|
 |
|
|
Commentary on School Funding Reform What
Are The Illinois Legislators Thinking? By
Joseph J. Matula* It seems like a lifetime during which school funding reform has been an issue in the Illinois Legislature. In this lifetime, there have been four major decisions handed down from the Illinois Supreme Court (McInnis v. Shapiro in 1969, Blasé v. Illinois in 1973, Committee for Educational Rights v. Edgar in 1996, and Lewis v. Spagnolo in 1999). In each case, the Illinois Supreme Court basically said, “It’s an issue for the Legislature to resolve, not us.” As much as many would love for the Illinois Supreme Court to say, “Here is how you will fund the public schools in Illinois,” it won’t happen. The Supreme Court will not get involved. Why not? Illinois is a local control state. Voters want their say in government and do not want someone else to decide things for them. So it’s logical for the school funding issue to be settled in the Illinois Legislature. The Legislature is the only game in town. School funding will not change unless the Legislature says it will change. And that’s the way it should be. Since the legislators represent the people and it’s the people who will pay the bill, then it makes sense that it’s the Legislature that should decide this. So now the most important question becomes, “What is the Illinois Legislature thinking?” In February and March of 2007, I sent a two-part survey to all 177 Illinois Legislators. In Part I, I asked them to identify three absolutely critical components they feel must be in any legislation that significantly increases school funding in Illinois. Few responded, but enough to generate the following list of critical components: 1. Revenue should be sustainable over time 2. Specifics as to how any new money should be spent 3. Assistance for parents of private school students 4. There should be a leveling up and no leveling down 5. Mandates must be funded 6. A longer school day 7. No negative impact to TRS by excessive salary increases 8. Effective way to fire bad teachers 9. Increase in foundation level / assistance to poor districts 10. Funding school construction grants 11. Property tax relief 12. Justification of expenses by school districts 13. Special education reimbursement amounts should be updated 14. Adequate funding for each school to meet State Standards 15. Adequate funding for special needs students 16. Any funding increase should be Pre-K through college The next step was to have the legislators pick from the list the factors that were most influential to him or her. They were asked to apportion ten points among their choices. They could give one point to ten factors or ten points to one factor. From this procedure the top five factors, in order, as seen by a sample of 25 Illinois Legislators, are: 1. Revenue should be sustainable over time. 2. Property tax relief 3. Increase in the foundation level/assistance to poor districts 4. Funding school construction grants 5. Mandates must be funded. * Joseph J. Matula is an assistant professor at Governors State University. He was formerly a superintendent in suburban Chicago for 26 years. |
|
|
 |
|
[Home] [Mission Statement] [DAY FOR CHILDREN] [Members] [One Proposal] [Fund Erosion Causes] [Compare Plans] [Doomsday] [Fiscal Reform] [Links] [ISNS CA Options] [In the News] [Student Rally] [HB750 Support Form] |
|
|
|
Copyright © 2003 by Better Funding for Better Schools Coalition |