By: Diane Rado and Darnell Little

December 20, 2004, Chicago Tribune

Taxpayers spent $20,173 per pupil last year to educate children in a tiny Lake Forest district, while 70 miles to the south, a Will County district paid out just $4,829 per pupil.

The spending gap -- $15,344 -- is the largest in Illinois in nearly a decade, even after adjusting for inflation, a Tribune analysis of state report card data shows.

Some experts point out that because the budgets of the lowest spending districts are growing faster than those at the top, the proportional gap is actually shrinking.

Still, the haves and have-nots make up a substantial portion of the state's districts. The top 10 percent of public systems spend an average of $12,705 on each student, while the bottom 10 percent spend $5,746.

Those figures all illustrate a statewide gap that experts say is one of the most dramatic in the nation.

In some quarters, that is fueling renewed calls for a thorough overhaul of state education funding, to shift the burden from local to state taxes and even out the disparities. "School funding in Illinois is far more unfair than in other states, which simply do not tolerate these huge disparities," said Kevin Carey, author of a recent study on funding inequities by The Education Trust in Washington. "Illinois has a lot work to do."

But the spending figures also raise a more fundamental and politically sensitive question: What does it cost to adequately educate a child?

There are too many factors in spending and performance to make a fair correlation. But at least on the extremes, there is evidence suggesting that money does not guarantee higher test scores.

In Summit Hill in Frankfort, the low-spending district, about 80 percent of students pass state tests. In Rondout in Lake Forest, the high-spending district, about 85 percent of students pass the tests.

Summit Hill Supt. Keith Pain said the district is efficient--not poor. Only 1.6 percent of its more than 3,400 students come from low-income families.

The district partners with the local park system to maintain school grounds, and it allows buildings to be used for park programs. The public library also helps by bringing a bookmobile into schools so students can check out books. Committed parent volunteers also raise extra money for their schools.

The district's class sizes are slightly higher than state averages, and its teachers have fewer years of experience, 11 compared with 13.8 years statewide.

In addition, enrollment in some of the district's school buildings is larger than parents might like; Dr. Julian Rogus Elementary School has nearly 900 students. But housing more children in one building is more cost-efficient than building and maintaining many small schools, Pain points out. And Rogus offers a popular full-day kindergarten program.

Pain said he'd like more money to improve technology, increase slots in extracurricular programs and boost staff development, all of which might ultimately help student performance. "Our kids score well, but I would like them to score even better," Pain said.

Rondout Supt. Renee Goier said her district needs to spend as much as it does to pay for building maintenance, keep class sizes between 6 and 18 students and offer competitive teacher salaries. The average teacher salary in Rondout is $68,257 a year, compared with $42,531 in Summit Hill.

With only about 130 students, Rondout has looked into consolidating with another school system, which might offer economies of scale, but there has never been a strong interest by parents to move forward.

"It's not the desire of this community," she said.

Some school officials question why rich districts such as Rondout get any state help at all.

"Why should [those] districts get any money from the state?" asked William Schewe, superintendent of Elementary School District 45 in Villa Park. "The reason is, they've got some political clout and they really haven't wanted to have equity. They could take that money and give it to the lowest-spending districts."

The way the state aid is disbursed, the 43 districts with the greatest property wealth got a flat grant of $218 per student this year. Other districts get additional funds based on formulas that take into account the community's ability to raise taxes. Still other funds go to districts through grants for special programs.

Schewe's district spent $8,100 per pupil in 2003, about the state average for elementary districts.

His district commissioned a cost-of-living study for Illinois. He said he has given the study to lawmakers, in hopes of retooling the funding system to direct more money to districts like his that face higher expenses than some rural districts.

Legislation also has been proposed to overhaul the Illinois school finance system altogether, lowering property taxes and increasing the state's income and corporate taxes, as well as broadening the sales tax to a variety of services.

That would force the state to pay a larger share of school expenses. In 2003, the state contributed 29.9 percent of school spending, one of the lowest state portions in the nation. Schools here get about 62 percent from local taxes, and 8 percent from the federal government.

The plan would narrow the spending gap, proponents say, helping pull up low-spending districts while allowing wealthier districts to keep spending what they that wish.

"What we don't do is take the top down. What we do is bring the bottom and middle up," said Ralph Martire of the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability, which is pushing the reforms.

But the reforms will be a tough sell in Springfield, with Gov. Rod Blagojevich vowing not to raise income or sales taxes.

Until there is substantial reform, however, experts believe the spending gap will continue to be a feature of the Illinois landscape.

The Tribune reviewed 10 years of district operating expenditures per pupil, between 1993-94 and 2002-03, the year parents will see in the report card data released last week.

The gap between the highest and lowest-spending districts over the decade was the largest in 1994-95, at $15,552 when adjusted for inflation. The gap dipped to $13,239 in 1997-98, but it rose to $15,343 five years later.

The rise coincided with a growth in school deficits, the records show. Fewer than half of all districts were in the red in the late 1990s, a portion that had soared to 82 percent in 2002-03.

Some poorer districts began cutting expenditures significantly in the last few years, which could be one reason for the growing gap, said Robert Grossi, a township school treasurer and chief executive of the financial authority overseeing Hazel Crest District 152 1/2 in southern Cook County.

Hazel Crest was near insolvency in 2002 and had to be bailed out by the state with grants and loans. Since then, it has closed two school buildings, reduced administrative staff and made other changes to reduce expenses, Grossi said.

Though the actual dollar gap in student spending fluctuates, experts say there is a pattern of modest progress.

In 1993-94, the average spending of the top 10 percent of school districts was 172 percent more than the average spending of the bottom 10 percent. In 2002-03, that difference dropped to 121 percent.

Over the long term, lower-spending districts appear to be coming up at a faster pace than the top spenders, helping to reduce disparities, according to Therese McGuire of Northwestern University.

"The closing of the gap looks to come more from raising the spending levels of the bottom districts thanks to more government aid," McGuire said.