Ohio’s GOP Defends Districts A gainst Kasich’s Cuts (OH)

April 29, 2011

Ohio House Republicans are considering alterations to the new education funding formula proposed by the Governor after protests by some of their constituents, cleveland.com reports. Angry crowds have been flocking to community meetings since the Governor’s plan was announced, and the GOP caucus is responding by promising to make “tweaks” in order to limit expected cuts to the most affected districts.

What’s drawing the most anger is Governor John Kasich’s plan that would limit the amount of state education funding going to districts with high property wealth. Since a district’s school budget is made up from both collected property taxes and state money, the new plan would benefit lower-wealth districts by giving them a larger allocation of the state’s education aid.

This has drawn a great deal of resentment from higher-wealth districts who feel they are now subsidizing the education of their lower-income neighbors. Representative Nan Baker, who represents two of the most property-rich districts in Ohio, Westlake and Rocky River, proposed an amendment that would cap the cut in the state school funding to 20%. Baker said that in proposing the change, she’s representing her constituents, who are slated to take some of the deepest cuts under the Governor’s plan:

    “Our school districts have taken a larger cut than they should. I represent those districts and I will do my best to remedy that for them. They’re looking to me to help them keep the cuts at a reasonable amount, and that’s what I’m trying to do.”

Baker’s plan would in effect “zero out” some of the gains seen by 200 of Ohio’s more than 600 school districts under the Kasich plan. According to analysis, those gains add up to roughly $114 million. Anthony Pod ojil, Executive Director of the Alliance for Quality Education, thinks the Baker amendment is good, in principle, but demurs that looking to ease the pain of higher-wealth school districts by redistributing the money from the poorer schools is the wrong approach:

    “We can’t take from the low wealth to give to the high wealth to even out the formula–that’s not going to be acceptable. It’s better to find the dollars to bring the outliers back in.”

Although House Speaker William G. Batchelder supports the Baker plan, he expressed anger at district superintendents for misrepresenting the scale of the problem. He said that district heads weren’t doing a good job explaining how little a part state funds play in their schools’ budgets right now, thus making parents think the cuts would be more severe than they really are.