(Stock photo from Getty Images)
Local public school leaders from all around the state filled the Ohio House Education Committee’s hearing room on Tuesday to explain to lawmakers how full state funding is critical to their districts.
Christopher Edison, superintendent of Pymatuning Valley Local School District, described the pride in the district’s diversity and resilience. At the Northeast Ohio district, 76% of the students are considered economically disadvantaged and there’s been an increase in the need for specialized services. Edison also highlighted the successes in academic achievement, career and workforce readiness, and mental health supports at the district.
“However, the sustainability of these programs is increasingly at risk due to rising operational costs,” Edison told the committee in Tuesday testimony. “Inflation has significantly increased expenses for essential resources such as transportation, instructional materials, and staffing.”
Without an increase in base funding, Pymatuning’s ability to “maintain and expand these successful initiatives is severely threatened,” Edison said.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
Hits have already come to districts because of inflation and increasing costs not reflected in the funding model that looks to see its final funding phase-in this year, if the legislature includes it in the operating budget set to be passed by July 1.
Montgomery County’s Northmont City Schools — a district with rural, suburban, and urban areas — has seen state funding cuts and defeats of school levies that resulted in the need to cut more than 40 district positions in May 2023, and the closure of one of their elementary schools, according to Superintendent Tony Thomas.
“I understand that members of the General Assembly passed a budget two years ago that increased funding across the state, and we are thankful,” Thomas told the education committee. “But unfortunately for Northmont, those dollars are not reaching our school buildings and we are doing more with less.”
It’s stories like these that the Fair School Funding Plan workgroup, which was created along with the state’s public school funding model, is hoping will flood both the education and finance committees, along with the offices of state legislators, to inform them about the importance of proper public school funding in Ohio.
“It’s our responsibility to ensure that every member of the Ohio legislature and the General Assembly be made fully aware of these facts, their implications, and the legislative decisions that led to these circumstances as they contemplate this important budget,” said Mike Hanlon, Jr., superintendent of Chardon Local Schools, and Fair School Funding Plan workgroup member.
The workgroup met recently, along with more than 600 other education community members, to discuss upcoming legislative meetings about the budget, what the governor’s proposal would mean for districts, and how to engage with lawmakers.
“In my visits to Columbus … one message was very clear with the legislators that we met with: ‘We need to hear from constituents on the issue of school funding,’” Hanlon said.
Members of the workgroup said they’ve heard another message from the lawmakers: resources are limited in the budget.
In the governor’s executive proposal, the Fair School Funding Plan’s final phase-in was included, but inputs that would account for inflation costs at districts were not, something the governor’s office has “remained silent” on in all budgets that included the public school funding plan, workgroup members said.
“First and foremost, this is not our ideal proposal from the governor,” said Jared Bunting, CFO and treasurer of the Athens City School District. “However, this is in line with what the governor has done in the past and we’re thankful that the governor has included the Fair School Funding Plan in his budget, even though it falls woefully short of our expectations.”
In the governor’s budget for the next two years, the budget would decrease funding for traditional public schools by 0.9%, according to a workgroup analysis. Community and STEM schools will receive an 11.3% increase in the governor’s proposal, while joint vocational school districts receive a 14.1% increase. Voucher programs including the EdChoice private school program would see a 15.8% increase.
“So 90% of the students in the state are seeing a reduction in funding,” Bunting said, referring to the enrollment numbers in the state, which show the vast majority of students attend traditional public schools.
Alternately, last year, the state funded private school voucher scholarships with nearly $1 billion in one year, according to the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce.
Source: Ohio Fair School Funding Plan Workgroup
School administrators on the workgroup noted that the funding simulations used in the governor’s budget proposal show an intention to “continue to update capacity each year without any input updates.”
Without inputs to account for rising costs and inflation, the state not only won’t meet the workgroup’s ideal of a 50% state share of education costs, but will drop below the share of funding before 1995, when the Ohio Supreme Court first ruled in DeRolph v. State of Ohio that the state’s education funding violated the state constitution, falling short of the “thorough and efficient” system of schools directed in the founding document.
With talk of addressing property taxes in Ohio, something that school funding has relied on for decades, workgroup members said updating cost inputs could help with that issue as well.
“When we talk about property tax relief, we would like to argue that … updating all inputs consistently is a form of property tax relief to our community members,” said Jenni Logan, treasurer for the Sycamore Community Schools.
Now, as the budget process continues, educators, and administrators not only plan to push for proper education supports in committees considering the budget document, but also want to get district stories to all legislators, including newly elected GA members, who haven’t had a front-row seat to the public school funding model fight.
Those who are new to school funding are also faced with “competing interests in other areas that are not related to school funding,” according to Hanlon. He said legislators who talked to him said they “haven’t heard from anyone” on school funding.
“As a result, it’s very likely that they need to hear from us, and from someone that they trust and are confident in, that will provide them with the necessary facts to shape their understanding of school funding,” Hanlon said.
By 
