HB3180 (McCormick) has been withdrawn, meaning that the only bill which specified a change to the BEP, mandating conversion to the TACIR prototype system-level fiscal capacity model is now dead for the year.

It’s always possible, I suppose, that existing pieces of budget legislation might be amended to do the same thing, so those of us concerned about the prospect of harming some school systems to help others will need to remain vigilant.

We need to support reforming the way Tennessee funds education, but we need to do so in a way that helps all school systems and harms none. I am proud to live in a community where the residents value education both with their checkbooks (via property taxes) and with their votes for like-minded City Council members, but I do feel sorry for educators and school boards in communities that are not as supportive.

Which comes first — support because a school system is high performing, or support to enable that higher level of performance? In the case of Oak Ridge, it’s hard to say. The school system was set up by the Manhattan Project (military) leadership during WWII, and well-funded specifically because the scientists and engineers that were needed for that effort were concerned that their children’s education be first-rate. As the City privatized, citizens chose to continue that to which they had come to expect.

Similarly, Kingsport has higher expectations due to the presence of Eastman Chemical (and the highly-educated parents who value education). But what about Greeneville — third on the list of cities who contribute the most per pupil from the City General Fund (and with the third highest ACT scores in the state)?

It’s not just genetics, and it’s not just money. It’s a combination of community and parent expectations of students, of teachers, and of themselves — with a will to invest both time and money for someone else’s immediate benefit.

But for today, I’ll celebrate this one small victory.

While Leadership classes in Knoxville and Chattanooga were in Nashville yesterday, they heard from the Governor that an overhaul in the way Tennessee funds education could come in a year or two. The News-Sentinel notes that there is not universal agreement on changes proposed to date:

The issue has become controversial in the Legislature. Proposed changes backed by Knox, Hamilton and other more urban counties are opposed by officials in areas that stand to lose state money if the changes occur. Oak Ridge is among the latter.

Controversy also stirred over a recent letter sent to 36,000 student households, urging parents to contact the Governor in support of the proposed BEP funding change. The letter compares Knox County’s BEP funding to that of Williamson County (Williamson County gets $328 more per student), deriving from that that Knox County is shortchanged by more than $17 million.

Bill Nolan, lobbyist for the City of Oak Ridge (and father of a talented ORHS student) accurately pointed out that if Knox County compared its funding with Hancock County, it would appear that they’re overfunded by $10 million.

The neighbor-against-neighbor fighting is unfortunate, because it’s almost certain we could agree on the basic, underlying issues:

1. State funding for education is not adequate. (adequacy defined)
2. If state funding were adequate, we wouldn’t have all these discussions (and lawsuits) about equity.
3. We would ALL benefit, economically and in quality of life, from raising the standard of education statewide. But that takes money, and we have to be willing to pay for it.

The big, bad, hairy monster in the closet is that the few communities in Tennessee that ARE ALREADY putting a priority on education are those with high local property tax rates. That’s where the money comes from. Municipal systems in particular benefit from city governments that agree on that priority and fund it, despite the fact that neighboring areas tout their lower tax rates to lure businesses and residents.

You can’t have it both ways.

PostScript:
James W. Guthrie, director of the Peabody Center for Education Policy, has an excellent editorial in Tuesday’s Commercial Appeal.

In a meeting today with school board members from across East Tennessee, I was heartened to hear from some County board representatives that, although the proposed system-level fiscal capacity model for BEP funding would benefit them intially, they realize that it would be harmful to them in the long run.

How? Because it would cause the City school system in their county to fold, consolidating with the County by default. At that point, the County would be responsible for matching the City system’s higher salary and benefit levels, in addition to assuming responsibility for the buildings, students, transportation, etc.

It’s encouraging that at least a few people are thinking beyond what looks like the immediate windfall. Unfortunately, there are others that believe this scheme only takes from “rich” school systems — those that are taxing themselves to fund an adequate education — to give to those who do not, and have not yet realized that there are many smaller, less affluent county systems that lose funding under the ill-contrived formula.

HB3180 is scheduled for the House K-12 Subcommittee tomorrow.