This is a 'Tough Budget to Top'

• State budget sets 'pattern for the future'

In his address to the WEAC Convention October 28, WEAC President Terry Craney said this is the best budget for education ever signed by you. Do you agree with that assessment?

Tommy Thompson

Certainly this is a tremendous budget for education – not only K-12, but higher education as well. As in the past, funding and programs for K-12 public schools remains a high priority for me. The budget clearly illustrates my unwavering commitment to ensure every one of Wisconsin’s young people receives a top-flight education. We are justifiably proud that our state has long been a pioneer in blazing new educational trails by blending innovative learning tools with accountability, and this budget boldly follows in that proud tradition.

Most important, I have reaffirmed my pledge to fund two-thirds of K-12 school costs, including the construction projects passed by our citizens through referenda. The State of Wisconsin will devote a total of $9.6 billion over the biennium as an investment in educational excellence.

According to Education Week magazine, this funding level ranks our state fourth in the nation in education spending per student, adjusted for regional cost differences.

Does all this make it the best budget during my tenure? That’s hard to say when we’ve done so many innovative things in public education such as picking up two-thirds the cost of pubic education, implementing academic standards, abolishing social promotion, lowering class sizes and developing the TEACH program. It certainly is a tough budget to top.

As you know, in recent years, WEAC has often not been pleased with the education initiatives in state budget bills. What happened differently in the Capitol this year that produced a budget that WEAC could embrace?

We worked very closely with WEAC leadership on issues we both support – SAGE, two-thirds funding (including construction costs), foreign language instruction, special education, etc. I think both sides did a better job of focusing on issues we can agree on rather than issues that divide us.

With a $1 billion budget surplus, Wisconsin had a unique opportunity to provide both permanent and one-time tax relief and make investments in the future in the form of targeted spending on K-12 education, the WTCS, and the UW.

Also, I had a series of conversations with NEA President Bob Chase at the 1999 National Education Summit, which I co-chaired in October. Bob assured me the WEAC leadership in Wisconsin, led by Michael Butera, the new state executive director, was ready to embrace the principles of accountability, high standards, and a focus on student achievement contained in the action statement approved by the summit.

Hopefully this is the start of a stronger working relationship between WEAC and my administration.

Do you see this situation continuing, and what do you see as the ramifications of it in terms of future education policy?

I am very encouraged with the meetings my staff and I have had with the WEAC leadership before and after the passage of the budget. While we do not agree on every educational issue, I am eager to begin discussions with them on positive reforms in education we both can support. It will hopefully be beneficial.

Why do you support the QEO changes in the budget bill (the exclusion of education attainment from the calculation and the narrower definition of economic issues)?

This budget also contains a series of compromises I approved to break the four-month legislative deadlock on the biennial spending proposal. First, I agreed to make two changes in the QEO that will take effect in the 2001-2003 biennium. In two years, calculation of the QEO will not include lane movement, or educational attainment. While teachers will continue to be rewarded for earning extra credits, these lane movements will not be included in the calculations of the QEO. The Wisconsin Association of School Boards and my Department of Administration both estimate the financial impact of this change to be the equivalent of adding an average of 0.1% to 0.2% to the QEO statewide. If we had to tinker with the QEO to pass the budget, I was more comfortable with paying teachers for improving their skills.

You also should know I have communicated to the leadership of the Wisconsin Education Associa-tion Council my strong desire to cooperate with them in developing a proposal on alternative methods of compensation for school faculty and staff. And I have received assurances from WEAC leadership that they will work with us on this issue.

Why do you support the revenue control changes (which have been described as revenue control relief) in the budget bill?

Unlike most of the rest of America, Wisconsin faces a shrinking student population in the foreseeable future. In recognition of the difficulties many of you face with this demographic trend, I have made permanent the 75% “hold-harmless” revenue limit exemption for declining enrollment at a cost of $23.9 million over the biennium.

To help schools provide extra learning opportunities for low-performing students, beginning in fiscal year 2001 I have agreed to allow summer school pupils to count as .40 FTE (full-time equivalent) for revenue limit and state aid purposes. However, I intend to revisit this issue in the future because I believe .25 FTE is a more fiscally sound summer school threshold.

What is the future of two-thirds state funding of education costs? What is the future of the QEO? What is the future of revenue controls?

While I have once again reaffirmed my commitment to fund two-thirds of local school costs, each local district in the next few years will have to look at maximizing its available state and local resources, including funding, time and personnel. Every community will have to carry on a difficult conversation about what its educational priorities are and whether the current delivery system can accomplish these goals. Merely adding dollars to the existing model without thinking outside the box is unlikely to satisfy anyone, especially the property taxpayer in Wisconsin, and it will not produce the educational system our children deserve. We simply can not afford to pay two-thirds local school costs without revenue controls.

While I am always willing to examine cost-effective changes to the current school aid formula, I cannot imagine any formula surviving the legislative process and gaining my approval without some form of revenue controls.

However, my office will be participating in the school finance task force convened by State Superintendent John Benson.

Why did you support legislation improving public employee pensions? Now that you have the actuarial report, are you ready to sign the bill?

I do support strengthening public employee pensions. I just recently received a study regarding the pension legislation and I will be making a decision on the bill’s future in coming weeks.

Finally, how important is it to you that Wisconsin maintain and improve upon one of the strongest systems of public education in the nation?

Our students will be asked to compete in an ever-changing global workplace and our responsibility is to prepare them to succeed in that environment.

While Wisconsin schools are among the best in the nation, and our students among the brightest, we must continue to reach for higher achievement. We must continue to require rigorous academic standards in core curriculum areas so our children are faced with higher academic challenges.

The 1999 National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) Reading Report shows Wisconsin is once again one of the top states in the national rankings. And I am confident Wisconsin pupils will be successful in achieving and exceeding the goals expected of them in the 21st century.

School board members, educators, parents, and students can take pride in the achievement of the majority of Wisconsin pupils.

The bottom line is our education system will be the driving force behind the future success of our state. And nothing I do as Governor is more important than creating a world-class education system in Wisconsin.

Posted November 22, 1999