GAMBLING with our Student's Futures (Unwise at Any Odd's and a Fool's Game)

Editorials 

Governor’s reprieve for schools likely to be short

Certainly it’s embarrassing for Gov. Jennifer Granholm that she announced an emergency school aid cut in October and then rescinded it before it took effect. Critics got plenty of am munition to say she was gaming the numbers solely to press for a tax increase that lawmakers would not entertain.

So, yes, her timing was and is suspect. The overall trend — dwindling tax support for schools — is not.

Even if Michigan manages to limp by with only its already enacted cuts for the current school year, districts will almost surely take a bigger hit next year than the one Granholm backed away from last week. Smart districts, if they found any palatable cuts while under the gun, may want to proceed with them anyway.

The numbers look like this: Gran holm had called for an emergency cut of $127 per pupil, starting with this month’s state aid payment, because of continuing tax shortfalls. Meanwhile, the most optimistic pro jection for next year’s budget starts with a $200-per-pupil cut. That comes on top of the $165-per-pupil cut made by the Legislature for the current year.

Where has the improvement come since Oct. 22? There is a bit more money than expected left over from last year in the school aid fund, for one thing. More significant is the smaller than- expected decline in taxes due on non homestead property — generally businesses and vacation homes. State forecasters aren’t certain why commercial property tax rolls remain relatively healthy, but the likeliest ex planation is simply that they have yet to show the full impact of the recession. So policymak ers would be wise to regard this as a short re prieve, rather than a rebound.

The fiscal outlook for the next school year is not pretty: Besides de clining taxes, federal stimulus money will taper off and job losses are expect ed to continue until at least late 2011.

But just as school districts would be smart to start making deeper cuts now, legislators could mitigate the damage by making urgently needed changes in Michigan’s tax structure sooner rather than later. Unfortunate ly, Granholm’s decision to postpone cuts relieves some immediate pres sure for reform.

The governor did not play her cards well. But her clumsiness should not become an excuse to ignore the bigger problem: Without more funding, the education that Michigan offers its children will inevitably deteriorate. And those students, in turn, will be even less well prepared to deal with the chal lenges that await Michigan in the decades to come.