The hard times schools are experiencing statewide just got tougher. In Montana, the halls of education can expect drastic cuts by 2011.

School District 6 Trustees Barb Riley and Jill Rocksund attended the Montana School Boards Association Delegate Assembly last week in Helena. At the meeting, the Montana Legislative Fiscal Division proposed 17 budget cuts and tax proposals. To the dismay of many of the delegates present, some of the proposals, if enacted, are likely to violate the state’s obligation to adequately fund schools under the Montana Constitution, a fact the state acknowledges.

Proposal 3, which boasts a $62 million savings per year, would lower direct state aid to K-12 education from 44.7 percent to 30 percent. Reducing the state’s share would directly contradict Judge Jeffrey Sherlock’s last ruling in Columbia Falls v. State, in which he noted that the decline in the state’s share in fiscal year 2009 was a “relapse” and that he expected the state’s share in future years to conform to the state’s progress in fiscal years 2006 through 2008.

Originally, in April 2004, Sherlock ruled that Montana’s current funding system fails to provide adequate funding for Montana’s public schools. Additionally, he ruled that the state had shown “commitment in its educational goal to preservation of American Indian cultural identity,” and that the state does not pay its “share of the costs of the basic elementary and secondary school system.”

The 17 proposals by the fiscal division would, in combination, raise local property taxes — without a vote — by more than $180 million, a two-thirds increase over present levels, the MTSBA held last week.

“Schools in many communities have already imposed budget cuts in response to dwindling revenues in the present biennium and the hard times faced by our constituents,” Riley said at the meeting in Helena. “There is not much left to cut at this point without lasting negative effects on student achievement that will persist for a generation or more of Montana’s youth.”

Members of the School District 6 board engaged in spirited discussion during Monday night’s meeting.

“It’s interesting (the state) would propose cuts that would work against the constitution,” Rocksund said. “We are in for a pretty unpleasant legislative session coming up. We’re working with a faulty funding formula that’s not based on needs, costs or much of anything except what (the state) feels like giving you this year. Once again this session, they’re tearing apart what the districts have built.

“How do we work with legislators to help them understand? It’s hard to be optimistic. You get the feeling no one cares, no one listens, no one believes you.”

Rocksund said schools can expect larger class sizes and programs losses in the future. School District 6 is expecting a $400,000 shortfall for the 2011-2012 fiscal year.

“What does it take to make people notice how bad things are?” Rocksund asked. “If you cut sports, people would notice. People don’t pay much attention (otherwise). It’s disheartening.”

Superintendent Michael Nicosia expressed frustration at the current state funding system.

“As a school district, we don’t control the revenue we will receive,” he said. “We will be blamed for revenue shortfalls; it’s not the legislature that gets attacked, but you, me, the high school principal.”

Nicosia said he and business manager Dustin Zuffelato have built budgets on the premise that there will be no revenue increase over the next two years, which Nicosia said may be wishful thinking. The district is likely to see deficits, not flat lining.

Other budget-cutting proposals by the state include returning to a half-day kindergarten model and eliminating district flex funds. Lance Melton, the executive director of MTSBA, noted that schools may be forced to expend those funds — generally considered rainy day and emergency moneys — to avoid a raid on those funds during the 2011 legislative session.

Proposal 4 calls for a 10 percent reduction of basic and per Average Number Belonging (Montana’s enrollment formula) entitlements. ANB is a primary source of school funding. This proposal also directly contradicts aforementioned Columbia Falls v. State.

“Long story short, it’s tough times ahead,” Rocksund said.

In order to avoid such drastic cuts, Riley proposed that school districts need to better educate legislators on what schools need. Riley suggested the district set up public forums with House District 3 candidates Jerry O’Neil and Zac Perry to bring them up to speed.

“I suspect Jerry O’Neil considers himself well-informed,” Trustee Larry Wilson said. “Zac Perry is trying to learn. He’s out there talking to people. He’s a local boy — he graduated from here and he graduated from Notre Dame. He’s willing to listen and learn. I have no idea what his position is.”

Trustee Dean Chisholm countered that it takes more than influencing individual representatives.

“Every one of these funding bills has passed on a party line vote,” Chisholm said. “The party controls their votes. It always ends the same until we affect the party process.”

“We’re getting the message that people don’t want strong school systems,” Rocksund said. “If you cut $400,000, what do you have left? There comes a time that really good teachers and administrators isn’t enough.”

Barb Riley suggested that the legislature needs to start with a clean slate.

“When things are broken, we need to start fresh,” she said.