Chapter 7: Connecticut

While Connecticut has had a longstanding practice of supporting public education dating back to colonial times, it was not until the state constitution was amended in 1965 that this relationship was formalized as a primary responsibility of state government. According to the constitutional provision added in 1965:

Due to strong traditions of local control, Connecticut school districts were long funded primarily by local property taxes. Until the 1970s, the state’s sole support to local districts was a flat grant of $250 per pupil based on Average Daily Membership (ADM). In 1977, as the result of a legal challenge to Connecticut’s heavy reliance on the property tax, the state supreme court ruled in Horton v. Meskill² that the state’s financing mechanism for schools violated the education rights clause and the equal protection clause of the state constitution. The court also held that public education is a fundamental right.³ In anticipation of the court decision, the Connecticut General Assembly had enacted a Guaranteed Tax Base (GTB) plan in 1975 which distributed funds to local school districts through a system that rewarded local tax effort.⁴ However, delays and phased-in spending meant that the GTB was never fully implemented. Meanwhile, the flat grant system remained in place until 1985, fueling another legal challenge which resulted in adoption of the ‘Education Cost Sharing’ (ECS) plan in 1988 which was designed to equalize funding across school districts. The original formula included the following elements: a foundation, resident students, poverty weighting, mastery weighting, town wealth, and State Guaranteed Wealth Level (SWGL).⁵ The ECS formula was since modified twice; once in 1995, and again 2007. Continual capping and phased-in spending plans brought a renewed legal challenge in an adequacy case CCJEF v. Rell (2005).⁶ In 2016, the trial court declared the entire K–12 education system in violation of students’ constitutional right to adequate education and ordered the legislature to develop a plan within 180 days.⁷ On appeal, the state supreme court reversed the superior court’s decision and found that Connecticut does provide a minimally adequate education sufficient to satisfy the constitution. The court held: