Opinion | Michigan lawmakers should take time to craft the best school aid deal

Michigan lawmakers are under pressure to get a deal done on the School Aid Budget before a July 1 deadline. We strongly urge lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to do what's right for Michigan students in this budget, rather than what's fast.  

On the table are billions of state dollars for schools at a time of great uncertainty at the federal level, especially as the Donald Trump administration threatens to make massive cuts to education funding. Indeed, some of the drastic federal cuts to public education could become apparent as soon as this week as Congress works to push through its own budget package. 

Meanwhile, Michigan lawmakers in the House and Senate appear to be football fields apart on their priorities. The Senate budget has the potential to make the strongest positive impact, while the House budget includes many potential landmines that would undermine support for students with the greatest needs.  

State leaders should negotiate the best deal for Michigan’s students instead of ramming through a package that could harm students and schools for years to come.  

What’s at stake  

Under the House budget, kids who would lose the most are students from low-income backgrounds, rural students and English Learners. In a state where half of our students are from low-income backgrounds and  7%  of our families are immigrants, this would make bad policy, all around.   

Here’s why: The House budget would continue the trend of unfairly prioritizing the foundation allowance, which is already among the highest in the country, at the expense of students with the greatest needs. Michigan already has one of the most unfair state funding systems in the U.S. That's notable, as the House budget does not increase funding for students from low-income backgrounds. 

In a nutshell, House legislators effectively have proposed to create a new $1,975 per-student slush fund for schools and districts – on top of the foundation allowance. The new fund would amount to more than $3 billion in additional dollars for school districts with virtually no reporting requirements on or accountability for how they would spend the money.  

Districts would be allowed to use this new funding for a number of services of their choosing. For instance, here are just some of the dedicated funding streams that the House has proposed to lump into the $3 billion new bucket:  

• Funding for English Language Learners  
• Special Education ISD Millage Equalization Dollars  
• Special Education Millage Incentive Dollars  
• Isolated District Funding, which supports rural and geographically isolated districts 
• Funding for Mental Health and School Safety  
• Funding for State Education Assessments and Benchmark Assessments  

Concerningly, the House budget would allow, but would no longer require, that the dollars be used for the purposes for which they are allocated. As an example, under the House budget, districts would receive funding for — but would not be required to use it for — school breakfasts. The same would be true for districts receiving funding for English Learners and ensuring schools are helping those students improve learning outcomes.  

The House budget also would no longer require districts to use funding for benchmark assessments, which help ensure schools track their student outcomes so they can tell where improvements are needed.  

In other words, the House proposal would gut accountability and transparency for critical tax dollars, at a time when many Americans want more accountability for their tax dollars, not less. That's the wrong direction for Michigan.  

And if passed, the House proposal would be bad for educators too, eliminating dedicated funding for a number of programs to address the state's acute teacher shortage.  

Eliminating fiscal accountability is bad for kids   

In eliminating these many streams of dedicated funding, in theory, House lawmakers are telling districts they would have broad flexibility for how they spend their dollars.  

Yet in reality, this budget dramatically undermines accountability for taxpayer dollars. It makes it impossible for Michigan families to know if their tax dollars reach the students and the purposes for which the dollars are intended. That’s bad for Michigan, especially because research has found that investments for vulnerable student groups and evidence-based strategies make a real difference in learning outcomes.     

This lack of accountability would be especially bad for a state like Michigan, where our students already lag leading education states in key subject areas, like 4th grade reading and 8th grade math. And outcomes are even worse for students who are underserved.  

The House proposal is particularly lousy for rural students as it would also eliminate $125 million for school district transportation costs, which would disproportionately impact rural districts.  

The House budget also includes a new $40 million line item that could be used for private schools – a slippery slope that would strip funding away from public schools that are struggling.  

Senate budget prioritizes students who need support most  

Meanwhile, the Senate budget proposal rightfully recognizes that  students from low-income backgrounds, students with disabilities, English Learners and others need more support – not less.  

At a time when the federal government is moving to pull out its support for so many  students and public schools in Michigan, strong state leadership is needed more than ever.   

We urge the House and Senate not to bow to the pressure of the new fiscal year. While it’s undoubtedly important for school districts to know how much money they are getting to effectively pass their budget and hire staff, it certainly should not come at the expense of Michigan students with the greatest needs.  

 We urge lawmakers to advance a budget that's best for students, even if it takes a bit more time.