How "adequate" is defined in Arkansas: $5,770 per pupil

HB1632 and HB1633 were filed today, which propose educational funding for the next biennium. Is either enough? Page 16 of the Act 57 recommendation says both are, but as I stated last night, I'm skeptical of the modest increases included in HB1632, but HB1633 looks to be much better. The foundation proposal in HB1632 includes a $28 increase from $5,662 to $5,690 (or about 0.5%). The foundation would increase to $5,760 in the 2008-09 fiscal year.

HB1633 is much better and increases the foundation to $5,719 in 2007-08 (and to $5,789 in 2008-09). It also grants additional funds taking the average daily membership into account and calls these additional funds "enhanced educational funding." These funds basically amount to $51 for the first year ($87 for the second year) of the biennium.

Other than the amount appropriated for foundation, HB1632 does consider the tax collection rate, which has been a sticking point with the school districts. The legislation does address declining enrollment funding and categorical funding amounts -- as stated previously, it is my belief that the legislature could get away with a modest increase in the foundation if the categorical funding (especially NSLA) included a more generous increase.

Also, upon the first reading of HB1632 (if I'm reading it right), it mandates that at least $27 of the $28 increase in foundation be allocated to the payment of insurance premiums on a policy of property insurance covering buildings (and contents).

Conclusion: We must pass HB1633 in conjunction with HB1632. Section (h) of HB1632 is an unfunded mandate, unless we're calling that bill a $1 increase in per pupil foundation funding. I'd like to see higher numbers associated with the NSLA proposals (see p. 5, lines 18-34 of HB1632), but overall, I'd call it adequate, so long as HB1633 is signed into law.