LM May 2016

If not us, who? If not now, when? Politicians ranging from

proposal is a “hold harmless” guarantee for the first year, but it is then phased out over four years. The evidence-based plan would lock in the FY16 or FY17 numbers to create a Base Funding Guarantee for each district, and then would direct 99 percent of any new education funding to the schools furthest from each district’s adequacy standard. Conversely, it would protect those neediest schools if the state ever again decided to cut funding to education. Those precepts would seem to be similar to Senator Manar’s approach. The plan does require more of an investment in public education by the state, but after seven years of underfunding it is crucial for the social and economic well-being of our state to invest more heavily in public education so that conditions can exist making a high quality education accessible to all students. The common ground between Sen. Marnar’s and the evidence-based plan provides a pathway to merge the best elements of both into something to provide immediate relief to districts most adversely affected while respecting the local taxpayer contributions of high capacity property tax districts. No district needs to lose state funding, but a high percentage of new education dollars should be focused on districts in need. No matter what is adopted for FY 17, the evidence-based plan could plug in behind that to provide a plan for public education. For the first time in nearly 20 years, we have the opportunity to change the public education landscape in Illinois. There is a viable conduit forward for legislators from both sides of the political aisle and others that are interested in a long-term, purposeful solution so that we don’t lose a generation of students. The problem is that changing the status quo is unbelievably difficult in Springfield. The closer you get to actual reform that is meaningful, the stronger the resistance and the harder it gets. We will overcome this obstacle. We live in the fifth-largest state in the nation, and we have plenty of resources if we will just tap into them. There has to be a way to give children from low -income and middle-class communities a reasonable chance to get a quality education – a “hand up” instead of a “handout.” If you want to talk about Return on Investment for communities and for the state, nothing else comes close to preparing all of our children for college and careers in the 21 st century. It should be Priority One. If not us, who? If not now, when?

Michigan Governor George Romney in 1963 to President Ronald Reagan in 1981 and President Barak Obama have invoked the quote “If not us, who? If not now, when?” to advance important but difficult and controversial social/political agendas. I think the quote is appropriate today for the cause of changing the state’s inequitable funding formula.

Message from the Executive Director Dr. Brent Clark

It would be difficult to find anyone with a conscience and any knowledge of the subject to defend the current formula that was devised almost 20 years ago. In six of the past seven years, we have had disinvestment and “proration” of General State Aid – cuts that most adversely affect districts that rely the most on state aid because they don’t have high capacity property tax bases. In recent years, there have been two significant attempts to reform the way public schools are funded in Illinois. The most visible has been the relentless effort of Senator Andy Manar (D-Bunker Hill), who has spent most of the last two years of his public life trying to get input and support from stakeholders all over the state. His quote: “A child’s access to a quality education should not be determined by their zip code” has become the mantra of this movement. Manar’s latest plan, Senate Bill 231, has passed the Senate but could face a tough hurdle in the House. Of course, there is always the potential that the House could produce its own plan to fund schools for FY 17. Behind the scenes, another movement has been taking place the past three years that has included administrators, business officials, principals, school board representatives and other educators. It is called Vision 20/20 and one of its four main pillars is titled “Equitable and Adequate Funding.” That pillar’s basic concept is the Illinois Evidence-Based School Funding Model, which is the topic of this month’s cover story that starts on Page 5. I urge you to read it and consider its benefits to public education -- most notably equity based on adequacy. IASA has remained neutral on Manar’s bill because while we completely agree with its goal of directing the greatest percentage of new state funding to the neediest school districts, we don’t agree with taking funding away from other districts. One of the changes to this version of Manar’s

Brent

3