Ducey is ruining his exit

Holding a special session to lift the school spending cap hostage to other things is shabby all around.

Gov. Doug Ducey had an opportunity not every politician gets: to leave on a high note. Ducey, however, is ruining his exit by holding an increase in the Aggregate Expenditure Limit for district schools hostage to other things, rather than doing everything he can to get it lifted before turning over the keys to Katie Hobbs.

Arizona and Arizona state government have done well during Ducey’s tenure. The state’s economy has regained its position as one of the nation’s fastest growing. State government went from being broke to swimming in cash. For the most part, state government agencies were competently and effectively managed.

Nationally, Ducey is in the midst of a victory lap in conservative circles, for having been a successful conservative reformer, principally due to the adoption of universal vouchers and the reduction of the state’s top marginal individual income tax rate to 2.5%.  

Even the election can be seen, from one perspective, as a vindication for Ducey. He’s been reviled and denounced by Donald Trump and the MAGA movement. But the key lesson from the 2022 election is that Ducey is the kind of Republican who can still win in Arizona, while his critics within the party can’t. 

There is something else that should be a part of Ducey’s legacy, but public opinion hasn’t caught up to it: there was a massive increase in funding for K-12 education during his tenure. 

When Ducey was elected, state government was still feeling the aftershocks of the recession precipitated by the bursting of the housing bubble. His first budget was an austerity one, including additional cuts to education.

Since then, there has been a steady and substantial increase in funding. In all, state and local per-pupil funding for K-12 education in Arizona, adjusted for inflation, increased by 22 percent during Ducey’s two terms in office.

He hasn’t gotten the credit he deserves for this in part because some of it was reactive. There was a court case trending against the state regarding some missed inflation funding during the recession. And there was a teachers’ strike. Ducey’s actions have been discredited in some quarters as just a reluctant yielding to mounting political pressure. But there is more to the story than that. 

One of the funding streams cut during the recession was something called District Additional Assistance. It began life as a dedicated source of revenue for what was designated soft capital, things such as books, desks, computers. That changed, and it became just another state funding source that district schools could use for anything.

District Additional Assistance was cut more severely than a comparable program for charter schools.  The cut amounted to hundreds of millions of dollars. 

Ducey made an early priority of a phased-in restoration of District Additional Assistance, which has been completed. This generated no fanfare. Only school finance wonks were aware of its existence and importance. 

Nor did it advance a school choice agenda. In fact, just the opposite. While Charter Additional Assistance was also restored, traditional district schools disproportionately benefited from making restoration of the Additional Assistance funding stream a priority. It exacerbated the funding advantage district schools have over charter schools.

Ducey deserves more credit than he has gotten for the significant increase in K-12 funding that occurred during his tenure. However, if that were part of Ducey’s perceived legacy, he would be in the process of tarnishing it.

There is a constitutional limit on what school districts in the aggregate can spend, based upon increases in inflation and student count. The limit only applies to district schools. Charter schools weren’t around when it was adopted by voters in 1980. 

What has been appropriated for district schools would exceed the limit by a considerable amount. The legislature can approve exceedances by a two-thirds vote. If the legislature fails to do that, districts will have to massively cut spending in their last quarter.

There weren’t the Republican votes to pass this year’s budget, so Democrats made up the difference. According to the Democrats, and some Republicans, Ducey agreed to call a special session to lift the Aggregate Expenditure Limit so that the money could be spent. I obviously wasn’t in the room, but that’s a believable claim. Why else would Democrats supply the votes the Republicans couldn’t muster?

I wrote at the time that it was crazy to approve the appropriation without simultaneously authorizing its expenditure by lifting the constitutional cap. But Democrats apparently trusted Ducey to get that done later. Trusting Ducey turned out to be a mistake. 

It is irresponsible to ask school districts to go through most of a budget year not knowing for sure what they have to spend. There was urgency to calling the promised special session and lifting the cap.

Nevertheless, Ducey has been evasive about calling one. And now there are reports that he is demanding other subjects be addressed in any special session, such as increasing the voucher amount, election reform, and border security. All of which will put the teeth of Democrats on edge.

This is shabby political treatment of the Democrats who supplied the votes Ducey couldn’t wrangle from Republicans. And it is irresponsibly shabby treatment of the school districts, who, given the composition of the incoming Legislature, now have to face a realistic prospect that the cap might not get lifted after all.

If Ducey had thrown his all into getting a special session to lift the cap done before turning out the lights, he would have a strong case to add school funding to his legacy. By holding it hostage to other things, he is making the point for the doubters, and may end up leaving on a very sour note.

Reach Robb at robtrobb.com.