Strickland's School Funding Plan Called Financially "Unsustainable"

The Bottom Line:  Ted Strickland's school funding plan uses millions of dollars in one-time federal stimulus money that would not be available in the next budget, raising serious questions about sustainability - or how the plan would be funded in the next budget without a major cuts or tax increase.

• "This budget plan isn't sustainable." (Editorial, Akron Beacon Journal, 2/4/09)
   
• "Paying for Democrats' new Ohio education plan over the next 10 years would require unprecedented increases in state funding. Meanwhile, budget experts are unable to predict when the state will finally climb out of its economic morass."  (Columbus Dispatch, 5/10/09)
   
• "We reject the emphasis on sustainability," Strickland said during an editorial board meeting with the Dayton Daily News.  (Dayton Daily News, 4/24/06)
   
• "With that statement last week to the Dayton Daily News, Gov. Ted Strickland earned all the criticism he's getting for a budget proposal, including his overhaul of education funding, that is unrealistic to the point of irresponsibility.  (Editorial, Columbus Dispatch, 5/1/09)
   
• "Throughout the budget debate, Strickland has refused to own up to the fact that his education budget has no visible means of support. Asked in April how such a plan could be sustained, he declared, 'We are committed to education, and if we are committed to it, it will be sustainable.' That statement comes direct from Neverland. Unfortunately for school boards and superintendents, they have to live in the real world." [Editorial, Columbus Dispatch, 7/19/09)
   
• "The numbers don't add up, and Strickland has undermined his pledge of transparency by dragging his feet on providing the data and details to back up his education plan."  (Joe Hallett, Columbus Dispatch, 3/29/08)
   
• “Word that Gov. Ted Strickland's ‘evidence-based’ plan for Ohio's schools might not fit with the new school buildings that taxpayers have paid $6.5 billion to construct is one more sign that the plan isn't well-thought-out.” (Editorial, Columbus Dispatch, 3/21/09)
   
• "Strickland has budgeted $927 million over the next two years for a longer school year, universal kindergarten, state audits and oversight of failing districts. Strickland has said the state budget would be able to maintain the increased spending even without the federal stimulus money, but short of more budget cuts, the governor only appears to be setting schools up for another funding disappointment down the road." (Editorial, The Lima News, 2/3/09)
   
• "Republicans have argued that the use of $7 billion in one-time state and federal money makes the budget unsustainable beyond the next two years. For example, the $12.9 billion education budget contains $845 million in one-time federal money, meaning legislators would have to spend $845 million more in state funds in 2012-13 just to prevent schools from losing funding."  (Columbus Dispatch, 4/28/09)
   
• "On paper, the funding is to be phased in over 10 years. Starting two years from now. But there's no mention of where the hundreds of millions of additional dollars will come from; there isn't even a complete price tag. Just maintaining the current funding level two years from now will be hard, because $800 million of the current allotment comes from one-time federal stimulus dollars." (Editorial, Columbus Dispatch, 7/19/09)
   
• "The response of the governor's office to these issues raised by The Dispatch was as disturbing as his earlier suggestion that he shouldn't have to explain where the money is going to come from to pay for his education plan -- that, as long as the state is committed to improving education, 'it will be sustainable.' He said he's going with the lower figure of $8.64 billion for the education plan because, who knows how much inflation will be over the next 10 years? That's irresponsible." (Editorial, Columbus Dispatch, 5/12/09)