A funny thing happened at a Terri Proud-sponsored education forum. Truth broke out.

by David Safier

Contrary to my expectations when I walked into what was billed as a "public seminar sponsored by Rep. Terri Proud and Educating AZ Right," I heard an excellent,thorough explanation of education budgeting in Arizona. Chris Ackerley, a physics teacher at Amphi High School, gave a two hour talk about how ed funding works in Arizona, from local to state to federal, interpersed with questions and answers. When the event was over, I introduced myself to Ackerley and told him, honestly, that he gave the best presentation I have ever heard on the subject.

No, I'm not being sarcastic. I'm absolutely serious. It was a terrific, down-the-middle, nonpartisan presentation. Later, I'll give my take of where I think Proud & Co. are going with this, but first, let me tell you what I learned.

Ackerley compared per student spending in Amphi School District, Marana School District, TUSD and, as a representative of charter schools, BASIS charter. His conclusion was, once you strip away all the spending that's not directly educational, Amphi, TUSD and BASIS spend close to the same amount on "regular education" per student: about $6,200. Marana spends closer to $5,300.

He got there by eliminating money spent on things that aren't related to students' classroom educations: transportation, food, extracurricular activities including after school sports, building construction and some miscellaneous items. He also took special ed money out of the mix, because that very high figure can inflate the per student spending figure (and most charters, including BASIS, have few or no special ed students). All he left in are costs for instruction, administration and building maintenance.

Before he eliminated those non-education items, the per student totals varied considerably. TUSD and Amphi spend in the $8,500 range, Marana about $7,500 and BASIS around $6,300. The point Ackerley made very clearly was, the major differences between total per student spending and the amount spent on "regular education" is taken up by items  school districts have to pay for — at varying levels depending on a variety of circumstances — which don't have any direct relationship to the education students get in the classroom. Charter schools have far fewer expenses of that nature.

Part of the conservative agenda is to give as much per student to charters as we give to districts. But as Ackerley made clear, though BASIS — and, by extension, many other charter schools — get as much as $2,000 less per student, the difference is not in money that goes toward what Ackerley calls "regular education." It's in services BASIS doesn't supply outside the classroom. If we give "as much per student to charters," we'll actually be giving them far more than districts receive for "regular education." It's a distinction conservatives don't want made, which is why it was so surprising, and welcome, to hear this so carefully explained at a Proud-sponsored event. Ackerley is an honest and thorough man, extremely knowledgeable on the subject, and a first rate teacher. (He is also the VP of the Amphi Education Assn. and a Board member of the Arizona Education Assn.) He knows how to take a complex subject and break it down into understandable parts without "dumbing it down."

Among other things, Ackerley mentioned that schools are underfunded, teachers are underpaid and all of that will very likely get much, much worse when the Fed stimulus money goes away and the Prop 100 sales tax money stops coming in, unless we do something to remedy the situation.

Beyond that, in the process of showing what he called the "Tangled Web" of public school funding in Arizona, Ackerley pointed out it is an unduly complicated process and implied there should be ways to simplify it. And this is what the people who sponsored the event wanted us to carry away. "All these numbers and funds and regulations make my head spin. Can't we just make this simpler?" And by "simpler," Proud & Co. mean, let's give every student the money the district would normally get for that student and let him/her take it to a "choice" school. If that just includes district and charter schools, it would mean charters would get more money for "regular education" than district schools. If it were broadened to private schools and home schooling — the next logical step — it would mean introducing vouchers. Ackerley, I should note, didn't much like the "Let the money follow the student" paradigm.

A FINAL NOTE: I was among a number of Democrats who attended the forum, basically because we wanted to monitor the event. As I said, I was pleasantly surprised by what I heard. Also, I have to say, I couldn't have been treated with more grace and friendliness by the people putting on the event, although they knew about the progressive column I write in the Explorer, and even about what I write on BfA. The event was remarkable for its lack of overt, bitter partisanship. I plan to attend future events put on by this group. I know the issues will be far more divisive in the future, but if they want honest dialogue, as this event suggested, I'm willing to do my part. And Ackerley laid a groundwork that may mean, though we're all entitled to our own ideas, we have a similar set of facts we can use as a basis for discussion.