Decayed Schools Beg For Share Of Surplus

It’s all about these numbers: $285 million, $50 million, $612 million and only 1.

Idaho’s revenues from a robust state economy are pouring in so fast that the state is looking at unprecedented surpluses of $285 million in fiscal year 2000-2001. A tax cut, of course, is in order in the most Republican state in the nation. Before legislators decide how much to give back, however, they need to study the other numbers above.

In 1999, a school assessment committee appointed by Gov. Dirk Kempthorne conservatively estimated that $50 million in construction was needed to ensure every school building was safe. Former Supreme Court Justice Robert Huntley, who is leading a suit against Idaho to provide safe, learning-friendly schools, sets the number at $612 million. The real figure probably falls somewhere in between.

Meanwhile, there is a number that’s indisputable. Idaho is the toughest state in which to pass a school bond. It remains the only state that provides no money for school construction while requiring a two-thirds supermajority to pass bonds.

In the past, Kempthorne has promised to tackle the school safety issue and to work to lower the bond supermajority. He didn’t follow through on those promises. Now, with the massive surplus, he’s promised to lower the overall tax burden while bolstering support for education and other programs intended to maximize benefits for every Idaho resident. He must be held to that promise. Every Idaho child should have a chance at a safe, quality education.

To its credit, the 2000 Idaho Legislature increased education spending 6.4 percent for a healthy budget of $873.5 million. But it failed to solve construction and safety needs of poor districts. It did establish two types of loans to fix critical safety problems in schoolhouses, but they must be paid back with interest. That doesn’t help districts already cutting staff and programs to survive.

School districts in rural areas, such as the Silver Valley, Bonner County and Boundary County, are hit with a double whammy. The poor economy in some rural areas forces parents to pull their children from school and go elsewhere to look for work. Declining enrollment means fewer dollars. Meanwhile, the districts are losing federal cash that comes from declining timber sales. That reduces money available for such necessities as building maintenance.

Idaho is mandated by its constitution to provide a thorough education for all public school students. The court soon will decide if that means adequate, safe buildings as well as good teachers and programs. With its massive surpluses, the state would be acting irresponsibly, bordering on criminally, if it refused to help children forced to go to school in crumbling buildings.