I think it is safe to say that no issue before the Texas Legislature is more important to address than school finance. This was already the case before State District Judge John Dietz declared on September 15 that our current system had constitutional problems and gave a year to fix it. While this case will likely end up before the Texas Supreme Court, a final ruling appears unlikely prior to the end of next spring's regular session. As such, the prudent course is for Texas' lawmakers to try to reach a consensus on how to address some of the more obvious flaws in our current system without waiting on the courts.


The good news is that the Texas Legislature has already done a lot of work on this topic in both a regular and a special session. In fact, both the House and Senate have already passed school finance legislation out of their respective chambers. There is also a special committee on which I serve, made up of both House and Senate members, that continued to work on school finance after the last special session ended.


So what do I believe needs to be fixed? Here are a few of the areas that I think the Legislature should examine.


First, it appears to me that the overriding issue in school finance is that the state puts up less of a share of the total cost than it did in the past. It used to be that the State of Texas was responsible for about 60 percent of the cost of running the public school system and local taxpayers picked up the rest. The state's share has since dropped to about 40 percent and local property taxes have gone up ever-higher to fill the gap. The problem is compounded for local schools boards caught between a declining share of state revenues on the one side and a $1.50 cap on the tax rate on the other.


I believe the Legislature's ultimate goal should be the restoration of a 60 percent share of education funding as a state responsibility. However, I also believe that we shouldn't limit ourselves to just looking at how to raise extra dollars for the classrooms. There are several other closely related issues that should be on the table for discussion at the same time.


For instance, it makes sense to take up the matter of adequate teacher pay and benefits as part of the school funding conversation. Our current system of teacher compensation is based largely on longevity, but I would like to see workable incentives for truly exemplary classroom performance integrated into the mix. I also voted in the last special session to restore the full $1,000 teacher health insurance stipend for full-time teachers, librarians, nurses, and counselors.


I further note with a bit of incredulity that automatic longevity increases are halted when a teacher attains 20 years on the job. Not surprisingly, many educators start looking at retirement soon afterwards. At a time of teacher shortages, I have to wonder if it makes sense for the state to provide no additional financial incentives for our most experienced teachers to remain in the classroom. I am exploring the option of some sort of a retention bonus for teachers eligible to retire who choose to stay on the job.


As for the state revenue sources that should be tapped to help close the local funding gap, I am open to looking at pretty much everything – except, emphatically, an income tax. I have supported a tobacco tax hike for education and anticipate doing so again. The final mix of revenue sources needed to fund education at a sufficient level may include everything from a revamped business franchise tax to a broadening of the state sales tax.


I will keep you posted as this issue moves forward.