking from the committee, Costantino called for the witness list, and I went up there with the first group to testify.

TESTIMONY TO HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE MAY 13, 2010

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. My name is John McDaid. I’m the parent of a 4th grader at Howard Hathaway Elementary in Portsmouth RI, an appointed member of the Portsmouth school facilities committee, a volunteer on the district technology committee. I am also a member of RI is Ready, deeply committed to quality education for all of Rhode Island’s children, so I come here today to speak in general support of a fair, equitable funding formula. I agree with the previous witness, Osiris, that it should be a given. Based on my experience in Portsmouth, I would like to suggest two key factors such a formula needs to be truly fair to all, in particular, those districts identified as allegedly overfunded.

Portsmouth is a suburban community serving 2,657 pupils with only 9.5% on Free and Reduced Price lunch, with an adjusted EWAV property value of $4.5B. Because we are on Aquidneck Island, we have a high proportion of shoreline and waterview properties, which is a wonderful benefit, except during hurricanes and revals which drive up that EWAV number. Based on these factors, under both H7555 and H8094, our community would see substantial cuts in the state share.

Now I could argue that this is inherently unfair to our district, since we are, at a per-pupil cost of just $11,299, among those districts delivering education most effectively. I could note that we recently commissioned a facilities analysis that shows we need a minimum of $29M in repairs and upgrades over the next five years to keep our buildings code compliant, safe, and effective. I could argue that Portsmouth is already paying over 80% of the cost of education locally, and that 8094 would raise that to 91%. I could argue that in the past three years, we have been through a Caruolo action — including two audits — and won a Superior Court judgement which affirmed our funding level as appropriate. I could point out that we had a performance audit performed two years ago, and that the findings suggested we _add_ staff and $150K in funding. I could talk about the heartwrenching decisions we have had to make as a community: In the past two years, we have had to close two elementary schools. One, Prudence Island, was our state’s last one-room schoolhouse. The other, Elmhurst Elementary, is a truly unique local gem with a deeply involved parent community. I could say all that.

But I’m not here to argue against a funding formula, even if it results in less money for Portsmouth. What I do assert is that to be fair to all, first, the state share needs to be more robustly funded. For that reason, I would prefer a bill that aims to raise the foundation amount. It costs Portsmouth $3,000 more than $8,295 to put a child in a classroom, and we have a Superior Court ruling and a performance audit to testify to our efficiency. I urge the committee to consider a state goal closer to $10,600 per student, and a target percentage of 45-50%, rather than the current 37% state share. We know we’re not going to see 40% in Portsmouth, but no matter what the quadratic mean says, it is hard to wrap my mind around the notion that only 9% is truly fair.

And finally, the proposed formulas place towns like Portsmouth between a rock and a hard place when you consider the environment of the S3050 tax cap. The Portsmouth school appropriation is at the cap this year, and even without factoring in proposed reductions, the administration has estimated $583K in reductions yet to be determined for the 2010 budget. The out years are even worse, with a projected shortfall of $1.3M in 2013. With H8094, we would lose an additional $260K next year. I was disappointed to hear the Commissioner say that she does not believe this would result in increased property taxes. We are already efficient. We have already closed two schools. We have been audited. There is nothing left to cut.

The funding formulas assert that our town has the capacity to pay. However, the ever tightening 3050 cap prevents us from doing so. My very specific recommendation is to provide automatic relief from 3050 in any funding formula. On March 25, at a meeting of Rep. Amy Rice’s Aquidneck Island consolidation study group, Commissioner Gist said, quote, “I will support whatever changes to 3050 need to be made,” unquote, and explicitly identified Portsmouth as, quote, “an example of a community” unquote that needed such flexibility.

What would it take to make up for the contemplated $260K reduction in 8094? Consider this: The impact on the average taxpayer with a $300K house would be $20 next year. Not $20 per thousand. Twenty dollars.

However, the way RI General Law 44-5-2 is written, that might as well be twenty million dollars. Because of the requirement in section (e) that any appropriation in excess of cap requires a supermajority, while the option may exist theoretically, there is no way in Portsmouth — nor many other communities — that any such motion would succeed.

We all want a fair and equitable formula. But fair to all means fair to _all_. Enacting cuts to the state share without providing an automatic waiver to 3050 would, by legislative act, drive districts into deficit. I submit to you that this is inherently unfair, and I urge you to include automatic relief from S3050 in the language of any funding formula.