“School districts, frankly, didn't fare very well,” he says. “We keep things afloat for the first year, and the second year, we don't have the resources from the state to keep it afloat.”
At the other end of the state, in one of the state's smaller school districts, the message is much the same.
But, wait - didn't public schools get a pile of cash from the state treasury's $1 billion surplus for the next two years?
The short answer is yes - and no.
Schools will receive $180 million in new state money over the next two years, thanks to the budget passed by the special session of the Montana Legislature this month. That's a 14 percent increase over the current amount of state funds flowing to schools.
But as any school official will tell you, upon closer examination, the cash infusion is hardly a windfall for schools.
Here's why:
n For starters, $20 million to $25 million of the amount will go directly to reduce local property taxes in 75 percent of the state's 430 school districts. It's a pass-through that offers no net increase in funds for schools.
n $30 million is a one-time pot of money earmarked for building maintenance and “capital investment,” which could include textbooks or other materials. The money can't be used to increase teacher or staff salaries or to fund ongoing programs.
n Another $10 million is one-time money to help districts implement full-day kindergarten, which was authorized and funded this year by the Legislature.
n Also, $28 million is the state's share of funding full-day kindergarten for the next two years, a new program districts may offer if they choose. School districts also must raise local property taxes to fund their share of ongoing full-day kindergarten costs, such as teacher salaries.
When the above amounts and other one-time grants are subtracted from the increase, public schools are left with $80 million in new state money to finance programs they have right now. That breaks down to a modest 6.5 percent increase over the two-year period.
“The general public believes that education has benefited substantially from this (state budget) surplus, and that simply is not the case,” says Copps. “I think schools would have received the same amount of money had there not been a surplus.”
In the Billings school district, which has 15,700 children, the $5.5 million increase in state funds for the 2007-08 school year is 6.5 percent more than the district's current-year budget.
Yet that includes $2.5 million in one-time funds earmarked for kindergarten startup costs and maintenance.
That leaves an approximate 3.5 percent increase in state funds this year, including money for full-day kindergarten. For the 2008-09 year, the increase in state funds is less, at about 1.8 percent.
Copps says that means unless local property taxpayers vote again to increase their taxes for schools, the district will have no choice but to increase elementary school class sizes and reduce staff.
“When we look forward, we don't see the state as a responsible funding partner,” he says. “We see a continuing struggle just to maintain what we have.”
Copps and others say this state of affairs is particularly disappointing in the wake of the 2005 decision by the Montana Supreme Court, which upheld a lower court ruling that the state is not adequately funding its share of school budgets.
In the state's other large, urban districts, superintendents say they're facing the same path: holding their own this year, thanks to a modest increase from the state, and hard choices next year, when the state money falls off.
“The real problem is that so much of (the increase) is one-time money,” says Jim Clark, Missoula County Public Schools superintendent. “The second year of the biennium is really a concern. I'll look at what we have (this year) and say, ‘Let's not put in money we don't have to for ongoing obligations.' ”
Like many school districts, Missoula is also finding it needs to augment the state money with increases in local property tax levies.
In Helena, voters last week approved tax levies totaling $515,000 to help pay for school operations in the coming year. The district's overall budget this year is nearly $45 million and its new state funds this year, including one-time money, are about $2.8 million.
Superintendent Bruce Messinger says the local tax increase will help pay for full-day kindergarten starting this fall, maintain programs at current levels and fund teacher pay raises. At $32,800, Helena has the state's highest starting salary for teachers.
The one-time money, while it won't fund ongoing costs, is appreciated, and can help cover items that might otherwise be financed by the general budget, he says.
“We try to invest those (one-time funds) in things that are truly, by their nature, a one-time purchase, like textbooks and computers,” Messinger says.
Yet in smaller districts, angst remains over what they see as continued failure by the state to offer any substantial increase of support to those who may need it most.
Dick Cameron, superintendent of schools in Broadus, says the increase in state money for ongoing expenses this year and next won't help him recruit new teachers to this geographically isolated town in southeastern Montana.
“I have my fingers absolutely crossed that I don't have to look for any staff,” he says. “I can't pay salaries (with one-time money).”
Cameron says many in the school community feel betrayed by Democrats, who had promised good increases in school funding if they came to power. Yet with Democrats in control of the governorship and the state Senate, schools received a relatively small piece of the $1 billion surplus, he says.
“I can't think of a single superintendent of schools in the state that would vote for (Gov.) Brian Schweitzer again,” he says.
Down the road in Miles City, Superintendent Jack Regan sounds a similar tune, saying the district gets few applicants for open teaching positions, which start at $26,000 a year.
“If you start full-day kindergarten, yeah, that's a lot of money (this year), but we have to start a new program,” he says. “It's not helping with teacher salaries or anything like that.”
Of course, not everyone in the school community is disappointed with the outcome of the Legislature.
Eric Feaver, president of MEA-MFT, the union representing Montana schoolteachers, says schools were starved for state money for nearly 15 years, from the early 1990s until 2005.
“You can't replace 20 years of bad budgeting in two legislative sessions,” says Feaver, who hopes future legislatures will continue to gradually increase money for schools. “It just can't be done.
“This (budget) may not be a perfect thing and schools may not be happy, but they really have reason to believe that things are getting better.”
Feaver notes that in addition to full-day kindergarten and inflationary increases for state funding, the Legislature also put $50 million into the teachers' retirement fund and covered the cost of increased employer contributions to help shore up the fund.
“A lot of folks don't look at that as school funding, but we do,” he says.
Superintendent of Public Instruction Linda McCulloch says she always wishes schools could get more money, but that the 2007 Legislature approved many good things for schools.
The former teacher says state funding of full-day kindergarten is “the first statewide education reform initiative in anyone's memory we've done,” and that it's a big step toward increasing the quality of education.
And while things other than schools may have grabbed a larger share of the budget-surplus pie, that's not necessarily bad news for schools, she says.
“During those lean funding years, social services also took hits,” McCulloch says. “Those are other services that we know many of our kids in school need.”
“You can't teach a kid who isn't fed well, who needs glasses, or who needs health care,” she says. “I don't think you can discount any of those. I would say that we're not done yet. We have to continue the next session, always funding schools.”
Coming Tuesday: A look at building projects approved by the 2007 Legislature.
Editor's note: This is the second of a three-part series on the legacy of the 2007 Montana Legislature.
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)