Here is a corresponding article about competing priorities in US public
school education.  I'm also attaching a link to a news article about
students passing on vouchers to return to public schools.  The article below
mentions in passing the frustration of wealthy taxpayers who don't want to
pay for equality in schools, but the issue remains mostly political, not
educational per se.  Such a frustrating circle of evidence that one affects
the other, and in the end, healthy economics and the future.  KWC

Miami Herald:  Many Reject Vouchers, Return to Public Schools @
http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/news/local/4430976.htm

Juggling 3 School Goals, Texas Trips
By Richard Rothstein, NYT, October 30, 2002 @
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/30/education/30LESS.html
Plano, Texas
Most Americans want low taxes, good schools and equal access to public
education for the rich and the poor. Texas has pushed this combination
farther than any other state, but the three elements are contradictory.  The
Texas system is about to implode, with lessons for other states (like New
York) that will later face similar crises.

Texas has one of the most egalitarian school finance systems in the nation:
Average spending varies between rich and poor districts by only about $600
per student.  This has been accomplished by limiting the property tax rate
to no more than $1.50 for every $100 of assessed valuation in rich and poor
districts alike, and by forcing rich districts to transfer some of their
revenue to poor districts.

Texans call their school finance legislation, adopted in 1993, the Robin
Hood law.

Communities with more than about $300,000 of assessed value for each
enrolled student must turn over any taxes they collect on value above this
amount to the state for redistribution.  Or they can donate the excess
directly to poorer districts.  Because wealthy districts cannot make up for
this loss by raising taxes above the $1.50 limit, they have no choice but to
reduce the quality of education as costs rise.

That is what is now taking place in Plano, a wealthy suburb of Dallas.  This
town of affluent professionals and corporate headquarters turns over one out
of every four property tax dollars it collects to poorer districts.  Plano
East High School is now slashing the elite programs that prepare its youth
for competitive colleges and professional careers.

Before the Robin Hood law, high school English teachers in Plano could
critique a lot of written work because they taught only 80 students in four
classes.  Now the student load is 140.  Advanced placement class sizes have
grown to over 30 students from under 20.  Before Robin Hood, if a few
students wanted to study Russian or Japanese, Plano hired teachers for them.
No longer.  Small classes to explore careers in psychology or law have been
eliminated.

Mary Lou Buntyn, chairwoman of the Plano East history department, said she
used to teach seminar-style, with chairs arranged in a semicircle and
students challenging each other's interpretations.  Now, with as many as 35
in a class, students sit in rows and are more passive.

Last year, Plano and other wealthy districts sued the state, claiming the
Robin Hood system prevented them from providing the "general diffusion of
knowledge" to which children are entitled.  The suit was dismissed.  The
appeals court said the Texas constitution only entitles children to attend
an accredited public school, not get all the benefits of schooling at Plano
East.  A tax rate of $1.50 is certainly enough to support a minimally
accredited school.

The trial judge quipped, "Football is not protected by the Constitution."

Opposing Plano and the other wealthy-district plaintiffs were the
property-poor districts whose spending has gone up from receipt of the
excess payments of the rich districts.  Leaders of the poor districts say
they do not oppose letting places like Plano spend more money, provided all
schools can spend more, and equalization is maintained.

Anger about erosion of a privileged status is spreading in wealthy (and
politically influential) districts.  Hyperbolic language grows.  Some
parents in Plano say they want to secede from the state.  The superintendent
of another district said there would be "blood in the streets" if she
continued to cut programs.

But nobody seems to know where to find the money to let places like Plano
keep high standards while preserving equality for poorer districts.  The
Texas Constitution prohibits an income tax unless voters approve, and even
then requires that most of the new revenue be used for property tax
reduction, not education or other services.  The sales tax in urban areas is
already 8 1/4 percent and cannot go much higher.

Texas school leaders say they need more money but are afraid to advocate new
taxes.  Corporate executives support better schools but have little appetite
for paying to achieve them.  Escaping the state's business tax by
reorganizing with a Delaware address is one gambit.

A court ruling in New York has also said that state's Constitution mandates
only a minimal education, not a good one.  Advocates for urban districts
that spend less than the suburbs are now negotiating with the governor for
new financing that will bring needy schools more dollars.  But nobody has
broached reaching the full equality that would allow New York City to have
the kind of education found in Scarsdale.

In Texas, it has become ever more clear that low taxes, great schools and
equality are incompatible.  Sooner, rather than later, Texans will have to
choose which they plan to forgo.  Then, so will the rest of us.

Outgoing Mail Scanned by NAV 2002


Reply via email to