School funding proposal should prompt discussion

We believe the word "admirable" used by Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland's spokesman to describe a public school funding proposal from a Republican legislator signifies appropriate caution.

There are many questions that need to be answered before the proposal can become public policy.

That said, we remain convinced that Strickland needs to play a leading role in the discussions.

After all, he made education funding a cornerstone of his campaign for governor last year and since taking office in January has talked about the need to develop a formula that passes constitutional muster.

The governor has also said hearings throughout the state are necessary to let Ohioans have a say in how primary and secondary schools should be funded.

But 11 months have passed since Strickland took office and taxpayer impatience at the lack of substantive progress is evident in the number of school levies being rejected at the polls.

The Supreme Court has ruled that reliance by school districts on property taxes fails to provide what the constitution mandates, a thorough and efficient education for all students.

The formula results in funding inequities, the court has said.

That's why the proposal by Republican Sen. J. Kirk Schuring of Canton is getting statewide press attention and a positive response from his colleagues — albeit Republicans — in the General Assembly.

Schuring is calling for a constitutional amendment that would dedicate 59.6 percent of income tax receipts and 71.2 percent of sales tax collections for public education. The money generated would equal the amount the state now spends on education and would be added to it.

The governor's spokesman, Keith Dailey, said Strickland found Schuring's proposal "admirable" but will have to take a closer look before deciding whether to endorse it.

One of the chief questions that must be answered is this: Given that there isn't much fat in the state's general fund budget, what would diverting funds generated by the income and sales taxes do to various state programs?

Economic realities

Another question has to do with the overall economy. While Schuring's proposal says that if the taxes generate more than they are doing now, the additional money would go to education, what if there is an economic downturn and the revenue generated falls shorts of projections?

There's also the issue of higher education, which gets its money from the general fund. How would diverting tax revenues affect state colleges and universities?

Such questions should not be viewed as criticism of the Republican legislator's proposal, but rather points for discussion.

After all, finding a funding formula that not only passes constitutional muster but has bipartisan support and is endorsed by the special interests, including the association of school boards and teachers' unions, and, most importantly, the voters is a major challenge.

During the years the funding issue was in and out of the courts, there were calls for a special income tax or sales tax just to fund public education.

Without any doubt, this is one of the most important issues facing Ohio because, as the governor has noted on several occasions, a high quality education will make the state competitive in the global economy.

Strickland's leadership is essential and we look forward to hearing his ideas in the near future. He has had enough time to look at the issue from every angle.