Karina Wood (far right) talks with residents at the Portsmouth Library.

Over a dozen residents, including elected officials and school administration, came out for a meeting with RI is Ready founder Karina Wood to chew over the pros and cons of the several education funding formulas being considered by the state legislature.

"Some people say we can't do it this year because of the budget crisis," said Wood, "But I think it's even more important in a budget crisis because this is how your state dollars are being targeted." She noted that without a formula, inequities that had been baked into the system 15 years ago were still governing the distribution of aid.

Wood talked the attendees through the bills being considered (Costantino/RIDE bill (H8094), Ajello (H7555) and Gallo/Corvese (H7123) and stressed that RI is Ready liked certain elements of each.

The Ajello bill, said Wood, has a more robust set of multipliers for groups identified with extra education challenges (English language learners, reduced price lunch, etc.) but did not set a target for an enlarged state percentage, and would cut "overfunded" communities drastically over three years. The Gallo/Corvese bill aims to increase the size of the state share, and holds communities harmless by starting with current funding levels, but would only be triggered by two successive years of positive state revenue. "That's never-never land," said Wood. "We just feel our kids can't wait."

The RIDE/Costantino bill, Wood said, was attractive for its innovative phase-in mechanism (communities gain funding over five years, but losers are spread over 10), but suffered from a low foundation amount (just $8,295) which did not include many big-ticket local items (transportation, utilities, etc.). And the formula itself, with its reliance on a complicated quadratic mean, came in for some criticism. School Committee member Marge Levesque noted that economic disadvantage was double counted, once in the multiplier for reduced-price lunch, and again in the EWAV number. "That's hitting us twice," said Levesque.

"When Dr. Wong testified last week," Wood said, describing the Brown professor who developed RIDE's formula,"He said no other state has a formula like this. He meant that as a academic, that it was innovative." Wood noted that this was not necessarily a positive thing, and commented on Wong's perhaps unintentional candor. "He was not saying it as a politician. He was just being honest."

There was a lively discussion among the attendees of the perceived shortcomings of each bill. Sen. Chuck Levesque noted that the Ajello and RIDE proposals, were described as revenue-neutral. "But they are not revenue-neutral to the local district," he noted, since towns like Portsmouth would be required to pick up an additional share.

Supt. Susan Lusi noted that a key difference between the current bills and the commission work they grew out of several years ago was the commitment to additional funding, rather than simply splitting up the current pie. "Funding our Future [the earlier formula study] presupposed more money to distribute," said Lusi. "Right now, that's clearly not the case."

Wood agreed, noting that one of the key principles that many in RI is Ready agree on is the goal of 50/50 state and local funding. The current state level, 36%, is far below the national average.

Karen McDaid saw this as the root cause of much of the disagreement about the particulars of the formula. "It seems to me that until we increase the size of the pie, we'll continue to squabble over the size of the pieces."

Nancy Zitka wondered about the lack of additional Federal funding to address obvious disparities for districts like Providence. Kathy Melvin expressed her concern about getting locked into a formula when the state budget was in such obvious distress. "You're forcing responsibility onto the local communities," she said, "And they may not be able to maintain."

And even if they wanted to, Len Katzman pointed out, S3050 is a serious political challenge to any local official who might risk angering taxpayers by seeking to exceed the cap. "That puts at great risk those proponents of education."

"That's why we have this language in our principle that says 'automatic," said Wood, describing the proposed language for relief from the cap to offset the loss in state aid.

By the end of the evening, the group seemed to have reached some consensus on the big themes — no double counting of free lunch and EWAV, the foundation amount needed to have all items included, and the goal needed to be a bigger pie over time.

"Otherwise," said Sen. Levesque, "We're fighting over the morsels and not seeing the big picture."

Full disclosure: I am a member of RI is Ready, and I helped organize this event.