This commentary is by Doug Racine of Richmond. He is a former Vermont lieutenant governor and secretary of the Agency of Human Services.Voter anger over property taxes has led to angst this winter in the Statehouse. A legislative leader recently urged fellow legislators and all Vermonters to discard “preconceived notions” about the issue. There seems to be a public consensus that our current education finance system is fundamentally flawed. Irretrievably broken. That something brand new is needed.Perhaps. But maybe the “consensus” is a preconceived notion to be discarded.Our education system — schools, educators, school boards — has worked well over the years, giving Vermont students some of the best outcomes in the country.It’s the education fund that is broken, not the K-12 education system. The education fund has been stretched beyond its original intent to include expenses not related to K-12 schools, as well as services needed by children struggling to meet the challenges of growing up today.The education fund was created by Acts 60/68 in response to the Supreme Court’s Brigham decision. It has provided all Vermont’s towns an equal chance to finance school spending. Property taxes have been adjusted to account for the incomes of most Vermonters.The education fund was designed to pay for the education of K-12 students. It was not intended to pay for programs outside the K-12 system, or unfunded state mandates, or the mental health needs of children growing up in turbulent times, or the full cost of school maintenance and construction, or the impacts of childhood poverty or the social costs of families ravaged by addiction.In “The Anxious Generation,” Jonathan Haidt presents compelling evidence of an acceleration of mental health issues caused in no small part by the smartphone. Revolutionary new ways of communicating for children and adolescents (and most adults), recreating, and interacting with others has produced unanticipated impacts, many positive but many negative and harmful. Then with Covid-19, the usual educational and social development of kids, especially teens, was disrupted. Learning suffered.  Students frequently need help. Anxiety and depression have become more common among adolescents and even younger children. Educators need help in dealing with the complexities of the unique individuals in their classrooms. Teachers are educators, but increasingly they are also called upon to be social workers, mental health counselors and just someone to talk to.The question is: Who pays to address the social and health needs of children? For a while, federal money helped — over $50 million for needed mental health services in schools. That money is now gone, but the need continues. The responsibility and costs have been shifted to schools, and the education fund, and the property tax.This expensive problem will not be fixed with a “foundation” plan with its larger class sizes, more private schools and boarded-up rural schools.State government, together with our local mental health centers and other community partners, has the responsibility to address the mental health needs of all our citizens, including our children. But the state government’s financial responsibility for children’s services has largely been shunted off to the schools.Mental health services should be a general government responsibility and should be paid from the general fund with its broad-based and more progressive taxes — just like physical health care.Statehouse discussion has largely focused on governance, financing and reducing spending. Less is being heard about our kids, their struggles and the quality of their education. The promise is better student outcomes at lower cost. How? Not clear.The governor has proposed using $70 million of general fund dollars to take the pressure off the property tax for one year. This is an opportunity to rebalance the education and general funds. The $70 million could be directed to the community mental health system to provide services to the schools and to start bringing all non-K-12 programs back to the general fund where they belong. And keep them there.This will not be easy.Every governor and every legislature since the passage of Acts 60/68 has used the property tax as a piggy bank to balance the budget “without raising taxes,” meaning broad-based taxes. What had been general fund programs and responsibilities were moved to the education fund. And property taxes went up. And up.There are solutions. Progressive taxes, especially on higher earners who have benefited most from Trump tax cuts. Prioritization within the general fund. More cost-effective integration of health and human services programs in our schools, as is being done with the community schools pilot program. More accountability from the executive branch for results. More accountability from the legislature for monitoring the executive branch.The Scott/Saunders proposal — tearing down a good education system and starting over — is a radical approach. It anticipates a $150 million cut in education spending. How will it be done? Closing rural elementary schools? That will hurt kids and their families and devastate communities. Larger class sizes? Less attention to individual students. Reduced staff? Fewer supports for students with special needs. No more local school boards? Less involvement from the public. More money for vouchers? Less for our public schools.That’s the alternative being considered. It started with a preconceived notion that education spending is out of control — when it is the education fund that needs fixing.Read the story on VTDigger here: Doug Racine: It’s the education fund that’s broken, not the education system. ...read more read less