Amendment A threatens public school funding by removing a mandate in Utah’s constitution that earmarks income tax revenues for K-12 public education, higher education and disability services. Amendment A does include a statutory framework for funding public education and a subsequent bill with a sunset provision (H.B. 394) will go into effect. However, by removing the mandate, Amendment A gives the Legislature the power to spend income taxes for state budgetary needs and services other than public education. The math doesn’t compute.

Despite recent increased investment in public education, the proportion of the state’s income tax revenue allocated to public schools has actually decreased and schools are still not fully funded. The Utah Education Association, an opponent of Amendment A, requested a 12% increase in the weighted pupil unit spending. The Legislature only approved 5%, of which 3.8% was an adjustment for inflation. Utah ranks lowest among states in WPU spending. The average Utah educator makes less than the minimum living wage and school meal debt topped $2.5 million. Additionally, local school districts are relying on one-time funding sources to preserve important programs and are supplementing budgets by increasing property taxes.

Proponents argue that removal of the constitutional mandate will give the state budgetary “flexibility.” However, that flexibility will include permission to use a share of our income taxes on other pet projects, slush funds and state needs including, but not limited to, transportation. The state can also use our income taxes to appropriate more funding to the school voucher program. That program gives families $8,000 to fund private school tuition or to make unregulated home-schooling expenditures for supplies, equipment and activities such as snorkeling, trampolines, zoo memberships and 3D printers. Ten thousand children were awarded a voucher in 2024 and over 17,000 are on the waitlist; organizations are actively recruiting more families to apply. Expect our Legislature to request more funding, as it requested $150 million last session. If the state awards vouchers to 30,000 or more applicants next year, the cost could surpass $300 million. Those monies will come from the share of income taxes currently allocated to K-12 public education, higher education or disability services.

Consider income tax revenues as a chocolate bar. As is, the state cuts this chocolate bar into three pieces, with a large piece given to K-12 public education. If voters approve Amendment A, we will need to cut this same bar into more pieces. Expect the Legislature to cut a larger chunk for vouchers and for any other need it views as “urgent.” In turn, the pieces for K-12, higher education and disability services funding will shrink.

Amendment A will not create the “budget flexibility” we need to invest more in the future of our children’s education. If other state needs and voucher expenses take away from K-12 funding appropriations and limit our ability to meet the budgetary needs of our public schools, local school districts will have to rely on increasing property taxes. Given the Legislature’s consistent push to reduce income tax rates, it is unrealistic to expect that the state will have enough of those tax revenues to increase public education funding, award more vouchers and meet other unspecified state needs.

The Utah Constitution currently protects our income taxes from wasteful spending and politicians’ pet projects, clearly dedicating it to public education needs. Let’s keep it that way. The Utah Legislature can address budget flexibility via other mechanisms. Prioritize public education funding by saying “no way” to Amendment A.

Kevin M. Korous is a researcher, writer and statistician. He received his Ph.D. in family and human development. He is a candidate for Granite School Board Precinct 2.