PROVIDENCE — A proposal to establish a statewide funding formula for schools estimates the state would have to contribute nearly $600 million more a year to “adequately and equitably” educate Rhode Island’s 147,800 public school students. Some of that additional money represents new spending and some includes costs now borne by local school districts that would be shifted to the state.

Several expensive items over which districts have no control — such as out-of-district busing costs, high-need special-education students who each cost more than $50,000 a year, and students in group homes — would be assumed by the state, saving cities and towns $40 million a year.

An advisory group charged by lawmakers to develop a school funding formula presented its final report at the State House last night. Members urged legislators to approve the concept of the formula before the General Assembly adjourns next month, even though key details of the plan would need to be developed over the next several months.

“I think it is imperative that there be a funding formula adopted this year while there is momentum and while the data is fresh,” said Marcia Reback, president of the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers and a member of the Foundation Aid Technical Advisory Group. “People in the schoolhouse are starving for resources. We have school closings, we have program cuts. It’s real and it’s palpable. We really need the revenue stream from the state.”

The proposal would more evenly split the burden of paying for schools between the state and local communities, gradually requiring the state to cover 44 percent over a period of several years.

Last year, the state paid about 38 percent of school costs statewide — or $645 million. Another 10 percent came from $181 million in federal financing. Property tax revenue from cities and towns made up the rest — more than $1 billion, or 52 percent. As in past years, in lieu of a formula, cities and towns simply received a 3-percent increase over the previous year. This year, cities and towns received about $690 million in school aid. The state also spent $133 million on other school-related costs, such as charter schools, construction aid and teacher retirement. The state also paid $27.6 million for three state-operated schools.

“We are sixth from the bottom nationally in state funding for education, and that is nothing to brag about,” Reback said. “I don’t think moving to 44 percent is a lot to ask.”

Mayors, town councils and school committees, as well as groups seeking property tax relief, have been clamoring for a statewide funding formula, saying the current system is too unpredictable and wreaks havoc with their local budgets.

The Joint Committee to Establish a Permanent Education Foundation Aid Formula was formed two years ago, and the group has since reviewed several studies.

“We are excited by the idea that Rhode Island is ready to adopt a predictable funding formula for education,” said Elizabeth Burke Bryant, executive director of Rhode Island Kids Count and chairwoman of the 14-member advisory group. Under this proposal, no district would lose state money, and wealthy communities would be guaranteed a minimum of 25 percent state funding, Bryant said.

Currently, Barrington and Narragansett receive just 7 percent of their school budgets from the state. East Greenwich and Little Compton receive 6 percent each and Block Island gets just 3 percent from the state.

Urban districts receive a far larger share from the state. Central Falls is the only district to make no contribution to schools from local property taxes; it receives 83 percent of its school funding from the state and 17 percent from federal sources. Woonsocket receives 66 percent, Pawtucket receives 61 percent and Providence receives 53 percent from the state.

The proposed formula also tries to address fairness, by adding extra money for the neediest students.

It assumes a per-pupil cost of $10,607. However, a special-education student would be counted as two students, because the formula estimates special-education students are twice as expensive to educate. Low income students and English language learners would also be “weighed” at higher amounts — 1.75 times $10,607, or $18,562 a year for a student receiving free lunch, and 1.25 times the base amount for a student receiving reduced lunch or learning English.

The “weights” would cost the equivalent of 41,200 additional students a year.

It is unclear what new tax or other revenue-generating mechanism would be introduced to cover the increased state share.

A separate Tax Relief Technical Advisory Group was assigned to that daunting task. But its chairman Gary Sasse, executive director of the Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council, said his group decided to wait and learn more details about the funding formula before exploring ways to pay for it. It is not clear when they will start their work.

Nevertheless, lawmakers on the joint committee said they plan to meet next week to draft a bill outlining the basic elements of an education funding formula they hope the General Assembly will pass. Specific aspects of the proposal, including the number of years the increased state share should be phased in, as well as the fairest way to gauge a community’s wealth, would be ironed out over the next six months, said Rep. Edith H. Ajello, D-Providence, co-chairwoman of the joint committee.

“I would hope that the General Assembly can approve a formula to guide the governor in his recommendation for education funding in fiscal year 2009,” Ajello said. “There are many refinements that need to happen and the funding change should be phased in. But we need to start working toward allowing the state to develop alternative funding streams for education.”

jjordan@projo.com