VICTOR JOECKS: Why more money won’t improve education in Nevada

There’s one issue where Gov.-elect Aaron Ford’s habit of flip-flopping would be useful — education funding.

Next year, Ford will present his proposed budget. One of the biggest things to watch is education funding. During the campaign, Ford said he supported ensuring “Nevada’s per pupil education funding meets or exceeds the national average.” Doing so is going to cost a lot of money.

The most heated political argument over that goal will likely be how to pay for it. Ford could get some money by rolling back the data center tax breaks he once championed. But reaching that level will take billions of dollars over Nevada’s two-year budget cycle. Nevada’s Commission on School Funding has suggested increasing property taxes or the sales tax. It would be hard to square that with promises of affordability.

This discussion assumes it would be helpful to increase education spending. That’s a natural assumption. When you shop, better items usefully cost more. I buy cheap hand soap in bulk at Costco. My beautiful wife prefers the foamy, nice-smelling soap from Bath and Body Works, whose cost approaches the GDP of a small country. We don’t disagree about which soap is better. The only question is over price.

But that isn’t what public education is like. More money for the Clark County School District doesn’t buy parents a different school district. Public schools don’t have higher test scores on sale for just $600 million a year. You can’t buy upgrades for a teacher like you can for a video game character.

Here’s a useful question when thinking about a policy proposal: What happens next? If Nevada gives more money to a school district, what happens next?

In this case, district officials can’t spend it as they would like. The vast majority of district spending goes to pay for the salaries and benefits of district employees. This year, the district said its average teacher receives almost $130,000 in total compensation. That includes an average salary of just under $85,000.

Superintendent Jhone Ebert can’t unilaterally determine teacher pay. She has to bargain with the district’s various employee groups. If the district can’t reach an agreement with a union, the dispute goes to arbitration. The first thing the arbitrator looks at is the school district’s financial ability to pay for raises. Ebert is in an even worse spot than past superintendents. Last year, Gov. Joe Lombardo signed a bill that legalized teachers conducting rolling sickouts during contract disputes.

Put this all together. More money for education in Nevada won’t buy a better product. It will result in paying the same people more to do the same thing in the same place.

You don’t have to take my word for it. Here’s another good question: Has this been tried before?

Yes, in 2023, Lombardo and the Legislature approved a record-setting increase in education funding. It led to higher teacher pay, but not much change in student achievement.

You can’t fix a broken system by dumping money into it. Barring an unexpected flip-flop, Ford looks prepared to do exactly that.

Victor Joecks’ column appears in the Opinion section each Sunday, Wednesday and Friday. Contact him at [email protected] or 702-383-4698. Follow @victorjoecks on X.