Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition and a campaign roundup
Next Post: How Mendoza could make life miserable for Rauner
Posted in:
* My weekly syndicated newspaper column…
Gov. Rauner attended a meeting last week of his “Cabinet on Children & Youth,” but it’s not known if he pulled aside one of its members, State Superintendent of Education Tony Smith, for a little chat.
The Illinois State Board of Education is reportedly mulling whether to settle a civil rights lawsuit filed eight years ago by the Chicago Urban League. The suit essentially claims that Illinois’ education funding system violates minority students’ rights because a disproportionate number of those kids reside in areas with the lowest property wealth and also attend schools with majority-minority enrollment. They’re basically getting shafted by the state, so they sued.
According to the Urban League’s CEO Shari Runner, the ISBE “walked away from lengthy settlement talks that we held this summer.” The group has filed a motion for summary judgment and Runner said last week it is “awaiting ISBE’s response.” Runner said the group hopes to “hold ISBE liable for implementing an unlawful and discriminatory school system.”
A settlement would drastically alter the way Illinois funds its school system, with wealthier suburban and Downstate districts losing tons of state money. It would also preempt long-stalled legislative action on the topic.
Last summer, when negotiations with the Urban League were still apparently underway, Gov. Rauner impaneled an education funding reform working group and charged it with coming up with a solution to the funding inequities by the first of next year. So, the Urban League’s civil rights lawsuit may actually be why Rauner imposed such an ambitious timetable.
What the administration doesn’t want (along with a whole lot of impacted legislators) is to take the tricky solution out of the hands of the governor and the General Assembly and give it to a Cook County judge. But there’s no guarantee that the governor’s funding reform working group will come to an agreement. A deal is politically complicated because legislators who represent wealthier school districts also tend to oppose tax hikes. But they’ll be forced to choose between losing state cash or voting for higher state taxes. Some might actually welcome judicial intervention to spare them this fate.
Word from inside is that some ISBE legal staff are urging board members to settle the suit. The board’s chief legal counsel, for instance, is a former Chicago Public Schools chief of staff. The city’s school system filed an amicus brief years ago supporting the Urban League case.
Perhaps more importantly, though, a massive amount of supporting data has been compiled since the suit was brought all those years ago, mainly because of state Sen. Andy Manar’s constant push to reform the system. The plaintiffs might be able to make their case more easily now than they could when their suit was filed. So, the logic goes, a settlement would be far better than a loss.
Superintendent Smith has made no bones about the fact that the state’s funding system is archaic and harmful to minority children, but he apparently hasn’t spoken up in the last couple of private board meetings when members discussed the litigation, and one board member swears Smith is not communicating directly with members about the case. Still, rumors abound that he is driving the settlement talks.
Smith has recently upped his national profile by traveling the country to talk about various education issues. He is not a popular man within the administration for several reasons, and his generous employment contract caused the Rauner folks quite a few headaches last year. Some Republicans claim he’s angling for a spot in a potential Hillary Clinton administration, which he has denied.
State Board of Education Chairman James Meeks, a former state Senator who pushed hard for education funding reform for years and was one of a tiny number of high-profile African-Americans to support Rauner’s 2014 election, has reportedly not taken an official position on the litigation. Meeks is said to be suggesting that board members also talk with the governor’s legal counsel to get another side of the issue. The board insists that Smith doesn’t have the authority to settle the case on his own, and there’s no indication at this moment that he plans to do so.
A settlement would also create a thorny political problem for Gov. Rauner down the road. A big chunk of his political base would get the short end of the stick, which won’t go over well when he runs for reelection in 2018.
Ironically, the state government got itself dismissed from the case several years ago, so I suppose we could see the administration try to get itself back into the game if the ISBE decides to move forward with a settlement.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 9:24 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition and a campaign roundup
Next Post: How Mendoza could make life miserable for Rauner
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Governin’ sure isn’t as easy as campaignin’. Some things you can just ignore (Trump). Some things you can just lie about (not involved in the races). But some things have to be done, and will upset some of your supporters. That is part of the job. It is inevitable. And the Guv has bobbed and weaved and ducked and deflected as long as he could. But eventually a tough decision is going to have to be made. He can’t do this forever, can he?
Comment by Henry Francis Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 9:54 am
Over the course of 4 years there will be a decision that will be unpopular. There is no way around it. You cannot just sell off this asset to another VC and let them deal with the headaches.
If you really don’t want to do anything- let the Cook County Court decide, finally get the formula fixed via Court order. Complain that the corrupt judges of Cook County stole collar county tax dollars. Go downstate and tell them you settled and got them more money. Go to the inner city and say you care deeply about minority children so they got more money for education.
At the end of the day the legislators who will lose for their districts are scared of you anyway and won’t go against you. And you still don’t have to Govern. Any questions?
Comment by DuPage Bard Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 10:16 am
Again no mention of poor rural White districts.
Always about race!
Comment by Federalist Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 10:45 am
Illinois’ over-reliance on property taxes to fund schools is blatantly unfair - kids who need the most resources get the least.
Federalist - the suit was brought by the Chicago Urban League, and I’m sure is based on the racial discrimination of school funding because race is a federally protected class. Poverty and geography are not.
But you’re right, poor, rural whites face should also have adequately funded schools and the state needs to step up to make that happen.
Comment by Century Club Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 11:12 am
=Illinois’ over-reliance on property taxes to fund schools is blatantly unfair - kids who need the most resources get the least.=
You obviously have not done your research. CPS does not get the “least” and there are a number of others that fill this bill.
=But you’re right, poor, rural whites face should also have adequately funded schools and the state needs to step up to make that happen.=
It isn’t about color. Just stop.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 11:22 am
==no mention of poor rural White districts==
Yeah, my daughter went to one of those for a couple years. Well off town in general, but the school was basically in the wrong side of the tracks area and since it was it’s own district it only got the property tax money from those neighborhoods. One of the times I thought a town of 13,000 people did not need 3 pre-high school districts.
Comment by HangingOn Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 11:22 am
I do realize that this suit was brought up by the CUL. However, if this article is correct then Supt Smith needs to expand his rhetoric to those beyond ’state’s funding system is archaic and harmful to minority children’
Comment by Federalist Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 11:24 am
“Illinois’ over-reliance on property taxes to fund schools is blatantly unfair - kids who need the most resources get the least.”
————-
Then have the City of Chicago and Cook County do away with their real estate classification system and then have the Cook County school districts extend taxes at the same tax rate levels as the rest of the State of Illinois.
Because right now those Cook County homeowners are getting a break, and if you strip away state money from downstate and suburban school districts, all you will eventually end up doing is to to keep subsidizing Cook County residential real estate property with a lower real estate tax rate, meaning keeping their RE taxes artificially lower.
“When they say it’s not about the money, it’s ALWAYS about the money”.
Comment by Anon Downstate Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 11:24 am
I do think it is interesting that the Chicago school district, which covers the entire city, includes probably the most valuable property in the state (downtown, near downtown, gold coast) along with areas of low property values.
Comment by NoGifts Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 12:02 pm
Hasn’t this been tried before and failed?
But yes the system is unfair, but if you end up with a bigger contribution from the state it is going to come with strings.
Also I would be more impressed if CPS paid the same school tax rate I do here in dogpatch.
Comment by Oneman Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 12:11 pm
It’s not just about Chicago. Low and moderate income towns and suburbs get hurt by the reliance on property tax funding - and they don’t have the gold coast to tax if they need it.
Things like poverty, parents’ educational attainment, special needs, and second language learners, absolutely increase the cost of education. So conditions most common in areas without a strong property tax base also increase the cost.
The only way that there is going to be an adequate and equitable school funding system is that if the state is putting up the resources that are needed to provide a good education for every child in the state.
Comment by Century Club Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 1:08 pm
All arguements aside, this is a great piece of inside baseball from Rich. Courts in states throughout the nation have jumped in to these debates and forced the legislators hands on school funding formulas. Might be wise for ISBE to settle, or they could have something they really don’t like imposed on them.
Comment by TT Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 1:50 pm
HangingOn @ 11:22 am === Well off town in general, but the school was basically in the wrong side of the tracks area and since it was it’s own district it only got the property tax money from those neighborhoods. ===
Your daughter went to school on a “tax-island.”
The root of the financing problem is the partition of the student population into 860 separate school districts. The principal function of this is to create tax islands, some of which do not have a sufficient wealth to support the school children on the “island”.
The solution is not to further complicate the GSA formula, but to consolidate school districts to a smaller number of larger districts, perhaps 60 local districts, to reduce wealth differences between districts, and to allow more equitable per pupil spending within the resultant districts.
Comment by Anon III Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 2:40 pm
The solution is not to further complicate the GSA formula, but to consolidate school districts to a smaller number of larger districts, perhaps 60 local districts, to reduce wealth differences between districts, and to allow more equitable per pupil spending within the resultant districts.
Interesting but will never ever come close to happening. The state is to diverse in so many ways for this to ever get any traction.
It would be interesting to abolish the property tax on schools and have it come 100% form the state with truly equal funding for each student no matter where they live. That wont’ happen either, although I would support it.
Comment by Federalist Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 3:08 pm
== Cook County residents see 67% of their property tax bill go to education! ==
Mine’s more like 80% - 85% going to the various school and community college districts. 67% sounds great!
Comment by RNUG Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 3:11 pm
- Federalist - @ 3:08 pm: === Interesting but will never ever come close to happening. The state is to diverse in so many ways for this to ever get any traction. ===
I have often observed over the years that once a lawyer was appointed a Federal District Judge, it took him (her) about three months to figure out that they could tell the President of the United States what to do, it the President was a party in a case before him (her).
IMHO, sixty school districts could accommodate a lot of diversity.
Comment by Anon III Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 3:39 pm
===Federalist said: “Again no mention of poor rural White districts. Always about race!”
It’s the URBAN League, dude, not the Rural League. And in case you can’t read between the lines, poor white rural districts would likely benefit from such a settlement.
Comment by Patrick Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 4:47 pm
Equal funding per student is not and should not be a state goal. Teachers are not paid the same in all parts of the state, and labor is the major cost in education.
Many people choose higher property taxes in return for moving into strong school districts. 75% of my tax bill goes to education, and it has been worth it.
The City of Chicago is not a tax island with insufficient resources to educate its children. It lacks courage, not wealth.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 5:05 pm
This might appeal like bankruptcy court to Rauner.
Comment by walker Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 6:23 pm
=IMHO, sixty school districts could accommodate a lot of diversity.=
Sounds very scientific and research based.
Not at all like you pulled a number out of your nether region.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Oct 4, 16 @ 8:13 am
If each school district was equal in enrollment to, or larger than, Plainfield School District 202 – ADA 26,208 – the fourth largest district in the State, then Illinois could operate with sixty or fewer school districts.
Comment by Anon III Tuesday, Oct 4, 16 @ 9:40 am
@Patrick,
Hey DUDE read the whole article and you will see that more than the CULK is mentioned.
Federalist - Monday, Oct 3, 16 @ 11:24 am:
I do realize that this suit was brought up by the CUL. However, if this article is correct then Supt Smith needs to expand his rhetoric to those beyond ’state’s funding system is archaic and harmful to minority children’
Comment by Federalist Tuesday, Oct 4, 16 @ 10:49 am