Commission on Education Finance, Equity, and Excellence

Minutes

July 24, 2000

___________________________________________________________________________

The Commission on Education Finance, Equity, and Excellence held a public hearing on Monday, July 24, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. in the Kepler Theater at Hagerstown Community College in Hagerstown, Maryland. The following members were present:

Dr. Alvin Thornton, Chair
Mr. Joseph F. Anderson, III
Delegate Paul Carlson (for Delegate Sheila E. Hixson)
Delegate Norman H. Conway
Ms. Elizabeth K. Moyer
Senator Robert R. Neall
Ms. Carolyn Y. Perkins
Ms. Marilyn J. Praisner
Dr. G. William Troxler
Mr. John F. Wagoner

Dr. Thornton convened the meeting at approximately 7:00 p.m. He welcomed attendees and asked that speakers limit their testimony to no more than five minutes. Most of the speakers provided the Commission with a detailed written copy of their comments for the public record. A summary of the comments presented by the speakers follows.

Earl Robbins, President, Maryland Caucus of Black School Board Members: Mr. Robbins provided an overview of the Caucus and identified as its main focus the education of its membership regarding the under-performance of African-American students on the Maryland School Performance and Assessment Program (MSPAP). After reviewing data on this topic, he charged the Commission: (1) to examine the historical MSPAP performance of various racial and socioeconomic student groups (both statewide and in each local jurisdiction) to gauge its cause and determine an appropriate solution; and (2) to pose and attempt to answer questions regarding the causes of systemic under-achievement of some student groups and the environmental conditions that significantly limit academic preparedness and academic achievement of those students. If more funding is needed to bring about improved student performance, then Mr. Robbins urged the Commission to issue a charge to the General Assembly to fund the remedy, possibly by devoting additional resources to the following areas: full-day kindergarten; pre-k programs; transportation assistance (particularly for rural areas); and a more "level" playing field for staffing needs.

Fred Hutchinson, Vice President, Maryland Caucus of Black School Board Members: Mr. Hutchinson continued the theme initiated by Mr. Robbins and implored the Commission to critically assess the adequacy of: (1) educational funding in the State and the extent to which current levels of funding contribute to the systematic under-achievement of African-American and low-income children; and (2) the State's overall revenue structure and whether it is capable of efficiently generating sufficient revenue to meet education funding requirements. With regard to the latter point, for example, Mr. Hutchinson suggested that the State's sales tax base perhaps should be expanded to cover services that currently are untaxed in order to capture more funds for education.

Teresa Akney, Member, Parent Advocacy Group for Education Rights: Ms. Akney described an "equitable" school financing system as one in which equity of learning opportunity is provided to each student regardless of the student's learning profile and level of need. She does not believe that the State's current financing system is "equitable," particularly for students with special needs. The State needs to monitor more closely special education funding and it should hold local school systems more accountable for its actions in this area. She said the State should dollar for dollar take money from local school systems used to fight parents. Additionally, schools of education and teacher education programs at institutions of higher education in the State need to be monitored more closely to insure accountability.

Sharon Chirgott, President, Washington County Teachers Association: Ms. Chirgott emphasized the importance of the recruitment and retention of quality teachers to ensure the delivery of first-rate educational services to students. She suggested that the State needs to take into account costs that are beyond the control of particular subdivisions to attract and retain quality teachers (e.g., school construction costs, student transportation, and students needing special education or ESOL services). Further, she believes that in allocating State money, the State should factor into the distribution formula a county's choice to limit its own taxes. The funding principles underlying the Commission's funding recommendations also should: (1) ensure that the definition of "adequacy" is sufficient to meet the current needs of students in each school district and should be broad enough to keep pace with changes as they occur; (2) fold as many categorical programs as possible into the State formula (although a limited amount of money likely will still be needed for targeted programs to address problems seemingly unique to a limited number of school districts); (3) ensure that any new funding formula does not result in a decrease in the current level of State funding for any school district; (4) exclude retirement benefits from any foundation formula; and (5) exclude funding for compensatory education, transportation, special education, and school construction from the base funding formula. Finally, Ms. Chirgott believes that any new funding formula should increase the total amount of State money for education, provide automatic adjustments for inflation, and continue to take into account a subdivision's wealth when calculating the amount of State support.

John O'Connell, Superintendent, Allegany County Public Schools: Dr. O'Connell strongly advocated that "differentiated" funding to incorporate local circumstances be a part of any State funding formula for education. He viewed the 24 local school districts in the State as a "family" and that "family members" must look out for one another. Some of the poorer local jurisdictions in the State -- left behind by economic development and the expanding tax base that such development produces and also often abandoned by many of its "best and brightest" for better opportunities elsewhere -- are in greater need of State help to support their public education needs than are some of the more affluent "family members." The State education funding formula should look at each jurisdiction's "real needs" and ensure that the funding formula accommodates those "real needs." As a guiding principle, Dr. O'Connell urged the Commission to support as its goal a formula that provides "Funding for Compulsory Learning" and not just "Funding for Compulsory Attendance."

Tim Miller, Allegany County Board of Education: Mr. Miller was one of several witnesses who expressed concern about the lack of State support for special education funding and lamented that State support has not kept pace with escalating costs in this area. Special education funding, particularly transportation funding for special education students, has proved to be particularly burdensome for rural counties.

Sally Bacon, Librarian, Old Forge Elementary School, Washington County: Ms. Bacon offered support for the additional funding for library services that has been provided to local school systems under the School Accountability Funding for Excellence ("SAFE") program enacted by the General Assembly in 1998. The additional money for library resources has made a tremendous difference in both the volume and currency of library materials in many schools. Ms. Bacon encouraged the Commission to support the continuation of this funding initiative for the elementary schools and urged that funds for similar resources be directed to the high schools.

Joseph Anderson, St. Mary's County Board of Education: Mr. Anderson asked the Commission to acknowledge the importance of having sufficient resources to attract and retain teachers and principals; higher salaries are going to be necessary in order to do this and the State funding formula should recognize that reality. Additionally, many local school systems are seeing a rising number of students with "special needs" (i.e., students identified for special education, students at-risk of failure in the schools for various reasons, and students in poverty), and that it takes more money to educate these student populations. Targeted funding programs help, but they often lack the flexibility needed to address local problems fully. For example, while SAFE and Title I federal education funds target schools with a concentration of low-income students, there are nonetheless many other individual children of similar economic status who attend other schools and don't benefit from these targeted funds because their school doesn't qualify for the funding. Local school systems need more flexibility to direct funds for programs of this sort. Mr. Anderson also noted that the current State education aid funding formula lags too far behind and does not reflect current year costs. This is particularly troublesome for counties with burgeoning school populations. A county's wealth and ability to support its schools also should undergird the State funding formula. Transportation services should be recognized for their full cost and account for both the number and the distance students are transported. Moreover, local school systems should be protected in those counties whose local governments make imprudent short-term fiscal decisions that have a negative long-term impact on the public schools in that county.

Dr. Wendell Teets, Superintendent, Garrett County Public Schools: The State education funding formula should recognize the added costs incurred by isolated, rural, economically depressed counties, especially when such a county's "effort" is exceptional and the county stretches itself to support its schools despite its limited economic means. The State funding formula should not allow a county to keep its taxes low in order to generate more State funding. Dr. Teets also strongly supports more State funding for teacher salaries, special education, and student transportation. Private groups and foundations, he suggested, should not be unduly relied upon for counties' basic education needs.

Gregory Snook, President, Board of County Commissioners for Washington County: Mr. Snook offered perspectives from a governing body faced with the duty to produce revenues to support local education and other government services. This past year the Board of County Commissioners for Washington County raised both its property and income taxes to meet the "adequate funding" amount requested by the local school board for fiscal 2001. The funding increase for the schools in fiscal 2001 will be 7% over fiscal 2000. In the past three years, funding for public education in the county has increased by 7.57% (1998), approximately 9% (1999), and 8.2% (2000). During this same period, State support for the counties schools has increased by a declining amount each year, increasing by only 4.33% (1998), 3.13% (1999), 1.83% (2000), and only 0.25% (2001). Unless greater State support is forthcoming, local governments in the State are likely to go bankrupt trying to provide "adequate funding" for local school systems. Counties with static enrollment must be protected against diminution in State support and the State must provide greater financial assistance for the many mandated programs that it imposes on local school systems.

Paul Bailey, President, Washington County Board of Education: Mr. Bailey respectfully urged the Commission to consider several issues when making its recommendations, by ensuring that any new funding formula:

• increases the total amount of State aid to education and encompasses both a built-in inflation adjustment and a "specialized sector inflation" adjustment (e.g., a "medical CPI" to account for extenuating circumstances such as escalating healthcare expenses);
  
• emphasizes the funding of basic expenses for all children by providing a greater percentage of the State's funding in the basic current expense program rather than in restricted, targeted programs (since basic current expense funding allows local boards of education greater flexibility in developing and implementing the best programs for that system's students);
  
• simplifies the (hopefully) limited number of targeted programs that would fall outside the basic current expense program so that there are fewer of these programs to administer, the programs can be more efficiently implemented to achieve the desired results, and the programs are more likely to receive funding in an amount sufficient to achieve their purposes;
  
• insures that a county's ability to provide local funding (i.e., "wealth") will continue to be considered when calculating State support and that a county that intentionally excludes personal property from its tax rolls will not be benefitted at the expense of counties that do not adopt this approach;
  
• reduces the "lag time" that is used to calculate State aid that is embodied in the current formula so that the State funding received in any given year is more closely aligned with a county's profile at the time the money is actually received;
  
• provides greater State reimbursement for special education private placement services;
  
• requires the State to "cost out" new mandates that it imposes on local school systems and provide the funding to implement such newly imposed requirements; and
  
• requires the Maryland State Board of Education and the Maryland Association of Counties to act cooperatively to develop a standard, top-sided reporting structure that all parties would agree to use from year-to-year as the basis for local education funding discussions.

Jack Dale, Superintendent, Frederick County Schools: Mr. Dale implored the Commission to address the following critical issues:

• State funding for schools must be distributed on the basis of student enrollment for the current school year instead of on the basis of enrollment from prior school years (this is an extremely important factor for fast-growing school systems).
  
• SAFE funding should be built into and become a permanent part of State aid to education.
  
• State funding for transportation costs for both regular and special education students must be revised to reflect current expenditures in these areas.
  
• The necessity of a joint county-State partnership for future salary adjustments for school personnel should be recognized.

Delegate Sue Hecht, Maryland House of Delegates (District 3): Delegate Hecht echoed the comments and suggestions of several of the prior speakers and also encouraged the Commission to revise the current State aid to education formulas to continue SAFE funding, revamp school transportation support, and provide funding that is tied more closely to a county's current profile. She noted that although she represents portions of both Frederick and Washington Counties, the needs and challenges of the two counties starkly differ -- the economy is vibrant in one, while stagnant in the other; the school population is fast-growing in one, while declining in the other -- yet each county is greatly challenged to provide sufficient local funding to meet the educational needs for its schools. State support for education must reflect these variables.

Russell Williams, candidate for the Washington County Board of Education: Mr. Williams emphatically implored the Commission to encourage the State to include in its anti-discrimination policies protection for students based on their "size."

John Schnebly, Board of County Commissioners for Washington County: Mr. Schnebly advised the Commission that over the past few years increases in State education aid for Washington County have been less than the annual rate of inflation; but, at the same time, local support has grown over 20% (oftentimes at the expense of other pressing local needs in the county). The county has imposed substantial increases in both its property tax rate and income tax rate to provide additional funding for education.

John Cavanaugh, an interested parent from Baltimore County: The final witness, Mr. Cavanaugh, expressed the view that the State has demanded and expects a great deal of accountability from schools, teachers, and local governments to achieve the educational goals that the State has established. In the view of Mr. Cavanaugh, the State also should demand more and expect greater accountability from parents to help insure the successful education of their children.

Dr. Thornton thanked the witnesses for their comments and also thanked other persons in the audience for their interest and attention. He announced that the Commission would hold its fourth and final public hearing in this current round of gathering public input on Thursday, July 27, 2000, on the Eastern Shore, at Chesapeake Community College, in Wye Mills, Maryland at 7:00 p.m. Dr. Thornton advised the attendees that additional regional public hearings will be held in the fall to gather public input once the Commission adopts its proposed recommendations to the General Assembly and Governor. The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m.