Last week I cast a vote to defeat a constitutional amendment on school funding. This constitutional amendment failed to obtain the necessary 60 percent vote of senators for passage by one vote. Because my vote was one of the deciding votes on whether this constitutional amendment would move on to the House, I want to share with you how I made this very serious decision.

In April I voted for a different constitutional amendment on school funding, one which was brought forward by Gov. John Lynch. After that vote, I explained why I believed that amendment was worthy of support. That amendment required the state to maintain an ongoing and substantial financial commitment to public schools - no less than 50 percent of the total statewide cost of an adequate education.

In stark contrast, the amendment considered by the Senate last week had no such guarantee. The most recent amendment defines the state's obligation simply as a "reasonable share of the state funds on a per pupil basis." The essential missing element? There is no definition of the word "reasonable." As such, it gave the Legislature total discretion as to how much or how little to contribute to the funding of local public schools. The amount of state funding for schools would be left to a constantly changing legislature, one whose priorities vary with the year and the leadership. Communities would need a crystal ball to try to predict what level of state funding they would receive from year to year, wreaking havoc for property taxpayers and school budgets.

While I am confident that Gov. Lynch and the current Legislature would provide a fair amount of state aid to local schools regardless of what is required by the state constitution, there is no guarantee that future legislatures and governors would do so. We need only look to our recent past before the 1997 Claremont II ruling, when the state funded only 10 percent of local public schools, to understand the dangers an amendment that contained no guarantee of a minimum level of state funding.

In addition, by lowering the judicial branch's level of review, last week's constitutional amendment effectively eliminated the protection provided to local property taxpayers and schools by court review of the constitutionality of school funding legislation. If a future legislature were to slash education funding, property taxpayers and students would have no recourse in the courts.

Many people on both sides of the aisle who voted for the constitutional amendment last week have worked hard to try to bring the education funding issue to a successful conclusion. While I believe their support for this amendment was sincere, I simply could not join them because of the failure of this amendment to include language setting a floor for the level of state funding for public schools.

The Legislature and governor will continue to work toward a school funding solution. The criteria for that solution must include a defined state obligation and targeted aid. Both must be accomplished without a state sales or income tax.

I have committed to you that I will vote against either tax, and Gov. Lynch has promised to veto them. Your elected officials must now work on a bipartisan basis to develop a solution that satisfies our constitutional obligation to reduce the disparities that exists in the education offered our children from community to community. You should expect no less.

(Sen. Kathy Sgambati is a Democrat from Tilton.)

By Sen. KATHY SGAMBATI

For the Monitor