COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Ohio lawmakers considering public input on proposed changes to school funding are
hearing from interested parties who say it’s a solid start, but want more: more money for certain
schools, more clarity on charter-school funding changes and more help for the economically
disadvantaged.
Two proposals are on the table. One, crafted through a workgroup led by two lawmakers, would increase
spending on schools by an estimated $1.2 billion over two years. The other, part of Republican Gov. Mike
DeWine’s budget proposal, calls for $550 million in new funding for services such as mental health
counseling and after-school programs, especially in higher-poverty areas.
Ohio’s school-funding system has been repeatedly adjusted since the state Supreme Court found it
unconstitutional 22 years ago in what’s known as the DeRolph case. Advocates say fairer funding could
help address an achievement gap correlating to poverty.
"It’s getting more and more difficult to pour from an empty cup," Vinton County schools
Superintendent Rick Brooks wrote in testimony last week for an Ohio House subcommittee . His schools, in
an area devastated by the opioid epidemic, would see no increase in under the lawmakers’ plan, he noted.

Many testifying before the panel agreed more money should be directed toward poorer students and schools.
Many also support factoring in the basic cost of educating a child, funding charter schools directly
rather than through local districts, and ending existing caps on funding for districts gaining students.
Those are key elements of the plan from Republican Rep. Bob Cupp, of Lima, and Democratic Rep. John
Patterson, of Jefferson.
They contend their proposal would more fairly split local and state shares of funding and account for a
community’s ability to help pay for educating kids, looking not just at property values but local income
levels. They said no school districts would lose money next year, and more than 500 of the 610 districts
would get additional funding during the upcoming two-year budget.
Their proposal drew praise from groups including the Ohio School Boards Association, the Ohio Association
of School Business Officials and the Ohio Education Association teachers union. But those groups also
raised concern that some of the poorest districts would see no or comparatively little immediate
increase.
"We can and must do better by these students," Jennifer Hogue of OSBA wrote in prepared
testimony. "We can choose to invest in their success now or we can pay for the consequences of
ignoring them later."
Cleveland schools CEO Eric Gordon noted districts with flat funding would include four of the big urban
districts — Cleveland, Dayton, Toledo and Youngstown. Those would get significant increases under
DeWine’s proposal, though, Gordon said.
Economist Howard Fleeter of the nonpartisan Ohio Education Policy Institute has been analyzing
school-funding proposals for decades. He said DeWine’s plan reflects that schools trying to educate high
concentrations of low-income students need more resources, and he urged the lawmakers to better reflect
that in their plan.
The Ohio Federation of Teachers suggested reallocating much of the new funding from DeWine’s proposal
toward disadvantaged students and wraparound services.
Two former state lawmakers weighed in, too.
Stephen Dyer with the liberal think tank Innovation Ohio suggested the state has a "Robin Hood
problem" after years of limiting state funding for wealthier districts to direct more money to
poorer ones. He said trying to fix it in one budget seems "a bit much."
School Choice Ohio President and CEO Kevin Bacon noted the Cupp-Patterson plan doesn’t deal in detail
with funding for charter schools and scholarships that support school choice. He said any plan must also
consider the nearly 200,000 students being educated outside of traditional public schools, such as at
private schools or charter schools.