State Representative Jay Hottinger

Just over one week ago Governor Strickland released his plan on how to best use state tax revenue for the next two years in the form of his biennial budget proposal.

In outlining his proposal during his State of the State address the governor laid out a multitude of goals. Reactions from listeners were varied, but many listeners agreed it was an ambitious plan and expressed interest in seeing how everything would be paid for. I would like to take this chance to address one particular aspect of the budget that has been getting a great deal of attention, the school funding proposal.

First of all, I do not expect the governor to develop a comprehensive school funding overhaul in the first three months of his administration. Many talented men and women from all points on the political spectrum have been working on school funding for the last ten years and there has not yet been a proposal that would satisfy all of the needs of our education system.

In his budget proposal the governor has proposed increasing the average state share of funding from 49% to 54% of the overall average cost to educate a student in Ohio by the second year of the budget. This will be reached through a variety of avenues.

The first proposal is to increase per-pupil funding by 3% each year. The second proposal is to count every penny that the state sends to school districts. On all residential property the state of Ohio pays the first 12.5% of the property tax assessed, but this is not counted as state aid to public schools under our current accounting system. Counting these funds will not increase the money the school districts actually receive. Finally, aid to property poor and economically depressed districts would be increased each year. While these plans sound positive, one of my main concerns will be the fact that five out of ten districts in Licking County will not see any increase in state funds during the next two years under the current proposal.

While a 3% increase in basic aid levels is a decent increase it is also one of the smallest increases approved by the Legislature since 1975, and would be the third smallest increase since 1997 when the Ohio Supreme Court declared the Ohio school funding system unconstitutional in the DeRolph case. Counting all state aid will not result in more funds for our schools, but simply pump up the state aid numbers. The appropriation of funds for poor districts through Parity Aid and Poverty Based Assistance will be more focused on the poorest 60% of our districts rather than the poorest 80% as in years past, but does not pose any real reform to our current system.

One of the main tenets of the DeRolph case was that the current funding system relied too heavily on local property taxes. While multiple changes have been made since that time, the debate over whether our current system is constitutional remains. To reduce reliance on property taxes the governor has proposed a 20 year property tax break for senior citizens and disabled residents through an expansion of the Homestead Exemption. However, under this program the same amount of property taxes will still go to the schools, except that more will be paid by the state. If more money is needed by a district another levy would have to go to a vote, and, despite the initial reduction in property taxes through the Homestead Exemption, each levy would still increase the property taxes paid by seniors and disabled Ohioans.

While there are no earth-shattering changes in this education budget I feel this is decent proposal. While the basic aid increase is less than that of many budgets I have supported, 3% is a reasonable starting point for debate, though concerns on how it will be distributed remain. The expansion of the Homestead Exemption is an issue I have supported in the past and this proposal is worth further study, especially into the way it would be funded through savings generated by the securitization of Ohio tobacco Master Settlement Agreement payments.

Over the next several weeks my colleagues and I will be looking into the financial numbers to ensure the governor’s proposal is financially sound, debating the wisdom of the various expenditures, and listening to the desires of our constituencies. I would urge you to look into the details of the current proposal and let me know your thoughts.

As always, I welcome your questions, comments and input on state government issues. Please feel free to contact me by mail (State Representative Jay Hottinger, 71st House District, 77 South High Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215), by email (district71@ohr.state.oh.us) or by phone (614-466-1482).