Sunday, March 7, 2010

School Choice and Taxes

I can't help noting the irony of Eileen's post this AM: "Willow School K-3 Open House Sunday" juxtaposed upon much hand-wringing at Town Meeting over falling enrollment at Marion Cross School (and our similarly ironic relief that Norwich' proportionate share of Dresden taxes is lower due to fewer Norwich kids in Dresden schools).

Knowing Eileen and knowing the two excellent teachers behind the Willow School, I think it's important to recognize that MCS is not and cannot be the one-size-fits-all best option for all our residents' children. Parents have many choices, including home schooling. Before criticizing those families who choose private school alternatives to MCS, it's worth considering the odd injustice those families face paying private tuition on top of paying their property taxes supporting MCS.

Basing public education funding on local property taxes raises all kinds of strange inequities, particularly as a greater proportion of our school budgets are dictated by decisions made far beyond our own community. A less obvious, but ultimately more difficult, problem is how deeply invested we are in a model for public education that dates back a century ago and may be reaching its legal and fiscal limits.

On the legal front, the U.S. Supreme Court's 2002 decision in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris exposed the tenuous legal principles limiting school voucher programs. Voucher advocates for both religious and secular private schooling have been aggressively litigating to pry the door opened by Zelman wide open. A logical conclusion for this line of cases -- woven together with advocacy for school funding based more broadly than local property taxes -- is very likely a system based on vouchers for all children and our public schools being but one of any number of competitors for those voucher-supported students.

On the fiscal side here in Vermont, it's hard not to be discouraged at the local costs incurred by the principle of equal education opportunity enunciated in Brigham, codified in Act 60 and modified further in Act 68. The political pressure to limit local authority over spending appears to be growing as more voters question the statewide school funding formula. It's probably simply a matter of time before Montpelier and any number of other state capitols demand and get the authority to negotiate union contracts statewide on cost containment and insurance purchasing power grounds. At that point, our local school are no longer local schools in the current sense; they'll be state schools and local private schools may reflect local education values more accurately.

The bottom line is we're in a mess that is only partially due to our CLA, the current economy, and our own decisions. I was distressed to hear the accusations back and forth at Town Meeting implying bad faith on the part of volunteer committee and board members; suggesting that votes made on fiscal grounds expressed a lack of support for education; or that our budget issues could best be addressed by teachers taking voluntary pay cuts. The problems we face aren't that simple and the solutions certainly won't be that easy.

No comments: