Give Credit Where Credit is Due

I have been reading with interest the Arizona Republic’s fall series regarding the private school tax credit program. Having always been bothered by the disparity between tax credits for public versus private schools, I find their articles thought provoking. Do current legislators really believe that public schools receiving 40% of what private schools get from a taxpayer is fair? But then, maybe it truly wasn’t meant to be fair.

First of all, let me say that I would support a program that gives students from impoverished neighborhoods all of the advantages that any other student in the state receives. We should make our public schools the best schools in the state and that is done through hiring the best teachers and principals, which means paying them more in some disadvantaged neighborhoods. Reducing class sizes is also a way to improve student performance – not by one or two students, but by placing no more than 15 students in those classrooms. This requires districts to hire more teachers, and all of these things demand more money, which we do not have under the present system.

And so the tuition tax credit program evolved, originally sold as a way to help students with less means attend schools that charge for the education received within their walls. I believe the Republic reporters are right in their evaluation that several problems exist within the program, even in the eyes of original supporters of the program, including the Republic. First of all, there are problems with implementation: to meet the intent of the law regarding private school tax credits, the money should go to “needy” students. In the public schools, the measure of needy is well understood. Those families qualifying for free or reduced-fee school lunches are needy. Why can’t private schools and their school tuition organizations use the same or a similar standard? Since tax credits are a state-authorized funding source, the state can and should establish a consistent measurement of “needy.” (Of course this means that a dentist I heard about could no longer ask his patients to target tax credit payments to his son’s private school to pay his tuition.)

I also support the suggestion that school tuition organizations (STOs) be given specific guidelines on the reporting of who benefits from the tax credits. After all, tax credits are public money – these are tax revenues that would otherwise go into the state general fund – and strict guidelines should be established like those required for the reporting of expending state monies in the public school finance regulations.

It is reported that STOs have a difficult time expending all this money and putting restrictions on it (as was originally proposed) would mean funds would definitely go unspent. This past year, according to the Republic, $55 million went into private school tax credits. If all $55 million (minus the 10% the STOs can apply to “administrative costs”) somehow does not make its way to needy students in the form of scholarships per the guidelines, how about transferring remaining balances to “needy” public schools? Those considered “needy” would have a population of at least 70% students being eligible for free and reduced-fee lunch – the same figure used by the Rodel Foundation to qualify for its programs.

That way everybody’s desires would be met. Taxpayers get a $1,000 credit and needy students benefit by either attending a private school at reduced tuition if granted entry or through their public school receiving more money to hire more excellent teachers.