Mike Graner, superintendent of the Groton Public Schools, and The Day were right on the money when they called attention to the funding problems that accompany having students attend magnet schools in the editorial, "Holistic approach to fund magnet schools." Several different issues accompany the loss of dollars that Dr. Graner speaks to so eloquently.

The magnet school funding process has simply brought into focus what people have known for a long time. Funding schools primarily with local property taxes is fundamentally flawed. It creates a system of "haves" and "have nots."

I don't think that it's reasonable or appropriate to discuss the approach to funding magnet schools without seeing magnet schools in the context in which they have emerged.

Why is it that students choose to attend magnet schools? For many years, the unspoken perception of many in southeastern Connecticut was that the New London Public Schools were unsafe and of poor academic quality. In fact, it was well known that staff in Pfizer relocation services advised employees to live in any community but New London if they had children. There is also no doubt that this perception was connected in many people's minds to New London's being a majority minority school system in which the majority of its student population (more than 80 percent) come from families classified as low income.

So, why has this changed? Why is it that New London's student population has increased by more than 400 students over the past three years? Students tell us that they like coming to New London because "they can be themselves … they are accepted for who they are." Students like the sense of community that has been created at schools like the Science and Technology Magnet School of Southeastern Connecticut in New London.

There should also be no doubt that the recognition given to New London by Connecticut's commissioner of education for improving student achievement and U.S. News & World Report's rating of New London High School as one of the best in the country have made a major difference.

The fundamental tenet of magnet schools nationwide has two facets. Parents will only send their children to magnet schools if they think that they are safe and that what is at the end of the bus ride is worth the trip. Clearly, this is happening in New London and at schools like the Marine Science Magnet School in Groton.

Why are there funding issues with magnet schools? Magnet schools were originally designed as a tool to desegregate public schools. In Connecticut, the origin is the Sheff v. O'Neill state Supreme Court case. The funding structure under Sheff was set up to encourage school districts to allow students to attend schools outside of their home districts and to adequately fund innovative programs that would attract students to get on the bus and encourage parents to allow their children to go.

More recently, this funding structure has come under even more scrutiny as advocates of charter schools and others say that the money should follow the student.

If the student moves, the money should move.

However, the problem is not just with inequities with magnet versus regular school funding, as Dr. Graner speaks to so clearly. The core of the problem is with both sides of Connecticut's school funding formulas, raising revenue and distributing funds. Someday, as many states do, Connecticut will need to address the fact that property taxes cannot be the primary basis of funding schools. There must be a more equitable mix of income, sales and property taxes (the major sources of revenue in all states) to support schools and other public services like police, fire and public works.

Next, the state will need to comprehensively address the school funding issues raised by CCJEF v. Rell, the Connecticut State Supreme Court decision speaking to equity and adequacy in the state's funding of public education. The core questions here are: What are the educational services to which all children are entitled and what is the cost per student? What is the appropriate balance between state and local funding of these services?

Mike Graner has shown real courage in raising the issues of choice and school funding publicly. School funding, adequacy and equity are statewide issues in Connecticut. School districts under the state's Constitution are agencies of the state. It will take political courage to take the next steps.

Nicholas A. Fischer was formerly the superintendent of schools for New London and remains a resident there.