Less than 20 percent of residents voted for SQ 744. The ballot measure would have amended Oklahoma’s Constitution to require the state to spend annually no less than the average amount spent on each student by the surrounding states.

Many voters, such as Pauls Valley resident Carl Janz, said they wanted to vote to increase spending on schools. However, this desire was outweighed by concerns that the lack of a funding source for the proposal could have caused deep budget cuts elsewhere.

“More money for education is a good thing,” Janz said. “But I don’t think (SQ 744) was worth it. I thought it would create more problems than it would solve.”

Proponents of increasing education funding now are looking at their plan B: Convincing legislators to boost spending on students without the controversial mandate. This task could prove difficult, however, since the state expects a more than $1 billion shortfall for the next year.

Rep. George Faught, R-Muskogee, who opposed SQ 744, said lawmakers likely do not have the ability to increase funding this year. He said finding a new revenue source, such as the state did with the Education Lottery Trust Fund, is not a viable option.

Instead, Faught suggested the best way to pump more money int o classrooms is through reforms and reexamining how schools spend their money.

“Obviously when looking at our economic outlook, we are not going to have any extra revenue,” he said. “I don’t think there are any (more funding sources) out there, so we are going to have to look from within and move that way.”

State Superintendent of Public Instruction-elect Janet Barresi said she does not plan to ask legislators to increase education funding next year.

She said her first act on the job would be to conduct an audit of the department to identify waste and transfer more money in ways that directly affect students.

“I think we have adequate funding for education,” she said. “Once we are sure the public is comfortable that we are spending every single dollar as effectively as possible, then and only then, will I go and ask the legislature for a funding increase. But there is a lot of work before we reach that point.”

McAlester Public Schools Superintendent Tom Condict, who supported SQ 744, said the consequences would be felt in the classroom if lawmakers make no funding changes or if school budgets are cut further.

He said his district is already in “survival mode” after it had to eliminate 35 staff positions last year while gaining 50 students to its enrollment rolls.

Condict said many schools would have to stall any plans to reduce class sizes or upgrade facilities if no new money is awarded. He said there is little administrative spending or “waste” left to identify in his district if more cuts are ordered.

“The consequences will be cutting back more on salaries and our payroll,” he said. “I don’t know how we can keep doing that, while keeping the integrity of the quality of our education intact.”

SQ 744 supporters have not disclosed if there will be another push to land another state question on the ballot in the future that would mandate a funding increase similar to what SQ 744 proposed.

However, that option is still open since voters also rejected State Question 754. State Question 754, which was crafted to counter SQ 744, would have added a Constitutional ban against mandating state spending on predetermined constitutional formulas or how much other states spend on a function. That ballot measure only gained about 37 percent of the vote.