Education funding: no easy solution in sight

School boards in Ontario have a lot in common, not the least of which being that they all get virtually all their money from the province.

Of course, that hasn't always been the case. In fact, it wasn't all that long ago that the boards were able to raise their own cash through property tax levies that in some municipalities represented half or more of the total residential tax bill.

That all changed in the mid-1990s when the Conservative government of Premier Mike Harris bought some, but not all, of the recommendations of former Toronto mayor David Crombie for changes in which level of government would be responsible for various public services.

The government accepted the Crombie report's recommendation that the province provide full funding for elementary and secondary schools but not the accompanying proposal that all the related costs be paid from the government's general revenues. Instead, the province has continued to impose an education levy on property taxes that for most homeowners adds up to hundreds of dollars annually.

More recently, the McGuinty Liberal government has taken costly steps toward reducing class sizes and improving relations between the government and the various teacher unions. It has also provided more money to the school boards, but a lot less than some say they need.

Consider, for instance, the plights of the Toronto District School Board and its nextdoor neighbour, the Dufferin-Peel Catholic board, which both are currently struggling with huge budgetary deficits which they blame on a one-size-fits all provincial grants system.

The Dufferin-Peel Catholic board has accepted terms of reference for a special adviser appointed by the Minister of Education who is to help the board achieve a balanced budget within two years.

The trustees' decision followed threats to have an outside agent make the cuts necessary to balance the books.

A year ago, the board estimated its 200506 budget deficit at $17.1 million. By last December, the board had cut that estimate to $15.1 million, and through a series of costsaving measures it reduced it further, to

about $7.4 million. But the latest estimate of its 2006-07 cumulative deficit is about $21.1 million.

Such figures all pale beside those found in Toronto, where trustees have been given another month to find out who to slash a current $84.5 million shortfall.

Sheila Ward, chair of the Toronto District School Board, has warned parents that some program cuts are inevitable.

"The issue is not cuts or no cuts. To put that in front of parents is not honest. The question is, do we make them or do we leave it with the province?" she said in an interview.

The extra month will allow the Toronto board to have the benefit of an investigation by two provincially appointed factfinders.

But it is otherwise considering a twoyear plan to eliminate its deficit by closing most school pools, shutting down schools, dropping food programs, hiking fees for parking and outdoor education and cutting administrators, education assistants and lunchroom supervisors. Meanwhile, the Toronto Catholic board postponed dealing with its $34 million budget deficit pending consultations with its parents.

That board is looking into suing the government for a commensurate share on the basis that it didn't receive a $55 million loan the government gave, and forgave, the public board.

While all those school boards maintain the province's school funding system doesn't provide enough funding, Education Minister Sandra Pupatello says no more money is coming and all but a handful of Ontario's 72 boards have balanced budgets.

Under the Education Act, the government could withhold funding from any board that doesn't have a balanced budget.

There's clearly no easy answer to the problem, but we think one thing that should be considered is the restoration of an element of local funding.

We would welcome a return to each county or region having its own school system, so that the county or regional government could decide whether it should supplement provincial education grants in order to meet widely-accepted local needs.

If nothing else, such an arrangement would be highly cost-effective.