Legislators confront education, funding issues

RONAN — The second half of the state legislature could be tough sledding, according to three legislators who held a town hall meeting in Ronan on Friday.

Sen. John Brueggeman, Rep. Joey Jayne, and Rep. Jeanne Windham agreed that their task is often easier when they don't have as much money to allocate compared to now, when they face a $300 million surplus.

"Seventy-five percent of bills are still alive right now, which is unusual and also an indication of good law, so people have good ideas for what to do with the money," said Jayne.

Brueggeman was skeptical of the changes Gov. Schweitzer was making administratively, commenting that Schweitzer put three MEIC members on environmental boards so that the people who filed environmental lawsuits are the ones deciding them.

"We saw a gay rights bill come up on the calendar that never would have made its way out of committee in the past, especially since the public has spoken about their views on this subject," said Brueggeman. "The business and industrial community is on their heels right now."

One Schweitzer proposal that drew some public comment was his initiative to create a public trust within the state's coal trust to fund $20 million in economic development that essentially comes from the interest accrued on the trust.

Brueggeman would like to see that money go to regional water project instead because development can't happen without infrastructure improvements.

"We've got a water system in St. Ignatius that's not regulation at this point," said Brueggeman. "You have to update that before any industries are going to want to invest in that community."

The legislators were undecided on all the issues the public brought up, but their general theme was skepticism about new spending initiatives unless there was some evidence showing a real need.

The education funding bill is still up in the air because it is still in committee. The state legislature was ordered by the Montana Supreme Court to provide a "quality" education long-term, and to fund Indian education for all students. Part of the dilemma is defining just what a "quality" education is.

"There are seven bills right now attempting to define what a quality education is," said Brueggeman. "The education community was united behind suing the state to increase funds, but it's become a turf war to decide where the money goes. In my mind, Democrats aren't properly utilizing the audit staff to determine how much money is needed."

"Good education isn't necessarily going to happen because you throw money at it," said Windham. "They do need more money, but I don't know if anyone knows just how much."

Current proposals have called for up to $400 million in education funding, and Schweitzer has proposed $80 million in stop-gap funding and a two-year study to find solutions. There is also a separate $3.3 million being allocated for Indian education.

"If you ask them, I believe the teacher's union would rather have $50 million in the statewide health insurance system," said Brueggeman. "But that's not going to solve the education question."

In other news, all the legislators showed their basic support for education, such as Schweitzer's best and brightest scholarship proposal, if not the exact wording and mechanisms it uses.

When answering a specific question about how the state can subsidize the education of some folks while not giving anything to others who choose not to go to college, Jayne replied that the student gets a better education, and likely a better job, and then gets a higher wage and pays higher taxes.

"It's not always immediate, but the idea is to balance things out in society in the end," said Jayne. "Higher education collectively benefits the whole."

"I'm playing along because I want the governor's support when my bills come up," said Brueggeman. "I'd rather have the same amount serve as a tuition tax credit, so that the money comes out on the end rather than the front."

Also, both Jayne and Windham voted against funding $1 million for a Lewis and Clark celebration later this year, and a five cents-a-can soda tax didn't have support from any of the legislators.

A seat belt law is coming up for a vote this year that would make an unbuckled seat belt a primary violation instead of a secondary one, meaning law enforcement could stop you for that reason, whereas now they must find another cause besides not wearing your seat belt. That proposal did not receive support from the public at the meeting, and the legislators were wary of approving it, even though they said studies show seat belts save lives and some medical costs.

Finally, the legislators expressed support for providing increased funding for adult basic education at tribal colleges. The colleges are experiencing increased enrollment from both tribal and non-tribal students, and the federal government does not provide funding for non-tribal students at tribal colleges.

Steve McCoy, the adult education supervisor at SKC, wants to amend HB 2 to increase $250,000 in funding per biennium for adult education, and legislators were open to the suggestion.