Our Rural Schools Are Aching for a New Funding Formula

Our local schools are the heart of our communities. A public school is where Friday night basketball games bring neighbors together. It's where concerts, community meetings, and town celebrations happen. It's where children build friendships, discover their passions, and prepare for the future. They are much more than buildings where children learn to read and write.

I’m a parent. Several years ago, my children’s school faced devastating budget cuts. Teachers, and educational opportunities were threatened, particularly art and music programs where children find the joy of expression. 

I realized that staying on the sidelines wasn't an option. I talked to other parents, my neighbors, and my kids' teachers. We organized. We spoke up. Our efforts were successful and funding was  restored to our schools. That experience guided me to public office and inspired this campaign.

But while that victory mattered, it also revealed the larger problem: our state’s school funding system is not built for rural communities.

Across Franklin County and Western Massachusetts, enrollment has declined over the past two decades. Indeed, enrollment is down statewide. But state funding formulas assume that when rural enrollment drops, costs should fall as well. Anyone who has worked in a rural school knows that is not true. A district cannot simply shrink its way to financial stability.

Even the smallest schools need professional infrastructure – a principal, teachers, a nurse, counselors – regardless of the number of students. A school bus still needs to pick up the kids, whether there are 20 riders or 40. Utility costs don’t fall because enrollment does. Many of our costs are fixed and rising.

State aid has failed to keep up with our needs. Districts are forced to cut programs, the very programs that make schools attractive to families. The result is a painful cycle. As opportunities shrink, enrollment will fall even further as families choice into other districts.

Communities are then asked to make up the difference through local property taxes, even as rising costs already stretch many residents’ incomes. Our small towns and cities should not have to choose between quality public schools and basic municipal services.  For many of the communities across the district, schools make up more than 50% of the budget.

For too long, state policy has treated equality and equity as though they are the same thing. They're not. Providing every district with the same formula doesn't necessarily produce fair outcomes. In addition to declining enrollment, rural schools face unique challenges: aging facilities; greater transportation costs (bus routes can last more than an hour); fewer economies of scale; and a heavier reliance on residential property taxes. A funding system that ignores these realities is not equitable. It leaves rural communities way behind.

The Student Opportunity Act made important progress by investing more in schools with high concentrations of poverty and English learners. While that investment was certainly a welcome start, we also need to recognize that rural districts face structural challenges that the current formula doesn't address.

I want to work for rural communities to have:

-Updated, strengthened statewide rural school aid formulas.

-Fully funded regional transportation. 

-Resources to maintain safe buildings and support students' mental and physical health.

Every child, regardless of zip code, deserves access to a well-rounded public education. Every community deserves a funding system that supports its present needs and future growth.

Our students deserve the same opportunities as children anywhere else in Massachusetts.