This research provides support for my testimony on August 12, 2024 before the Texas House Committee on Public Education on advancing educational opportunities in Texas.

Overview

Despite increases in public education expenditures with taxpayer money in Texas, student performance is flat or declining. Texas is falling behind thriving states that offer educational choice as part of the school choice revolution, in which more than ten states have or nearly have universal ESAs. 
​
Economist Milton Friedman, who championed school choice well before it became popular, famously said, "The only solution is to break the monopoly, introduce competition, and give the customers alternatives." Texas can follow this optimistic vision to improve student learning and outcomes, increase teacher pay, and advance parent empowerment from universal ESAs by passing the “Texas approach,” as said by Public Education Chairman Brad Buckley, in the next session. This approach should build on what has worked well in other states rather than starting from scratch to make it universal for every child now. 

Why Universal ESAs?

1. Students and Texas are Falling Behind

• While Texas has historically been a leader in many areas, we are now trailing behind 12 other states that have complete or near-universal school choice with ESAs. These states, including Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, West Virginia, and more, have recognized the power of school choice in driving educational improvement. If Texas does not act swiftly, we risk falling further behind as other states benefit from a competitive education system that empowers parents, students, and teachers. 
• The outcomes of standardized tests (STAAR and NAEP), though flawed in many ways, indicate that performance over time either stays the same or worsens.
  • Despite large increases in funding (see below), student performance is flat or declining, according to the Texas Education Agency’s (TEA) STAAR scores in Texas (see Table 1).
  • The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) scores show that only 24% of Texas 8th graders are at or above proficient for grade level in mathematics (the lowest since 2000) and 23% in reading (the lowest since at least 1999).
  • The current system is failing our students and placing an unnecessary financial burden on taxpayers. However, the ultimate accountability factor is parents, who should be in charge instead of politicians and unelected bureaucrats.

2. Excessive and Inefficient Funding of Public Education

• Regarding the total budget, Texas increased appropriations from major funding sources by a record amount in the last session. Unlike the LBB’s reporting in the Fiscal Size-Up, this results from my consistent two-year budget comparison of 2022-23 initial appropriations to 2024-25 initial appropriations. 
  • Comparing estimated/budgeted in 2022-23 to appropriated in 2024-25, as the LBB does, is informative but incomplete. The 2022-23 total amounts include initial appropriations in the General Appropriations Act in 2021, supplemental appropriations in 2023, and other expenditures, whereas the latter two amounts are yet to be available for 2024-25 and will likely increase. 
  • Table 2 shows general revenue funds increased by 21.2%, state funds by 32%, and all funds (including state and federal funds that are all taxpayer money) by 21.5% from the previous budget cycle, which are all historic increases. 
• Regarding public education, the Legislature increased taxpayer funding by $20.3 billion or 33.3% in state funds and by $20.7 billion or 28.6% in all funds (see Table 3). While $12.7 billion in state funds was used to provide new tax relief from school district property taxes, the state provided about $7 billion more to public education. 
  • Despite this historic budget increase for public education, the monopoly government school system remains riddled with inefficiencies, and the return on these expenditures is highly questionable. For example, less than 20% of classroom expenditures directly fund teachers. 
  • Specifically, the average of roughly $17,000 per student going into a classroom of 20 students is $340,000, but teachers receive less than 20% of it for a 10-month $60,000 salary, on average. The rest goes to the non-teaching administrative staff surge primarily to deal with federal, state, and local requirements, including taking standardized tests with questionable results because the ultimate accountability factor of a child’s education is parents. 

3. Public Support for School Choice and Fiscal Responsibility

• Public support for school choice is robust across multiple surveys. Also, consider the results of the Republican primary elections. The time to act is now. 
• The path forward should include the Texas Legislature passing a universal ESA bill next session, establishing universal ESAs for all Texas families. 
  • The approach should use what works well in other states to streamline and start the program quickly for every student. 
  • More taxpayer money should not be spent on public education unless outcomes improve, school district debt should be reduced, more money should go to teachers over administrators, and superintendent pay and other excesses should be changed.
  • Public schools would not get less funding unless they are not competitive and parents choose to send their kids elsewhere. Why would some assume public schools cannot compete and thus get less funding?
• The path forward should include a simplified school finance system based on ESAs funding public, private, home, co-op, charter, and other schooling options. 
  • Texas could move from spending about $17,000 for each of the 5.5 million students, or $93 billion per year, on public education today to a fully funded ESA model with $12,000 for each of the 6.3 million school-age kids, or $75 billion per year.
  • This improved school finance system could save Texans $18 billion annually. The excessive taxpayer money collected should be returned to taxpayers by reducing school district M&O property tax rates for a path to elimination. 

4. Overwhelming Evidence of Success

• The evidence favoring universal school choice is compelling. Studies consistently find outcomes improve when parents can choose the best educational environment for their children. Table 3 from the University of Arkansas shows how this includes improvements at public schools from competitive pressure. 

• Better Outcomes: Out of 18 academic publications then, 12 (67%) found all or some students had improved outcomes, four found no effects, and two found negative effects (based on a limited choice program in Louisiana–but the Louisiana Legislature passed universal school choice this year so should have improvements soon). 
• Better Teacher Pay: While public school districts employ about 90% of Texas teachers, teachers have little bargaining power under the current monopsony system. The introduction of ESAs would create a more competitive labor market, allowing teachers to negotiate better salaries and working conditions. ESAs could lead to an average salary increase of $14,000 per year more for teachers, with some seeing as much as $28,000 per year more.
• Better Economy: Research indicates that increasing school choice improves educational quality, reduces dropout rates, and improves labor market outcomes. School choice supports higher property values, spurs job creation, and provides better matches between students and their educational needs, leading to a more robust and adaptable workforce.

Conclusion

Texas must lead in the race for educational excellence. The evidence is clear: universal Education Savings Accounts will improve educational outcomes, increase economic opportunity, and provide the competitive edge that our state needs. Texas should pass a universal ESA bill so kids in Texas can access a high-quality education tailored to their unique needs. This is an educational reform and a commitment to Texas's future. We can fully fund students with ESAs, who can use them to attend public or other types of schooling, spend less money and pay lower taxes, and improve outcomes and teacher pay through universal school choice.

​
Vance Ginn, Ph.D., is a leading economist and advocate for free-market principles and fiscal conservatism, shaping policies across the U.S. through his work with 15 think tanks. As the founder and president of Ginn Economic Consulting and host of the Let People Prosper Show podcast, Dr. Ginn provides high-impact economic consulting and dives deep into pressing issues with top influencers. With experience as the associate director for economic policy at the White House’s Office of Management and Budget and chief economist at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, his insights are frequently featured in major media outlets. Residing with his family in Round Rock, Texas, Dr. Ginn champions policies promoting economic freedom and prosperity. Find out more about Dr. Ginn at vanceginn.com, subscribe to his newsletter at vanceginn.substack.com, and follow him on X.com at @vanceginn.

​​Introduction
Downtown Dallas has long been a hub of business activity, attracting companies with its vibrant urban environment and economic opportunities. However, there has been a troubling trend in recent years: businesses are increasingly leaving downtown for areas like Uptown Dallas, a Public Improvement District (PID) in Dallas just north of downtown, and surrounding communities. This exodus is driven by recent elevated crime rates and persistent homelessness issues, which undermine the quality of life and economic vitality in the heart of the city. To address these challenges, it is essential to adopt market-driven solutions that can effectively reduce homelessness and crime, ensuring that downtown Dallas remains an attractive location for businesses and residents.

Details about Dallas, Texas
Dallas has a rich history and a dynamic cultural scene. According to U.S. News & World Report, the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex is the fourth largest in the country, with over 8.1 million residents. Dallas offers diverse attractions, from world-class museums and performing arts venues to professional sports teams and a burgeoning food scene. The city is known for its friendly residents and a blend of Texas pride with cosmopolitan offerings.

However, the city faces significant challenges. Dallas has a higher cost of living than the national average, and housing prices have surged in recent years, making it less affordable for many residents. The median home price in Dallas is significantly higher than in many other parts of Texas, contributing to the economic strain on residents. These factors, combined with issues related to crime and homelessness, have impacted the city's overall attractiveness as a place to live and work.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Dallas has a population of 1.3 million and a median household income of $58,231. The poverty rate is 19.3%, which is higher than the national average. The city's population is diverse, with 42.3% identifying as Hispanic or Latino, 29.1% as White, 24.3% as Black or African American, and 3.6% as Asian. The city's demographics highlight the need for inclusive and effective policies to address its socio-economic challenges.

Overview of the Situation in Dallas
Dallas has faced significant challenges in managing crime and homelessness, particularly in its downtown area. The 2023 Community Survey conducted by the City of Dallas revealed that 75% of residents identified homelessness as a major problem, with 61% citing crime as a significant issue. Despite efforts to provide services and support for homeless individuals, the lack of market-driven, charitable pathways hindered by excessive government planning with insufficient shelter beds and resources for a necessary policy force has perpetuated the cycle of homelessness and associated criminal activities.

Crime and Homelessness Data
The Point-in-Time (PIT) count by Housing Forward reported 4,244 homeless individuals in Dallas and Collin counties in 2023, a slight decrease from previous years but still a substantial number. The Supreme Court case City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, which addresses the regulation of homeless encampments, underscores cities' legal and logistical challenges in managing homelessness. This case highlights the complexities of balancing humanitarian concerns with public safety and urban growth.
​
Crime rates in downtown Dallas have also been a concern. Reports indicate that prostitution and petty theft are rampant, contributing to a perception of insecurity among business owners and residents. Efforts by the Dallas Police Department to curb these issues have failed due to resource constraints and the sheer scale of the problem.
A spike in murders in 2023 has exacerbated concerns. While overall violent crime was down 8% in 2023, murders increased by 15%, with 32 more killings compared to the previous year, bringing the total to 246. This surge in violent crime highlights the urgent need for effective solutions to improve safety in the city.

​Impact of Supreme Court Decision
The upcoming Supreme Court decision in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson could have significant implications for Dallas's policies on homelessness. The case addresses whether cities can criminalize sleeping in public places with insufficient shelter beds. If the Court rules against such criminalization, Dallas may need to revise its approach to managing homeless encampments and focus more on providing adequate housing and support services.

This decision could force Dallas to increase investments in affordable housing and social services to comply with the new legal standards. It may also prompt the city to explore innovative, market-driven solutions to address homelessness more effectively. Daniel Roby from Austin Street Center noted that the lack of sufficient shelter beds is a critical issue, and a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs could highlight the need for more robust support systems for homeless individuals.

Businesses Leaving Downtown Dallas
The impact of crime and homelessness on downtown Dallas is evident in the number of businesses relocating to Uptown Dallas and other surrounding areas. The Uptown Public Improvement District (UPID), established in 1993 and renewed multiple times, includes about 2,181 properties, primarily business, office, and residential. Managed by Uptown Dallas Inc., UPID enhances public safety, builds and maintains public infrastructure, and improves common areas and pedestrian amenities. The current term lasts until December 31, 2026, with the annual budget and assessment rate requiring a public hearing and City Council approval. The UPID is a Dallas tax increment financing (TIF) zone that allows for part of the property taxes collected to be paid for improvements in the zone. TIFs are costly endeavors that centrally plan areas at taxpayers' expense instead of allowing the marketplace to work.

Notable companies such as Invesco, Goldman Sachs, Deloitte, and Bank of America have decided to move their offices out of downtown, citing better security, amenities, and business environments as key reasons for their decisions. While these businesses may be leaving for reduced crime and homelessness issues, they also seek privileged tax situations in places like Uptown at a high cost to taxpayers. TIFs and other tax privileges that pick winners and losers should be eliminated so businesses are on a level playing field and the cost of government spending is not redistributed to other taxpayers.

Invesco
Invesco plans to move into 58,464 square feet at The Union, a premier office and retail space in Uptown Dallas. Invesco has been in downtown Trammell Crow Center for over a decade. The move is driven by a need for a more secure and attractive business environment. The estimated cost to build the new office space is $1.5 million. Invesco's relocation is part of a broader trend of financial firms moving to Uptown.

Goldman Sachs
Goldman Sachs has been a fixture in downtown Dallas for many years. They plan to leave 300,000 square feet in the Trammell Crow Center for new offices under development in the nearby North End project, set to open in 2027. This move will significantly impact the occupancy rate of the Trammell Crow Center, potentially dropping it to 62% if no new tenants replace Invesco and Goldman Sachs.

Deloitte
Deloitte, another major financial services firm, has also relocated to Uptown, joining a growing list of companies seeking better security and amenities. Deloitte has maintained offices in downtown Dallas for several decades, contributing significantly to the local economy.

Bank of America
Bank of America is relocating about 1,000 workers from its iconic downtown skyscraper to a new office tower in Uptown. The move to the Parkside Uptown Tower, a 30-story building overlooking Klyde Warren Park, is driven by the need for a more modern, amenity-rich work environment. Bank of America's departure from downtown Dallas will leave a significant vacancy in the 72-story Bank of America Plaza, impacting local tax revenues and economic activity. The adopted total property tax bill for this building at 901 Main St, Dallas, Texas 75202, was $2.96 million.
Impact on Local Economy and Tax Revenue
If businesses leave the City of Dallas, their departure affects the immediate economic environment and has long-term fiscal implications. These businesses' property and sales taxes contribute substantially to the city's budget. A decrease in this revenue could lead to budget cuts in essential services or costly tax hikes, further exacerbating the issues of crime and homelessness.

Also, Walmart's downtown office closure, involving the relocation of over 1,200 employees, exemplifies the economic toll of these relocations. Walmart has been in downtown Dallas since the early 2000s. They have decided to consolidate their operations, asking employees to relocate to other U.S. markets, including its headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas. The departure of such a major employer will result in a substantial loss of local tax revenue and economic activity.
​
The estimated annual tax revenue losses below from the movement of specific businesses from downtown are derived from the typical contributions of these large businesses to the local economy. However, it should be noted that these businesses moving to Uptown will still be collected by the City of Dallas and other local governments but at a lower rate, given the TIF situation. For example, Invesco and Goldman Sachs, both significant financial institutions, contribute through property taxes and sales taxes. Walmart's substantial workforce and sales generate significant sales and property taxes by consumers and workers. Using conservative estimates, just these four businesses could provide $7.5 million less tax revenue for downtown Dallas annually. While this is a relatively small share of the City of Dallas’ $1.8 billion general fund budget for FY 2023-24, these revenue losses will continue to grow if these issues in the downtown area persist.

Comparisons with Other Cities
The situation in Dallas is not unique. Cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles have faced similar issues with crime and homelessness driving businesses away. For example, California has seen many businesses relocating to states with more favorable economic conditions, such as Texas, due to high costs and regulatory burdens. This trend underscores the importance of addressing underlying issues to retain businesses and ensure economic vitality.

Interestingly, despite Dallas's economic potential, it did not make the list of best places to live in the United States according to a recent ranking by U.S. News & World Report. In contrast, other Texas cities like Austin, McAllen, El Paso, Corpus Christi, Brownsville, San Antonio, Houston, Beaumont, and Killeen were all ranked among the top 150 cities to live in the U.S. This discrepancy highlights the need for Dallas to address its underlying issues to enhance its attractiveness and livability.

Economic Principle: Voting with Their Feet
Businesses and residents relocating due to unfavorable conditions is often called "voting with their feet." This concept, rooted in economic theory, suggests that individuals and businesses will move to areas that offer better opportunities, lower costs, and higher quality of life. When the cost of staying in a particular location—due to high taxes, crime, poor services, or other factors—becomes too high, people and businesses will relocate to more favorable environments.

As Ilya Somin explains in his article "Voting with Our Feet,” “People 'vote with their feet' by choosing which state or local government they wish to live under, thereby ensuring that states compete to attract residents by offering better services at lower costs." In the case of downtown Dallas, businesses are leaving because the cost of dealing with crime, homelessness, and outdated infrastructure outweighs the benefits of staying. This migration can create a negative feedback loop: as businesses leave, the local economy suffers, leading to reduced tax revenues and further cuts in public services, which in turn can exacerbate the very issues driving businesses away. Creating a more conducive environment for businesses through targeted, market-driven reforms is essential to break this cycle.

Market-Driven Solutions
To reverse the trend of businesses leaving downtown Dallas, it is crucial to implement market-driven solutions that address homelessness and crime without relying excessively on government intervention. Here are some recommended strategies:

1. Reduce Local Government Spending and Lower Property Taxes: The city can reduce property taxes by cutting unnecessary government spending, making downtown more attractive for businesses. Lower taxes can help retain and attract existing businesses, fostering economic growth.
2. Reduce Zoning Restrictions: Simplifying and reducing zoning regulations can encourage more development and investment in downtown Dallas. By allowing more flexibility in land use, the city can attract diverse businesses and create a more dynamic urban environment.
3. Find Market-Driven Ways to Reduce Homelessness and Crime:
   
   1. Community Policing: Enhance community policing through increased police presence and engagement initiatives. Businesses can invest in private security and surveillance systems, working with the police to deter criminal activities and create a safer environment.
4. Reduce the Costs of Doing Business and End Tax Increment Financing Zones and Tax Exemptions: Implement policies that lower the operational costs for all businesses without picking winners and losers. This can include eliminating tax incentives, streamlining permitting processes, and reducing regulatory burdens. By making it easier and cheaper to do business, Dallas can retain existing businesses and attract new investments.

Conclusion
The departure of businesses from downtown Dallas to areas like Uptown indicates the pressing issues of crime and homelessness that need to be addressed. By adopting market-driven solutions and fostering public-private partnerships, Dallas can create a more secure and supportive environment that attracts and retains businesses. It is essential to move beyond government-centric approaches and embrace innovative, market-based strategies to sustainably reduce homelessness and crime, ensuring downtown Dallas's long-term economic health and vibrancy.
​
References

• City of Dallas 2023 Community Survey
• Supreme Court ruling likely to affect Dallas’ policies on the homeless
• Invesco joins growing list of companies moving from downtown Dallas to Uptown
• Invesco could move to Uptown from iconic downtown Dallas tower
• Walmart Asks 1,266 Employees To Relocate As It Closes Downtown Dallas Office
• Harry Hines business owners meet with Dallas police over prostitution, crime concerns
• California Business Headquarters Now Leaving Twice As Fast, With No End In Sight
• The best places to live in the United States, according to a new ranking
• Dallas, Texas
• Murder Spikes in 2023 Dallas Year-End Crime Numbers
• Developer: Downtown Dallas needs new office space to attract business
• Hang your hat in Texas: State remains a leader in firm relocations
• Texas Dominates Nationally, Dallas‑Fort Worth Steps Up With 24 on 2023 Fortune 500 List
• U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts for Dallas, Texas
• Bank of America to relocate workers into new Uptown tower overlooking Klyde Warren Park

Originally published by American Energy Institute.

Originally published at Texans for Fiscal Responsibility.

Executive Summary

• Property taxes in Wyoming are unaffordable and make buying a home or starting a business more costly or outright impossible for many people. The surge in spending by local governments has resulted in increased property taxes, while the state government’s exorbitant expenditures have constrained the funds available to lower them.

 

• From 2000 to 2023, total property taxes increased by $1.7 billion (+316%), including increases of $136.6 million (+381%) by special purpose districts, $293.3 million (+321%) by counties, $1.2 billion (+309%) by school districts, and $30.3 million (+298%) by municipalities. These property taxes have grown substantially faster than increases in personal income (+206%) and far faster than the rate of population growth plus inflation (+91%) during this period. This results in unaffordable property taxes for most people.

 

• More recently, total property taxes increased much faster from 2021 to 2023, increasing by $912.3 million (+71%), 54% of the total increase since 2000. This total includes increases in school property taxes of $676.3 million (+73%), county property taxes of $161.6 million (+73%), special district taxes of $64.8 million (+60%), and municipal taxes of $9.6 million (+31%). In contrast, population growth plus inflation increased by +17%, and personal income grew by +9% during this period. Wyoming’s population growth was up 0.6%, and inflation was up 16.3% from 2021 to 2023. 

 

• From 2021 to 2023, inflation-adjusted personal income declined by 8%. Despite this loss in purchasing power, property taxes were up an average of 71%, proving to be a crushing, unsustainable burden. This burden also passes through in higher prices paid by housing and commercial property renters. The problem affects every person’s quality of life and ability to do business in Wyoming.

 

• Bold reforms are necessary to restrain government spending at the state and local levels and use surplus taxpayer money to reduce property taxes until they are zero. These are similar to what has been worked on in Texas, but Wyoming can be the leader in helping people stop paying rent to the government forever through property taxes and start owning property. 

Originally published at Kansas Policy Institute. 

​Kansas, like most states, has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. The 2025 Responsible Kansas Budget offers several ways that the state can limit its spending to pave the way for tax reform and economic growth in the future.

In June 2023, Kansas ended FY 2023 with collected tax revenues at $10.2 billion – a 4.1% or $402 million increase over the collected tax revenues of FY 2022.  According to the Kansas Legislative Research Department, even if Kansas had enacted a flat tax bill during its 2023 legislative session, the state would end FY 2028 with $2.7 billion in its ending balance and $1.8 billion in the Budget Stabilization Fund, totaling $4.5 billion in reserves.

At the same time, spending has grown massively over the last decade. According to the FY 2025 Governor’s Budget Report, the approved FY 2024 General Fund budget of $9.918 billion is 13.6% more than the approved 2023 budget. In FY 2020, the State Fund appropriations equaled $12.6 billion, but has ballooned into and after the COVID-19 pandemic to be $19 billion in FY 2023 and a base of $18.4 billion for FY 2024.

​If Kansas’s annual appropriations had grown at the rate of population growth plus inflation since FY 2005, State Fund appropriations would be $6.4 billion lower in FY 2024 than the actual base appropriations. This equates to a $46.6 billion cumulative difference from FY 2005 to FY 2024. What this number represents is higher taxes on Kansans, slower economic growth, and fewer opportunities for people to flourish.