Education measure a tall order

Emily Richmond and Cy Ryan

Thursday, Jan. 29, 2004 | 11:38 a.m.

If a ballot initiative passes to raise Nevada's per-pupil spending rate to the national average, the change would require additional funding of more than a half-billion dollars, based on the figures being used by the organizations that are pushing the initiative.

The Nevada State Education Association announced Wednesday a ballot initiative to require the Legislature to fund education at the national average.

For the 2001-02 academic year Nevada spent $5,813 per student, compared with $7,548 nationally -- a difference of $1,735, according to numbers compiled by the National Education Association. Nevada fell $619.07 million short of the national average that year, based on the NEA's figures. That was when the state had 356,814 students; the 2003-04 enrollment is 385,414.

The NSEA's ballot initiative does not yet include cost estimates. The organization says it is still trying to determine which formula will be used to calculate the national average for per-pupil funding. Projected enrollment growth will also need to be a factor. The Clark County School District expects its current enrollment of 268,357 students to climb to 330,023 in 2007 -- the earliest year the new funding requirement could take effect.

Of the state's current biennium budget, 34.7 percent -- $1.69 billion -- is slated to go to K-12 education. It came only after a long and bitter battle over the largest tax increase in the state's history.

"Lawmakers raised taxes by $836 million for the biennium and it was a bloodbath, so imagine what would happen if they went back for nearly that much for a single year," Nevada Treasurer Brian Krolicki said. "Given the carnage we this saw this summer I would say it would be extremely difficult to raise those funds through taxes unless we agreed to fundamentally change how we do business."

The per-pupil funding comes from the state's general fund which relies mainly on property tax and sales tax revenues.

While different organizations use varying methods for calculating per-pupil funding averages, Nevada follows the formula set down by the National Center for Education Statistics, an arm of the federal education department.

Based on the federal agency's formula, Nevada was about $1,151 below the national average in per-pupil funding in 2000, said Doug Thunder, the state education department's deputy superintendent of administrative and fiscal services.

"It wouldn't surprise me if that gulf has widened since then," Thunder said.

The statistic Thunder said he is most troubled by is Nevada's education spending per $10,000 of personal income per capita.

"We rank right at the bottom of the country," Thunder said. "That tells me we need to work on the public's willingness to direct more money to K-12 education."

During the last legislative session lawmakers approved raising per-pupil funding by 7 percent to $4,424 over the next two years. The union's per-pupil spending figure is higher than that because it includes federal aid, Thunder said.

As for how to pay for the initiative's increase in spending, union leaders were ready to leave those details up to the lawmakers.

"We would not presume to tell the governor and the Legislature how to pay for the increase in per-pupil spending," NSEA President Terry Hickman said in a prepared statement Wednesday. "However, we believe it is their job to make these types of decisions. We expect there will be a mix of budget reprioritizations and or dedication of new revenue. We anxiously await the debate."

The union's petition drive comes 10 days after the kickoff for another ballot initiative -- Education First, sponsored by Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev. Gibbons' initiative calls for the Legislature to pass the education budget before tackling anything else.

"On many levels (the NSEA's plan) is a complementary effort," said Scott Craigie, a political consultant and co-chairman of the Education First initiative. "We want to make sure the problems we saw during the last session don't become routine or chronic and we don't want to see funding levels go backward."

In order to be placed on the November ballot, the initiatives each must have more than 57,000 qualified signatures in support of the proposals by June 15. The signatures must constitute 10 percent of registered voters in at least 13 of the state's 17 counties. A second, affirmative vote would be needed in 2006 in order for the initiatives to become law for the 2007 legislative session.

Bob Fulkerson, state director of the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada, said Wednesday he preferred the teachers' union initiative to Gibbons', which he called a "thinly disguised self-promotion by someone who wants to be governor in two years."

Because the congressman's plan doesn't set a minimum for education funding any amount -- even a drastic reduction -- could be approved provided it is passed first, Fulkerson said.

The money to pay for the NSEA initiative could be found, said Fulkerson, whose organization represents the interests of labor, racial minority groups and gays.

"Nevada is the 14th wealthiest state in the country, and we barely spend as much on our schools as Mississippi does," Fulkerson said. "We give tax breaks to millionaires and yet we're still one of two states without a corporate profits tax."

If the NSEA initiative is to gain ground, supporters must convince voters that it is a sound economic development strategy, Fulkerson said.

"When companies think about relocating to Nevada they look at what the educational opportunities are," Fulkerson said. "'That tells them about the quality of the work force and whether they would put their kids in our schools. Why would businesses come here if we're at the bottom nationally?"

Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins, D-Henderson, expressed support for the NSEA initiative Wednesday.

"I have always believed we should fund our education at the national average.

'We've looked for it (money to put it at the national average) every session I have been here," said Perkins, who is chairman of the Legislative Committee on Education. " The challenge has been to find the revenue to do that. We will work with them to identify those funds in any fashion we can.

Asked if he would support a tax increase to make this happen, Perkins said, "We went through our session in dealing with that. You won't see any proposal along those lines as far as I'm aware." Assemblywoman Dawn Gibbons, R-Reno, said she does not think the teachers' initiative interferes with the proposed constitutional amendment being forwarded by her husband Jim. She said the teacher's plan appears to be "positive" but she wants to read it before she signs it. "Anything that helps the student is great. The public can let the Legislature know where they want their money spent."

One of the sharpest critics of the Clark County School District during the last legislative session, Assemblyman Bob Beers, R-Las Vegas, said he needed more details on the union's proposal and whether an increase in funding would be tied to accountability measures.

"I want a strong educational system as much as anybody -- I've got a fifth grader and a third grader," Beers said. The problem, he said, "is just how we get there."

Walt Rulffes, deputy superintendent of operations for the district, said the ballot initiative should include a specific plan for spending the additional funds.

"While we certainly support the concept of increasing per-pupil spending we have to make sure the taxpayers and the legislators are convinced we're using every dollar we get now effectively," Rulffes said. "We also have to have a clear plan on how extra dollars will yield student results."

archive