Ruth
Page Jones
Good morning. My name is Ruth Page Jones, I am a parent from
Waukesha, President of Project ABC, a local school advocacy
group, and interim President of Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent
Schools, WAES, a statewide grassroots organization dedicated
to promoting excellent schools
I am so pleased to be here today, so pleased that you have
heard our pleas for school funding reform and that you are
finally getting down to the hard work of developing a new
plan.
As you look around this room today, you will see a grassroots
movement come to life. The people before you came from Waukesha
and Oconto and Milwaukee and Madison and Florence, Pecatonica,
Sturgeon Bay, Birchwood, Phillips, Kettle Morraine and elsewhere.
We are parents and grandparents who came today to show our
level of commitment and passion to Wisconsin's children and
our state's future.
It is time to trash the current "Going out of Business
Plan" that you crafted for schools 15 years ago. It is
time, it is past time for a new 'Kids First Business Plan"
that helps all kids in all communities. Wisconsin needs a
plan whose primary purpose is to educate children. Investing
in education is the best, most effective use of state funds
to ensure a thriving economy and a great future for the state
of Wisconsin.
The current funding formula has forced schools throughout
this state to cut valuable programs and eliminate opportunities
for children.
Districts have already fired administrators, delayed maintenance
projects, slowed down textbook adoption, reduced technology
and site budgets, cut extra-curricular programs, and found
efficiencies to reduce costs in utilities and transportation.
And now in the last few years, for many schools, all that
is left to cut are teachers. There is something drastically
wrong with a system that forces schools to fire great teachers
who are successfully helping children.
Let me tell you about my own school district, Waukesha. Last
year the formula forced the firing of elementary school guidance
counselors and librarians and the elimination of our gifted
and talented program, The district increased class sizes at
every level for the second time and cut back on our award-winning
music program. What logic dictates that a school must cut
the very programs that make them successful?
My friend Mary's daughter is in a freshman English class
with 41 students. Teachers are reducing 3 page writing assignments
to one page so they have time to correct and provide feedback.
Classrooms were so overcrowded, children were sitting on
the floor at the beginning of the school year.
My son broke his foot in gym class 4 weeks ago playing soccer
with 47 kids in a class with one teacher.
My friend Ronda's 7 year old daughter started school this
fall in a class with 36 kids. She can go to the library once
a week for an hour but she can't bring any books home because
there is no librarian in her school.
The art teacher at my friend Stacey's school ran out of her
supply budget in October. The PTO in this school with modest
income parents doesn't have extra funds, the teacher has already
spent too much of her own money. I guess this art class will
just have to make do.
My heart breaks for the bright but struggling 8 year old
boy sitting in the principal's office for disruptive classroom
behavior. Last year he was an eager and engaged learner, benefiting
from gifted and talented programming, a helpful librarian,
a teacher with a manageable class size - and a guidance counselor
to listen and advise. In just one year, that support structure
was slashed, and now when he acts-out ,no doubt due to boredom,
he is sent to sit in the principal's office. What a terrible
waste of potential!
The funding formula will force Waukesha to cut another 60
teachers next year, and on and on until you, the people we
elect fix this mess. The Waukesha school board may very soon
be forced to take the Florence vote - the vote to dissolve
because the school district can no longer guarantee an adequate
education to its students.
And as you will hear today, the Waukesha story isn't the
Waukesha story, it is the Oconto story and the Sturgeon Bay
story and the Kettle Morraine story and the Madison story.
It will only get worse.
At this point in time, communities have exhausted all local
remedies. Referendums especially are a lousy option that tears
apart communities. Cuts have gone too far - there are no more
'efficiencies' that still preserve educational integrity
You, our legislators, have the power to change this law.
You, or those who are elected to replace you, are the only
ones who can remedy this situation.
We ask you to develop a new funding system that meets the
critieria of SJR 27. We need it now! Please listen carefully
as people testify today from around the state. The people
who follow me will passionately and eloquently explain how
the current 'Going Out of Business" plan is failing us
all and they will share their ideas about ideas for a new
plan that puts Kids First.
Properly funding public schools is the very best investment
we can make for the prosperity of everyone in our state now
and in the future.
back to top
Nancy Ketchman
Dear Wisconsin Senate Education Committee:
I am appearing before you to support Senate Joint Resolution
27. I am representing the PTA of MacDowell Montessori School
(Milwaukee Public School) and WAES.
Background
My husband and I have two sons, both of whom attend Milwaukee
Public School’s MacDowell Montessori School. I am also
an active volunteer at my sons’ school. While there
are many successes in our school – and my sons are thriving
at MacDowell – there are many situations that cannot
be solved by teachers and parents. These are problems directly
affected by the budget.
Here are some examples that I have observed both at MacDowell
and at other MPS schools in the past year:
»Budget cuts made it necessary this year for MacDowell
to choose between eliminating a classroom or the assistant
principal position. We eliminated the assistant principal.
» Budget cuts made it necessary to cut a teacher position
last year, resulting in the elimination of one classroom
and hence more crowding in the remaining classes.
» Our library lacks decent seating and there is only
one piano bench for four of the school’s pianos. Because
the budget doesn’t provide enough to replace these
and other items that enhance our student’s educational
experience, we’ve requested these in our PTA newsletter
“Wish List,” hoping that some enterprising parent
will find items at a rummage sale.
» Without the financial support of the PTA, our K3-K5
students wouldn’t be able to afford the transportation
costs for one annual trip to the Milwaukee County Zoo.
»At Milwaukee’s Riverside High School, I observed
few working clocks in the hallways and classrooms.
»At Milwaukee’s Washington High School this
past month, I observed several broken exit signs, with only
a red box indicating that this was an exit.
In addition, our school (and many others in Milwaukee) deal
with issues that more affluent communities do not: poverty
(79% of MacDowell students qualify for free or reduced lunch
and breakfast); a high percentage of low-income, single-parent
families, many of whom work multiple jobs or do not own a
car making it difficult for them and their children to participate
in after-hour activities; and a greater percentage of students
with special education needs. These are all factors that make
educating a student at our school more difficult and more
expensive than educating a student in more affluent communities.
On an even more personal level, I’ve seen my own city
neighborhood become a revolving door of sorts for young families.
It’s become a bit of a standing joke that my husband
and I don’t get too close to anyone with kids until
their children reach the age of 6 and their parents haven’t
moved away because of the schools. But it’s not funny.
We’ve lost many fine families because of the “school”
issue. And I can’t blame them, especially when they
see how hard MacDowell parents and other MPS parent groups
have to work just to get the basics to our children. In more
affluent communities, students receive – as a matter
of course – a level of education (classroom size, teacher
expertise, financial support, and physical environment) that
students in MacDowell can only dream of. How hard would you
work to ensure your child and their classmates have working
clocks, properly trained and enthusiastic teachers, and working
soap dispensers? It is an ongoing, relentless task. None of
my suburban friends and relatives work as hard as my fellow
MPS parents do to provide their children with the environment
suburban parents take for granted: bright, well-lit classrooms;
enthusiastic teachers; and extra-curricular activities. Nor
do they struggle with issues of poverty, unemployment, and
other social problems that make educating children in my community
more difficult.
Support for SJR27
It’s for that reason that I support SJR27. The community
– and the state – must fund schools based on the
actual cost of educating children in particular communities
rather than some blind, universal formula that doesn’t
take into consideration specific circumstances that result
in higher costs. School districts such as mine have vastly
different populations and needs than more affluent, homogenous
districts. Yet, the funding formula is the same.
We all know that education is the path to future success
– as an individual and as a community. When you look
at what makes a desirable community, number one on the list
is the quality of the school system. But what makes those
school systems so effective is that they are sufficiently
funded. In Milwaukee, our public school system is not sufficiently
funded.
I urge you – as legislators, as community leaders,
and as parents – to take responsibility for the education
of all of our children, not just those fortunate enough to
have born into the right circumstances. Blaming the failure
of our public schools on “bad families” or “lousy
administration” and hence avoiding making structural
changes in our current funding system is too easy. Please,
accept this challenge and take action now. Our community’s
current and future social, economic, and political health
depends on it.
We need your help. Please support and pass SJR27.
back to top
Jill Gaskell
The Pecatonica School District is located in the beautiful
rolling hills of southwestern Wisconsin. While it is a wonderful
place to live, the economy is shrinking and people are moving
to more urban centers. Our school enrollment this year is
456 students. Ten years ago, it was 561. We have lost over
100 students in 10 years, almost a 20% decrease. That loss
of students comes when even a steady enrollment means there
is not enough funding to make ends meet. The loss of 20% of
our students increases that loss of funding to the point that
our school is a skeleton of an education system.
This is the same thing that is happening to small, rural,
and very necessary school districts all over Wisconsin.
In 1995, we had a wonderful Technical Education program,
and a Family and Consumer Education program. They were cut.
So we are a rural school district with no programs that teach
skills that would be useful to businesses in our own community.
The kids graduate and leave.
Today, our school offers one art class that you can take
four times. We offer one language, Spanish, one band class,
no orchestra, strings or woodwind ensembles, no chorus. One
of our students open enrolled to Verona. He wanted a broader
curriculum and was musically talented. Verona offers 16 music
courses and an AP music class! But he had to drive 50 miles
every school day for the additional courses.
We have one semester of Information Technology. We have 4
offerings in English; and for students planning careers in
science, engineering or math, we have 3 math classes. Last
year we added 2 in-house AP classes.
Our school board has looked at our curriculum and knows that
it is very minimal. Where do we cut next? We have 2 school
buildings in different towns. We have tried eliminating one
principal in the past, but that didn’t work, so the
position was added back. We are considering a part time superintendent,
but superintendent also serves as business administrator and
there seems to be plenty of work. Do we cut sports next? Sports
is often considered expendable. We have a minimal sports program
and cooperate with a neighboring school. Sports is the incentive
that keeps some kids in school. It also makes well-rounded
students in body, mind and spirit. And, it is the only social
activity for youth in our community. If we cut it, how many
students will open enroll somewhere else?
We are at a crisis point at Pecatonica?as are scores of other
small but necessary districts across the state.. We are not
a wealthy district and we were low-spending in 1993. It is
not morally responsible to ask people to choose between educating
children or paying the bills. But our students are not getting
the education they have been promised by the Wisconsin Constitution.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has interpreted the state Constitution
to say that “Wisconsin students have a fundamental right
to an equal opportunity for a sound basic education. An equal
opportunity for a sound basic education is one that will equip
students for their roles as citizens and enable them to succeed
economically and personally.”
I, and many others in this room, do not believe we are fulfilling
that fundamental right.
back to top
Dean Ryerson, Superintendent
Honorable Senators Lehman, Erpenbach, Hansen, Kreitlow, Olsen,
Grothman, and Lazich:
It’s American Education Week. This year’s theme
is: “Great Public Schools, A Basic Right and Our Responsibility.”
That theme is consistent with the Constitution of the State
of Wisconsin that requires the state to provide each child
with an equal opportunity for a sound basic education.
I’m Dean Ryerson, Superintendent of the Port Edwards
Public Schools. Prior to coming to Port Edwards this year,
I served as Superintendent of the Wisconsin Rapids Public
Schools for 11 years, and as that district’s human resources
director prior to serving as superintendent. I also served
as human resources director in the Middleton-Cross Plains
Area School District and as an assistant principal in the
Beaver Dam Area School District.
In 2003 I was appointed to Governor Doyle’s Task Force
on Educational Excellence. As a Task Force member I served
on the teacher issues sub-committee.
The Port Edwards School District is one of the 159 school
district members of the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellence
in Schools due to that organization’s commitment to
seek change in the current funding formula for public schools.
I submit this testimony in support of SJR-27. Here’s
why:
It’s time to fix a convoluted and out-dated school
funding formula. The many changes to the basic formula that
have taken place over time have created confusion, inequity,
and mistrust.
Confusion. Attempting to explain a 13% levy increase when
expenditures are going up 2.83% is one of many confusing aspects
we face when speaking to others as when I spoke to our local
business association last week. It is difficult to engage
our electorate in discussion about school funding when such
funding is so complicated to understand.
Inequity. The current budget supports wealthy districts more
than poor districts, when the poor districts also serve students
with more challenging needs. What’s fair about that?
While the intent of the formula to equalize funding is laudable,
in reality modifications to the formula have created inequities
Mistrust. At a time when school districts are encouraged
to collaborate, the funding formula fosters unhealthy competition
that can be illustrated by a neighboring school district’s
billboards that have been erected in our local district. Consolidation
is a panacea that will not solve the challenges for small
schools. However, funding that encourages collaboration would
keep quality educational programs in our small communities
along with the pride that comes with small school and community
spirit.
Efforts have been made to significantly modify the current
formula but to no avail. The Governor’s Task Force made
recommendations to encourage systemic change. Several recommendations
from the Task force have been honored through subsequent budgets
including that which was recently enacted. Those recommendations
include additional funding for SAGE, increased funding for
school breakfast programs, enhancements to transportation
funding, additional support for school districts such as Port
Edwards for declining enrollment, and the maintenance of funding
for 4K.
The Task Force called for a cost-out study that is a basis
for what SJR-27 references in a component of the resolution
that would provide “funding levels based on the actual
cost of what is needed to provide children with a sound education…”
The Task Force also provided insights and recommendations
into ways to reduce the burden on property taxpayers through
sales tax revenues and other means.
The Port Edwards Public School District is being challenged
by the current funding formula in several ways.
Changes in our paper-making industry have resulted in lower
equalized values that mean additional costs for property taxpayers.
Open enrollment data (Exhibit A) indicates a gradual shifting
of our students to other districts. When I talked with parents
of those students this fall I was informed that many chose
other school districts because of the additional program opportunities
available to adjoining districts with high schools just minutes
from our community. While for this year and in the near future
our District will continue to compete through our personalized,
small district approach, without changes in state funding
the Port Edwards School District joins other small schools
in facing the long-term future.
Special education funding places significant challenges on
small school districts. Services for one high-cost student
with severe needs can be crippling to a small district.
Over the last five years the Port Edwards School District
expenditures for special education have increased over 24%,
in spite of a recent teacher lay-off in this area.
Revenues in special education for the same period have decreased
nearly 13% over the same five-year period. As a result, general
Fund 10 revenues must make up the difference, putting pressure
on regular education program sustainability.
Our district competes very well with neighboring districts
on the basis of student performance (Exhibit B), and on our
ability to offer personal student service through small class
sizes. Yet, due to budget constraints resulting in support
staff and professional staff reductions, our ability to maintain
this edge is being challenged.
As with other comparable small sized districts our per pupil
costs are above the state average. Yet we are trying to economize
in several ways. Teacher negotiations in 2003-2005 resulted
in the implementation of the 3.8% QEO, resulting in strained
labor relations within our district.
For the current school year a vacant high school principal
position was not filled. The board reduced the superintendent’s
position from full-time to part-time.
Employees in both of our labor organizations have accepted
changes in health insurance resulting in more cost-effective
insurance programs. The teacher union is currently negotiating
with the Board on changes in post-employment benefits that
could also result in cost savings. As school funding changes
are explored, any changes must include a discussion on how
benefits cost increases can be contained, meeting both the
needs of our employees and of the district’s ability
to pay.
Our expenditures for this current year are budgeted to increase
only 2.83% due to the reductions gained through the efforts
noted. Yet, with revenues decreasing by .37%, the district’s
ability to maintain what it has is seriously being challenged.
This is not about our district not finding ways to economize.
This is not about our community’s unwillingness to pay
more to continue a quality educational program it demands.
Efforts to change the funding formula as expected through
SJR-27, if successful, will insure that public education continues
to be the driver in economic development that it is widely
acknowledged to be.
Efforts to change funding through SJR-27 will support communities
such as Port Edwards in providing a quality life for its children
in the midst of significant community economic change.
Efforts to change funding through SJR-27 will help districts
to meet the numerous unfunded mandates placed on schools by
federal and state legislation.
Efforts to change funding through SJR-27 will remove some
of the burden of education from the property taxpayer and
support a more equal system of taxation and education funding.
Thank you for your efforts to change an outdated and complex
school funding formula, and thank you for listening to my
comments this morning.
back to top
Bonita Basty, Bookkeeper
My name is Bonita Basty. I’ve been a resident of Birchwood
for 33 years, relocating here from Northern Indiana at the
age of 14 and entering high school at Birchwood School. At
first, this move to a very small rural setting was “culture
shock” but I quickly thrived at this small school after
being treated as a “person of value” and not just
getting lost in the student body as a number. I went on to
graduate as Valedictorian of the class of 1978 and along with
my husband (my high school sweetheart who had moved to Birchwood
from Chicago when he was 14) chose to stay in the community
and have our son attend the school we had grown to love. He
is now excelling as a senior at UW-Superior.
Birchwood is located in Northwestern Wisconsin. It is one
of the more unique school districts in the state because of
its continued loss of state aids, its large geographic size,
its poverty levels and its academic success levels.
I have seen how funding changes that started in 1992 that
had some positive impact through 1997 on our district, have
since become a major threat to continuing quality educational
opportunities for our students.
In addition, having worked in the school business office
for 22 years now, I have experienced first hand the adverse
affects of the current school funding formula on our district,
both as a taxpayer and one who struggles to balance the budget.
As a school we strive to maintain the integrity and value
of the successful educational programs I grew up with, plus,
meet and exceed the new demands of technology and our students’
growth through expanding youth option programs thereby producing
exceptional young adults. This is becoming increasingly difficult
to accomplish as the 2007-08 school year represents the 11th
year in a row that our district has lost 15% of its Equalization
Aid because of property value increases largely due to vacation
homes on lakefront property. The resulting loss of 80% of
this aid had to be shifted to property taxpayers.
Birchwood is unique because it is one of the least densely
populated school districts in the state. It encompasses just
under 200 square miles and serves 330 students. Of these students,
62% of the elementary school students qualify for free and
reduced lunch.
Birchwood is also unique because it is, to our knowledge,
the most recognized low-income school in the state for high
student achievement. It has received the New Wisconsin promise
award at the middle and high school levels for 5 years in
a row and at the elementary level for the first four years
of the award. Only 7 other districts in the state have had
any school qualify for 5 years and we have done it for two
schools.
I also need to mention that northern tier schools have a
track record of being very successful in spite of an outdated
funding system. A disproportional number of these rural and
poor districts are being recognized by DPI as New Wisconsin
Promise Schools.
In terms of funding reform, for the past several years the
school district has supported efforts by the Wisconsin Alliance
for Excellent Schools to have funding reform occur. This reform
is needed by so many schools to overcome long-term adverse
effects that have developed over time.
We support efforts to provide a true costing out of what
it takes financially to support a quality education. This
quality education needs to be paid for through significant
school finance reform.
We are very thankful to the Legislature for recent changes
that have been started with the passing of the new State Budget.
While not all schools supported the shift of $79 million in
Equalization Aid to a Property Tax Credit, many northern tier
district taxpayers benefited because of high property values.
For many schools, unless a new aid is a categorical one, there
is no positive impact because of our continued mandatory 15%
loss in state equalization aid each year. Therefore, we support
some additional new education dollars being applied as tax
credits.
The Legislature “got it right” when it started
to provide Sparsity Aid to a number of schools. Although this
categorical aid is not fully funded, we hope that the Legislature
sees this as the first step in providing additional funds
to help rural districts whose costs are much higher than the
state average due to small enrollments.
We also thank the Legislature for providing additional funds
for high poverty schools, While we missed out in qualifying
for this aid by 5 students, we will qualify in the future
if the funding is available for the budget cycle.
There are any number of “Birchwoods” located
“Up North.” We ask that you please consider the
need for true school funding reform. What may have been a
good short-term strategy for funding schools back in the early
1990’s has proven to be bad long-term policy for northern
rural schools.
We have been a strong supporter of WAES proposals because
they address the needs for significant school reform while
not creating “winners” and “losers”
among school districts.
back to top
Rita Simon
We have students coming to school today relying on school
nurses to be there primary health care providers. Students
need medication, but parents can’t afford it. Students
need glasses to see to read and write, but parents can’t
afford to buy them. Students are not able to learn due to
being unhealthy, hungry, tired, and overweight because of
inadequate exercise.
Wisconsin needs to address this health care crisis in our
schools.
The Wisconsin Association of School Nurses supports Senate
Joint Resolution 27. Funding public schools is the best investment
we can make in the state’s economy and in the future
or our communities. According to the state constitution, a
large part of that investment belongs to the responsibility
of the state.
For the last 15 years we have fallen short of that investment
because our school-funding system no longer works.
The responsibility needs to be taken for the school-funding
problems that have been created. School districts are very
efficient in finding ways to educate children. Very well educated,
trained, and competent teachers work every single day to educate
our children. Students and parents do what they can to bring
knowledge into their homes and their lives. Now, it’s
time for the Legislature to do its part and change the way
we fund our schools.
Again, the Wisconsin Association of School Nurses supports
SJR 27 and urges its passage. We will continue to monitor
how lawmakers handle this crisis as the November 2008 elections
approach.
Thank you for your attention.
back to top
Dan Brereton, School Board President
Thank you for holding this hearing on this very important
legislation, I am happy to be here talking about the need
for school funding reform again. My name is Dan Brereton,
I am here as an active member of the Wisconsin Alliance for
Excellent Schools, I am also a board member of the Wisconsin
Association of School Boards, however my most important role,
and by far my hardest is as the president of the School Board
of the School District of Florence County. I’m pretty
sure most of you by now either know where Florence is, or
have heard of us. Our economic struggles have not gone away
nor will they unless a comprehensive change is made in the
way we fund schools. I travel the state as the “lighthouse”
of what is to come for school districts under the governorship
of the current school funding system. The one consistent question
asked by every school and every group I have spoken with is
“how can we educate our children within this formula
without having to go to a referendum? The answer is easy,
you can’t. For most, if not eventually all school districts,
they will come to a point where they will need more operational
revenue than is allowed by current state statutes, or systematically
cut the quality of education. You can close schools two ways,
economically or educationally, both results are the same.
Before I close I would like to provide you with a snapshot
of our ’06-’07 vs ’07-’08 revenue
limit worksheets which clearly shows the economic impact of
the current funding system on our district.
Declining Enrollment = 3 year average 653 to 615 (with budget
exemption 75%-100%) Enrollment sets our revenue cap.
Equalized Values = increased 9% this year, 14% last year
for a total of 23% in just the past two years. This determines
how much money the state kicks in compared to how much money
the taxpayers kick in.
General Aid = decreased by 15% A direct result of declining
enrollment and the raise in equalization value. (Last year
it was 14%)
Non-recurring referenda to exceed the revenue cap increase
from $750,000 to $1,000,000. This year’s revenue cap
for our school with this additional $250,000 of referendum
money will only increase $9,141.
The End Results
1. Aide Loss of $338,671
2. Tax levy increase of $373,559 this rise in levy primarily
due to the loss of aid.
3. We do not control equalized values, enrollments, or revenue
cap, but we must operate under these restrictions.
4. These restrictions will require another referenda or possible
dissolution. We will be back to where we were a few years
ago.
Florence is labeled as a “rich district” in this
system, our aid from the state is 29%. In comparison the Howard-Suamico
district is aided at 67%. I ask you to drive through Howard-
Suamico and look at the houses in which their year-around
residents live, then drive through Florence and look at the
houses in which our year around residents live, I think you
will notice a difference. I make this point not to promote
the notion that Florence should receive more or less aid then
other districts, however it clearly points out one of the
several basic flaws in the system. Florence doesn’t
want someone else’s money; all children need to be educated
to the highest level. I hope there are several members of
the legislature that are as concerned as I am with the National
Assessments of Educational Progress report that shows the
average reading ability of 4th and 8th grade black students
in this state, are the lowest in the nation.
This funding system will not provide the education our students
require to carry this state and nation forward. There will
come a day as Florence has already come close, where this
system will not allow the local taxpayers to support the referendums
we all need to educate our kids.
Not only are we educating tomorrow’s doctors, lawyers,
and engineers, we are also educating our future state Senators
and Representatives. We cannot wait for our students today
to get into your seats tomorrow to save the education system
in this state, it will be too late, we need you to do it now
.back to top
Jack Norman, Research Director
I am Jack Norman, Research Director for the Institute for
Wisconsin's Future (IWF). IWF is a Milwaukee-based non-profit
doing research and education on school finance and on state
and local taxes. Our work is funded almost entirely by the
Rockefeller and Ford Foundations. Among my duties is staffing
the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools (WAES).
You are hearing today from others about how severe are the
financial problems facing public schools. You are hearing
how urgent is the need for comprehensive school finance reform.
That is why I urge you to support Senate Joint Resolution
27, which calls for enactment of broad reform in time for
the 2009-’10 school year.
I am here to describe what should be the elements of a new
school finance system. I will stop short of prescribing exact
dollar figures and other highly specific components. Among
other things, because we are working with our coalition partners
in the School Finance Network on a school-finance reform plan,
it would be premature for WAES to be too specific now.
But you should know that WAES first released a reform proposal
in 2002 and has continued to modify that plan in the five
years since, taking into account newer data and feedback from
many people across the state. However, the elements of that
plan have remained the same.
Specifically:
• Adequacy: All resource levels should satisfy an
“adequacy standard.” That is, resources should
be at least enough to give every student an opportunity
to be educated to local, state and national standards.
• Balance inputs and outputs: Another way of describing
this adequacy standard is that there must be a balance between
educational inputs and educational outputs. Inputs—that
is, resources available for each student—should be
sufficient to achieve the expected level of outputs—that
is, educational performance.
• Adequacy cost-out: The best way to determine what
amount of resources satisfies an adequacy standard is through
a cost-out which uses research evidence to determine the
resources necessary for a certain level of student achievement.
• Basic level of support: Every student in a Wisconsin
public school should be supported by a basic level of resources
that satisfies an adequacy standard. This foundation can
be thought of as the amount of resources needed to educate
the ‘typical’ student to expected achievement
levels. It can be expressed in dollars per student.
• Students with special needs: Additional resources
are needed for three categories of students, in accordance
with the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision in Vincent v Voight.
These are: students with disabilities; students living in
low-income households; and students who are immigrants still
learning English.
• Small-but-necessary rural districts: Additional
resources are needed for students in certain rural districts
where there are unavoidable inefficiencies of scale. These
are low-enrollment rural districts that cannot be suitably
consolidated with neighboring districts.
• Student transportation: Costs to bus students to
and from school and school activities must not use funds
that otherwise are needed to support educational programs.
• Declining enrollment districts: Districts with chronically
declining enrollment must be cushioned so declining levels
of resources don’t undermine student opportunities.
• Capital projects: All students should be educated
in buildings that are safe, well maintained, and conducive
to learning.
• Property value equalization: State aid must be used
to ensure that all students have an equal opportunity for
a quality education, regardless of the property wealth of
a student’s district.
• Inflation: Annual increases in resources must match
price inflation at work in the real world of public education.
• Teacher compensation: Schools must be able to compensate
teachers enough to attract and retain quality staff, especially
in difficult-to-staff schools and subjects.
• Local options: Districts must have local authority
to spend above the basic adequacy levels, in a way that
does not unduly advantage districts with substantial property
wealth.
• Capped level of property tax support: Continued
use of local property tax dollars is essential to maintain
local control and diversity of revenue sources. However,
taxpayers must be assured that levies will not go above
current levels. It is preferable that levies decline over
time in real (inflation-adjusted) dollars.
• Accountability: With the above elements included
in a school finance plan, schools will be able to meet the
high expectations for academic achievement set out by local,
state and federal standards. Schools that fail to meet these
expectations would be subject to ever-increasing control
by outside authorities.
We know that putting all these elements into a school finance
system will require an increased investment of state funds.
The state is the logical source for additional funding, because
as has been stated repeatedly by the Wisconsin Supreme Court,
public education in Wisconsin is fundamentally a state obligation.
Most important of all, we are confident that a school-finance
system with the elements summarized above will support schools
to educate students who will sustain a successful and thriving
Wisconsin in the 21st century.
back to top
John Simonson
I am John Simonson. I live at 1851 Twin Bridge Road, Mineral
Point WI 53565. My telephone number is (608) 935-0192, and
my e-mail address is jsimonson@mhtc.net. I am an economist
specializing in public policy, having retired from UW-Platteville
in 2004. I am here today representing the Grassroots Citizens
of Wisconsin, the Center for Applied Public Policy, and the
Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools. I appreciate having
this opportunity to speak with you.
There can be no doubt that Wisconsin’s school funding
system is in dire need of reform. Funding levels are seriously
inadequate, funds are allocated capriciously among schools,
and the tax burden is distributed inequitably. As we see replayed
year after year, unrealistic State-imposed revenue caps leave
localities with two options—both undesirable—reduce
educational quality or go to referendum to raise property
taxes. A friend likens this to asking localities to form a
circular firing squad.
To fix Wisconsin’s school funding system will obviously
require additional revenue, but not from property taxes; indeed,
property taxes ought to be reduced, if not eliminated. By
virtually any standard, the property tax is a terrible tax,
unfair both among localities and among individuals, and having
perverse economic effects as well.
We hear repeatedly that nothing can be done because “there
is no money.” This is a myth. Many options are available,
including increasing income or sales tax rates. It should
be noted that the State of Iowa permits counties to add up
to two percent to the State sales tax to help fund local schools.
However, tax rates need not be increased to fund our schools
adequately. Indeed, closing tax loopholes would not only generate
the needed additional revenue, but would increase the overall
fairness of Wisconsin’s tax system as well.
We can start by enacting the Streamline Sales Tax Project.
This would involve collecting an estimated $200 million annually
in Wisconsin sales taxes that are owed but not collected.
It was deleted from the biennial budget submitted by the Governor.
Why anyone would resist collecting owed taxes is beyond me.
Moreover, this would level the playing field for Wisconsin
retailers, who must collect sales tax, in their efforts to
compete with on-line retailers who are not now collecting
tax on sales to Wisconsin residents.
Then, we can move to tax loopholes which cost the State billions
of dollars in lost revenue. A study by the non-partisan Wisconsin
Tax Expenditures Survey estimates that loopholes cost the
State some $3 billion per year.
A recent study by the Institute for Wisconsin’s Future,
for example, found that two-thirds of all large corporations
operating in Wisconsin pay no taxes at all; the “Las
Vegas Loophole” is but one example. Wisconsin is fifth-lowest
nationally in the share of all state taxes paid by corporations.
All sales taxes tend to be regressive, that is, taking a larger
percentage of incomes from lower-income taxpayers than from
higher-income taxpayers. But Wisconsin’s sales tax could
be made less regressive by including more products, especially
services, currently excluded. In fact, I estimate that Wisconsin’s
overall sales tax rate could be reduced by about a third by
broadening the base (except for such essentials as food and
health care). Or, the rate could remain the same and the added
revenue used to fund our schools adequately.
No other investment pays off for the State of Wisconsin and
its citizens anywhere nearly as well as education does. The
primary engine for economic growth is investment in our children.
To short-change our schools is short-sighted and wasteful.
The problem is not lack of money, but rather lack of political
will.
Thank you.
back to top
Roxanne Starks
My name is Roxanne Starks, president-elect for Wisconsin
PTA (Parent Teacher Association). The address is 4797 Hayes
Road, Suite 102, Madison, 53704. The phone number is 608-244-1455
and email address is wi_office@pta.org .
The Wisconsin PTA has been in existence for 99 years. Our
role is about advocacy for the health & welfare of all
children and youth in Wisconsin. One of our legislative priorities
for the 2007-2008 year is school funding. This has been a
priority for Wisconsin PTA since the QEO and revenue caps
have been in existence. It is the belief of our membership
that we must fix the current funding formula for our schools
in Wisconsin.
Wisconsin PTA is speaking in support of SJR27.
The crisis we are in with funding our schools encompasses
not just our urban school districts, but also our rural and
suburban school districts. We can no longer ignore the importance
of school funding. Funding public schools is the best investment
for Wisconsin’s economy as well as the future of our
communities. The state constitution states that a large part
of this investment is the responsibility of the state. The
old funding system has to be thrown out and a new system must
allow school districts to meet state and federal mandates
especially the needs of all children particularly those with
special needs.
I’m sure many of you will say that schools need to
be more efficient or simply hold a referendum. You might even
go so far as to say that there is no more money for schools.
The point is our schools have cut to the bare bone and referendums
are expensive and yes there is enough money for funding schools.
You can’t continue to take funds for schools and use
it on other programs, spend it on tax rebates, tax exemptions,
or even tax breaks.
We are talking about our future, our children.
Bottom line, the system is broken. As elected officials,
it is your job to fix it. Wisconsin PTA is nonpartisan; our
membership will be watching all of you carefully with the
upcoming November 2008 elections approaching to see exactly
what you will do for the children of Wisconsin and their education.
back to top
Janet Kane
The League of Women Voters of Wisconsin strongly supports
Senate Joint Resolution 27. League members from across the
state selected financing education for primary attention in
the League’s 2007-2008 advocacy agenda. The League supports
a system of school financing:
»which ensures equal educational opportunity and
access for each child
»in which the state assumes a significant funding
share, and
»which provides for increased payments for children
with special needs.
Public education in Wisconsin is on increasingly shaky ground.
The constraints of the current funding system are eroding
the quality of education. Temporary mechanisms that were put
in place in the early 1990s were narrowly designed for property
tax relief and to buy time until the system could be reworked.
After more than 15 years, they are not serving us well. Wisconsin
has had a tradition of excellent public schools. Now we’re
losing ground. Our neighbor, Minnesota, has pulled ahead of
us on many measures.
Sound policy is based on sound fundamental principles. Wisconsin’s
equalization aid formula was designed so every community could
afford to fund good schools regardless of the property wealth
in the area. Any new system should preserve this principle.
The state has an obligation to provide good schools for all
children.
The state also has an obligation to serve each child, in
light of his or her individual circumstances and abilities.
Many studies document that some students need more services
than others. After more than a decade of revenue caps and
increasingly-under-funded categorical aids, it has become
impossible to serve all children well.
Financing education is very complicated and very expensive
– but also essential. This bumper sticker expresses
it well –
“If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.”
Many studies document the significant benefits of quality
education – from an educated workforce and a robust
economy to a decrease in crime and a reduced prison population.
We need to support quality schools for our quality of life.
The good news is that many groups have worked extensively
on alternatives for funding education in Wisconsin. There
is detailed information and extensive analysis to provide
a solid base for reforming our system. Within the last 10
years, several states have made fundamental changes to their
school funding, and their experiences can provide guidance
in undertaking this important task. The League of Women Voters
strongly encourages you to adopt this bill.
back to top
Emerita Law Prof. June Weisberger
As an active member of Wisconsin’s senior community,
I appear today in full support of Assembly Joint Resolution
35 initiated by Rep. Sondy Pope-Roberts to commit the Wisconsin
Legislature to address one of the key unresolved issues confronting
our state in recent years, public school funding reform.
My husband and I are retired UW-Madison faculty members.
Like many of our neighbors, colleagues, and friends who are
also seniors, we have chosen to spend our retirement years
in Wisconsin engaging in civic activities designed to give
back to our community through service for the many benefits
we have enjoyed as Wisconsin citizens. Since our retirements,
we have been committed volunteers in our local public schools
and have made regular financial contributions to various individual
public school funds and endowments. We know from our personal
experiences in our schools that such individual efforts can
never be sufficient and that systemic school finance reform
is needed.
Public schools today face unprecedented demands in educating
today’s children. More and more Wisconsin children (both
rural and urban) who attend our schools are from low-income
families facing daunting economic challenges. More and more
Wisconsin children are from homes where English is not regularly
spoken. More and more Wisconsin children come to school with
special educational needs. All of these children require special
services to level the playing field so that they can become
productive adults and citizens. These special services are
costly.
In addition, to secure a vibrant economic future, Wisconsin
must maintain a well-educated, skilled workforce and must
attract many highly skilled and educated individuals who will
only move to Wisconsin or stay here if their children are
assured first-rate public school educational opportunities.
For these reasons, as seniors dedicated to remain Wisconsin
citizens and taxpayers for the remainder of our lives, we
and our friends, colleagues, and neighbors know it is in our
own interest to work for the strongest public school system
possible and to commit ourselves to assist in the process
of assuring adequate funding for these schools. This problem
is not unique to Wisconsin nor is it a new one but Wisconsin
can no longer ignore it. Other states have faced this issue
of reforming their inadequate school funding formulas - voluntarily
or under court order. We should be able to learn from their
experiences and do the right thing for our community’s
children. When we do so, it will be one of our most important
legacies for our grandchildren, members of their generation,
and for future generations in Wisconsin.
back to top
Randy Kunsch
I am testifying to support the Senate Joint Resolution 27
and its mandate to find a better way to fund public education.
The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (1791)
specifically states that, “The powers not delegated
to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by
it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively,
or to the people.” In its constitution, adopted in 1848,
Wisconsin further declares in Article X, Section 3 that “The
legislature shall provide by law for the establishment of
district schools, which shall be as nearly uniform as practicable.”
The state of Wisconsin has a legal obligation to establish
public schools and provide a high quality education for all
students attending those public schools. In 1993, Wisconsin
forgot its moral obligation when it mandated revenue caps
be imposed on Wisconsin school districts. These revenue limits,
or "spending caps", froze spending at 1992 levels
with only small increases allowed since that time. Since the
mid 1990’s, there have been financial shortfalls in
nearly all public schools and reports of increasing problems
in maintaining the quality of educational programs
In the spring of 1999, only six years into cost controls,
a small handful of citizens from Price County stood on the
shores of Butternut Lake (during the Governor’s Annual
Fishing Opener) and asked for the governor to come ashore
and take a petition requesting a better way to fund public
schools. The governor chooses to ignore the request and did
not receive the petitions. That group of citizens then decided
in the summer of 1999 to walk the 245 miles from Price County
to Madison and present the governor with the petitions for
a better future for all Wisconsin public school students.
As we walked that route, many other walkers joined us and
many names were added to the petition. When we arrived at
the capitol, we found the governor of Wisconsin gone and only
his representatives to receive the petitions. We did not hear
back from the Governor. So, the following year, we walked
the same route back to Madison with more walkers and more
signatures. We eventually met with the governor and his representatives
and they said the cost controls could and would not change.
Over the course of six years, the “Walk on The Child’s
Side” to Madison was held five times. Each time more
people participated and more names were added to those concerned
about the loss of educations quality in our state due to the
funding system. Each time we arrived at Madison, we were met
with the same old political rhetoric?not answers:
1.) This is the best system for funding public education.
2.) This is a partisan issue and nothing will change until
the political balance of power changes in the governor’s
mansion and the assembly and senate.
3.) Referendums allow school districts in dire needs to exceed
the revenue caps.
4.) Legislators telling us that they don’t hear the
general public on this issue.
I would like to briefly respond to each of those statements
that our petitions and concerns.
1.) If this is the really best system of financing public
schools. The state Supreme Court has questioned whether
or not we are investing enough resources in our children.
Anyone who has read a newspaper, watched television, listened
to the radio, or gone to a school board meeting in the last
decade know it is a system that is failing schools and failing
kids
2.) Since when are children – their education and
their future – a partisan issue? The care of our children
and their education is a moral obligation of each and every
generation.
3.) School boards are elected by the public to operate schools
and then the state tells them they are not capable of making
sound financial decisions. What does that say about how
the state views the ability of our communities to elect
competent board members? The last figures I saw indicated
that barely 50% of all referendums for building and/or to
exceed the revenue caps have passed. Have you paid attention
to how those referendums have pitted the children against
taxpayers, communities against one another over issues of
consolidation, programs within a school vying for funding
against each other – bottom line this policy has torn
communities’ apart and created divisions that will
take as long as it took the Civil War to heal.
4.) When legislators say they don’t hear about this
issue from the folks back home they are, at best, stretching
the truth. This is not the first time that this room full
of people have asked for help. I have been the part of too
many “contact-your-legislator” stunts to buy
that excuse. That’s why this hearing and this resolution
are so important: We have your attention.
The present policy for funding public schools in our state
has failed miserably and each day that our present elected
officials allow it to remain in effect will cause irreversible
damage.
I am tired of walking. I am tired of talking. Everything
that CARE and WAES have said has fallen on deaf ears. Don’t
punish the kids of Wisconsin for the mistakes of its elected
officials. The present system of funding education was and
continues to be a tax policy plan and not an school-funding
plan. We can and must do better in Wisconsin. SRJR27 calls
on the Legislature to change the way Wisconsin funds its public
schools by July 1, 2009.
What will the current system be replaced with? Well, ladies
and gentlemen - that is your job! Article X, Section 3 of
the Wisconsin State Constitution, gives you that task. As
a part of the Wisconsin Alliance for Excellent Schools and
the Phillips School District, it is our sincere hope that
you will include the guidelines as set down by the WAES in
its work over the last decade.
How can the new system be funded? Well, there are certainly
suggestions in the WAES plan. However, it comes down to priorities.
The money is available if members of Legislature can put kids
first and not worry about PAC money, partisan politics, and
open their eyes, ears and hearts. While individual property
owners have been burdened with taxes; many businesses and
companies have seen their property taxes decrease, various
products are exempt from sales taxes, etc. Money can and must
be found for public education.
This issue is not about and never has been about teacher
salaries and benefits! Those who have muddled those issues
to confuse and mislead the public should be ashamed of themselves.
What is this issue about?
1.) Do you teach in a school where middle scholars come
to school bragging about being drunk the night before? I
do and we have had to make cuts in guidance counseling.
2.) Do you teach in a middle school where middle school
students have brought weapons to school? I do and we have
cut back on the number of principals and now the police
spend more time at our school than ever. The high school/middle
school principal estimates in the first 50 days of school
he has had to call the police 40 times and social services
another 25 times.
3.) Do you teach in a school district where a child is left
alone because his/her parent is hooked on meth? I do and
now we charge participation fees for extra curricular making
it impossible for some students to be involved in positive
after school extra curricular activities.
4.) Do you teach in a school district where children who
have special talents are overlooked? I do because the Gifted
and Talented Program had to be cut.
5.) Do you teach in a district where students are lost to
open enrollment? I do because the board had to close an
outlying elementary school due to budget cuts and some members
of that community retaliated by sending their kids to other
districts.
6.) Do you teach in a middle school where students are sexually
abused by significant adults in his/her life? I do and we
cut even deeper into the guidance counseling positions.
7.) Do you teach in a district where a child gets on the
bus at 6:40 a.m. and gets off the bus at 5:30 p.m. and rides
over 60 miles one way on the bus route? I do and they are
looking at eliminating buses and combining routes (i.e.
even longer distances and times spent on the bus) to save
money.
8.) Do you teach in a district where teachers are pitted
against one another for funding for their academic class?
I do as special education is pitted against regular education.
If the federal government and state government are going
to mandate special education programs, at the least should
not district do the best possible job implementing those
programs? Where are the funds and when they are not funded,
but yet the district maintains high-level programs, the
regular education students suffer.
9.) Do you live in a district where adults are charged $4
admission to high school basketball game? I do and many
of the spectators are parents of the participants who must
already pay a fee of $75 for their son/daughter to be in
that activity.
The list could go on and on. I teach in Phillips, WI, at
the middle school. Phillips is located approximately 200 miles
northwest of Madison. It is located in rural Price County.
Phillips has a population of 1,500 people and the enrollment
of 920 (that number is projected to drop 170 students in the
next 7 years) students’ district wide and the middle
school enrollment is approximately 200 students. The questions
I asked may make it sound like I teach in an urban area. I
don’t. In fact people move to Phillips to get away from
the rat race, because it would be a nice place to raise their
children, and to enjoy life. Would you want your son/daughter
to go to the Phillips District? Would you want your grandchild
to go to the Phillips District? Do you know what? Phillips
is a great school district with caring, compassionate and
hard working staff members. We are facing an uphill battle
that we cannot win due to the current way of funding public
education. This issue is purely making our kids, our schools,
and the future of Wisconsin the top priority as it had been
throughout our history prior to 1993.
In conclusion, I ask you not only to support Senate Bill
SJR27 but also then to be an active part of the solution to
the crisis in public school funding. Some people live an entire
lifetime and wonder if they have ever made a difference in
the world, but if you stand up for kids and public education
funding, you will not have that problem.
back to top
|
