Duff, 041917 CTAGO, AGO 2017-3

Case DateApril 19, 2017
CourtConnecticut
The Honorable Bob Duff
AGO 2017-3
No. 2017-03
Connecticut Attorney General Opinions
Office of the Attorney General State of Connecticut
April 19, 2017
         The Honorable Bob Duff          Senate Majority Leader          Legislative Office Building          300 Capitol Avenue, Suite 3300          Hartford, CT 06106-1591          Dear Senator Duff:          You have asked whether certain potential changes to Connecticut's Education Cost Sharing ("ECS") formula would violate our state constitution. Specifically, you ask whether our constitution requires that the ECS formula measure a town's ability to raise property tax revenue "using a ratio of ninety percent property wealth and ten percent income wealth." We conclude that the Connecticut Supreme Court has never specifically required that or any other particular approach, but rather has articulated general standards for state educational funding as further described below.          Before discussing your specific question, it is necessary to provide some background regarding certain Supreme Court cases and the ECS formula.          In Morton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615 (1977) (Norton /), our Supreme Court ruled that the state's method of funding education was unconstitutional. At that time, the state provided a flat grant of $250 per pupil in state aid, and left the rest of the responsibility for funding local public education to each district to provide through local property taxes. The Court explained that by relying primarily on a local property tax base without regard to the disparity in the financial ability of the towns to finance an educational program, the state was failing to meet its constitutional duty to educate its children. Id. at 649.          In 1979, in response to Horlon I. the General Assembly adopted the original ECS funding formula. Following a subsequent constitutional challenge, the Court held that the formula was constitutional, and ordered further proceedings to determine whether legislative changes to the system after 1979 undermined the new system's constitutionality. Norton v. Meskill, 195 Conn. 24 (\9S5) (Norton III).          The ECS grant program created in response to Horton I has been the principal method by which the General Assembly appropriates funds to support local public elementary and secondary education. The original...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT