Voters and the media should demand that candidates for state legislature explain their positions on K-12 funding, in detail. If they don’t do it on their own, they should be asked the question by every journalist who interviews them and by the public at every forum they attend—with follow-up questions to pin them down on specifics.
Rep. Randy Friese, LD-9, set the tone in a recent campaign email and on the front page of his campaign website. Full disclosure: Friese is my representative, and I have donated to his campaign. But I will be happy to describe and analyze statements on education from any legislative candidate anywhere in the state. You can send them to me at tucsoneditor@tucsonlocalmedia.com.
Friese begins by noting that our schools are inadequately funded. It’s closing in on two months since Prop 123 passed, yet we still haven’t heard any details about Ducey’s promised next step.
Was this a promise? Or was this just rhetoric?
In the absence of any proposed second step from the governor’s office or republican legislative leadership nearly two months later, I’m concerned it was rhetoric.
Friese writes that he would put a freeze on corporate tax breaks until we restore school funding. He would have the legislature put a renewal of Prop 301 on the ballot before it expires in 2021 so its 0.6 percent sales tax for schools doesn’t expire. He would change the amount of money the state draws from the State Land Trust from the levels set by Prop 123 so they are lower when state revenues are strong.
Friese ends with this.
In order to address our K-12 education funding needs, state leaders should propose a multi-year funding plan. The governor should call a special legislative session this summer to enact this plan. Only then will Arizona students, teachers, and parents be assured that state leaders are committed to properly maintaining our system of public education as required by our constitution.
Friese doesn’t suggest what he thinks is an adequate funding level, nor does he explain how the state can change the land trust disbursements set by Prop 123. But he’s clear that current education funding is inadequate and has to be increased, and he suggests ways it can happen. That puts him on the record, which is where all legislative candidates should be.
This article appears in Jun 30 – Jul 6, 2016.
“Until we restore funding”?? At what level? Once again with no accountability. Sorry. Lost my vote.
Why does Safier thinks anyone needs him to analyze candidates’ statements on education?
Safier voted for 123 and propagandized in support of it in his blog. Most recently, he has gone on the record yet again trying to obscure TUSD admin’s ongoing incompetence and failure to fulfill promises:
http://www.tucsonweekly.com/TheRange/archives/2016/07/05/prop-123-tucson-area-schools-and-salary-hikes
The candidates can speak for themselves. Neither they nor the public need David Safier acting as an intermediary / interpreter.
I would rather read his take on the FBI’s Director comments on the gross negligence of Hillary Clinton. I don’t find anything here about her sloppy, sloppy protection of classified information. We could never trust her as President.
where we live, when the County needs money for schools, they raise the property tax. You only get about 3% from property tax for schools. You get 46% from “Local”. What’s the difference between Local and County. Does local tax mean you have a higher Sales Tax?
11% of the kids attending your schools are the children of Illegal Aliens = 110,000 kids cost per student is $7,208 X 110,000 = $792,880,000. Their total wage contribution is far less than their consumption of Services and Programs.
The average spent per student in the US is $12,400.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?…
I don’t get the nay-sayer commenters on this blog. Education and education funding is the number one issue for Arizona voters. This from surveys conducted by both Republican and Democratic and independent pollsters. Why shouldn’t David write about it? Why should’n’t David report on the position of wannabe elected officials. The issue is important to most voters/taxpayers/citizens and it is of vital importance to our future, our children’s future and to our economy.
Tax cuts have not worked, we’ve been trying tax cuts to grow the economy for 25 years, it has not worked. Perhaps investing in our kids might have a better outcome.
Michael S. Ellegood: You ask, “Why shouldn’t David write about it?”
Did you read the post entitled “Safier’s analysis is not wanted”? The answer is in the second paragraph.
Some of us feel that David Safier has, through his blogging on Prop 123 and TUSD, destroyed whatever credibility he might have had on the topic of what should and should not be done RE education funding and local education governance / administration.
Credibility Lacking in this Blog: Yes I did read the post, I have read all of the posts and I follow David’s blog and the generally negative comments. So David supported 123, so did a majority of voters, (I personally held my nose and voted for it). Why? Because David, myself and the majority of Arizona voters know that we need to get more money into our public schools and we need to do it now. I don’t get your comment that my supporting 123 and TUSD, David “destroyed whatever credibility he might have had…..”
One thing missed by the media in Tucson is Rep. Friese is in the minority in Phoenix, the Republicans have controlled the House since 1966 with no interruptions by the Democrats since than until now and not likely to in the future. Thus, whatever he has to add to the debate is as the loyal opposition, which means what he proposes will not get enacted. If he did not show up no one would know it in Phoenix, or care. It is time for Tucson to elect Republicans to the House so they can particpate in the GOP caucus where the decisions are made.
It is time to vote for the candidates who will support and fund public education, including Pima Community College and the U of A. Friese fits that description and he will get my vote.
The UA just received a NIH grant for $43M dollars. They have access to tons of money to spend on education. The lie that tax cuts don’t work is simply a lie. The last 8 years are a perfect example of democratic economic inexperience. Ultimately tax increases hurt everybody. Almost as much as petty jealous class warfare.
Make America Great Again? With so much ignorance outr there it may not be possible.
Hurray for Representative Friese stepping out and going on record with solutions in the form of solid proposals for future funding in field of education. While I do not agree his approach would be the path I would follow it would work if put in place and not subject to future legislative tinkering.
That is the problem, each legislative session has new leaders with new legislative goals and friends to satisfy. I would support a Constitutional requirement of fiscal support based on a formula of per student basic school support as one leg of a four legged stool to pay for k-12 public schools.
I would suggest a study of a dedicated statewide gross income tax to fund basic school support funding.
The other three legs would consist of property taxes as approved by local taxpayers, funds from collection of sales taxes and federal, county or private grants balancing the other legs. No where would local control be relinquished.
Michael S. Ellegood: if you have been reading all David Safier’s blogs and the comments on them for the last few months and you still don’t understand why he is having credibility problems, I’m not sure anything I or other commenters can write here will help you to understand, but I’ll give it a shot and translate it into language somewhat different from the language that has been used up to this point. There are some in the Democratic Party (and outside the Democratic Party, in what could be termed the “progressive” movement) who don’t like machine politics and cutting “we need money now” deals with the people who are currently running the show in Phoenix.
We all recognize that education needs to be better funded in Arizona. Some of us don’t think collaborating with ALEC to sell-out the long term best interests of the public school system for short term gains for desperate and dishonest TUSD administrators who have so mismanaged their district that they have made any other form of supplementary funding (e.g. bonds, overrides) that depends on the good will of the constituency inaccessible to themselves is the right way to do it.
Thus those who supported (or voted for) 123 and those who defend TUSD’s ongoing sad mismanagement have lost credibility with us, and we won’t take their advice on this or on other topics. If you still don’t understand, someone else will have to try to explain it to you.