It is not just a coincidence that the legislative task force to identify essential school services came up with a proposal that would cost an additional $130 million to $150 million. That’s roughly the amount General Purpose Aid to Education has been underfunded during this decade.

When legislators begin debating the size of the next school-funding package, they should keep this numerical confluence in mind because what it shows is that Maine at one time got school funding right. Legislators cannot return Maine to an equitable level of funding in a single year, but they can make a bold step toward dropping the gimmicks from the funding formula and returning the state to a fair system.

The best part of Bangor Superintendent James Doughty’s school-funding proposal announced this week is that it sets the terms of the debate where they belong. His call for an honest accounting of the state share of funding for kindergarten through grade 12 and for a three-year effort to restore a proper funding level — back to where the essential-services task force concludes it should be — enlarges on the recent funding proposal by Education Commissioner Duke Albanese.

But where the commissioner has political constraints, a superintendent such as Mr. Doughty has computer and textbook shortages, maintenance bills and funding restrictions that prevent his district from offering programs that would, for instance, help very young students catch up with their peers before they fall behind permanently. Funding shortages at the local level don’t look like state budget printouts; they look like kids without tools for learning and like leaking school roofs.

Maine school districts began falling behind at the start of the 1990 recession and, first, through lack of state money and, later, through budget gimmickry, they have never caught up. Mr. Doughty’s proposal would add $57 million a year for three years to General Purpose Aid to Education. It would return to an earlier version of the school-funding formula, before such south-shifting additions such as counting the average local income were factored in. It would raise to a reasonable level the per-pupil guarantee, which determines how much state funding needy districts will receive.

There is only a slim chance that a proposal as ambitious as this will make it through the Legislature. That chance depends entirely on public support. Already, the 25-member Penquis Superintendents Association has endorsed it, as has the funding committee of the Maine School Superintendents Association. But the plan needs wider support than this; it needs a public committed to excellent schools but tired of the state forcing the property tax to carry too much of the load.

It needs every school district that has lost money because of funding-formula reforms to demand the old formula be returned. It needs every resident tired of the legislative sleight of hand that merely pretends to fund schools to demand an end to the gimmicks.

The Legislature will avoid this issue as long as it can because it raises hard questions about other programs or tax relief. The Maine public can force lawmakers to pay attention, however, if enough people get behind Superintendent Doughty’s plan and demand fairness.