Give Gov. Angus King credit for one thing in the school funding debate: at least he is upfront about the fact that his latest plan to provide more to schools while reducing the sales tax is poor fiscal planning. He knows, the entire Legislature knows, Maine cannot responsibly do both.

So which is it: a half penny cut in the sales tax or real funding for education and a property-tax break?

And, no, school funding and the sales-tax reduction do not have to be in conflict. Maine, as the governor proposed, could simply pretend money that appears as one-time revenue is actually ongoing funding, and then hope that more shows up next year.

Or the Legislature could face reality and face up to its obligations by dedicating increased funding for schools from ongoing revenues.

This plan, sponsored by Senate President Mark Lawrence, sends $60 million generated by the half penny on the sales tax to education until the state comes within shouting distance of the level of funding it should have been putting in by statute for the last 15 years. Even if the trigger to lower the sales tax is not activated, the direction of the funding is clear: education is the priority. A combination of state revenue surplus, rising property taxes and a new school-funding formula make this the best year Maine will see for some time to provide school districts with the money due them and give property taxpayers the break they deserve.

Gov. King, instead, wants to reduce the sales tax by a half penny as a symbolic gesture. This is expensive symbolism, particularly in rural Maine, as legislators are fully aware.

Sen. Paul Davis Sr. of Piscataquis, for instance, could hardly fail to note that a school district in his area, SAD 41 in Milo, earlier this month was forced to address a growing budget deficit by cutting teaching positions in high school English, French, math and social studies. More cuts are expected in the near future.

Under the plan to use the $60 million generated annually by the half penny, SAD 41 would see an immediate increase in state funding of $186,000. Under the governor’s plan, the residents of Milo could pool their saved half pennies to help pay for a “Closed” sign on the front door of their high school.

Sen. Rick Bennett of Norway could return to his hometown and tell constituents that he supported a symbolic gesture. Or he could tell them he stood up for the principle of equitable school funding and got them a property-tax cut of $860,000.

Sen. Leo Kieffer of Caribou could defend the half-penny cut to the bitter end, or he could go back and read his city manager’s budget letter for this year. “This indeed is a very bleak forecast,” City Manager Richard Mattila wrote in January. “… As a growing portion of the cost of education is placed on the property tax, we must strive to provide a balance between education and other municipal services and not let the quality of these other services fall through the cracks, in the endeavor to cut costs.” Caribou’s balance would be helped by $265,000 under the Lawrence plan.

Rep. Joseph Bruno of Raymond could explain the trickle-down theory of the half-penny cut or drop the symbolism and fight for a bill that would send $93,000 against property taxes in his town.

Rep. Roderick Carr of Lincoln could poll his constituents to find out whether sales-tax symbolism was worth the $259,000 they would give up if the half penny is cut.

For Rep. Richard Campbell, representing Brewer, this is a $577,000 question.

And so on throughout Maine.

This is not merely an appeal to parochialism; it is an accounting of how badly the Legislature has cheated towns during the last decade. Now is the time for state government to turn the money back to the locals. The argument that towns cannot be trusted to decide for themselves whether to spend on schools, the tax break or a combination is not only wrong, it is insulting. The disparities in school funding has been brought on by the state, and it is the state’s duty to fix it.

Republicans have talked about having it all: money for schools and a cut in the sales tax. But they have yet to propose a school-funding figure that is both sustainable and big enough to give property taxpayers a break. Now is their opportunity to cut taxes, increase local control of funding and help education statewide.

To individual residents, the half penny is small change. Cutting it will make no difference in anyone’s life. But, taken together for schools, targeted to where it is needed most, sent consistently, year after year, that money will decide whether a school stays open or is forced to close. It will determine whether schools can offer college-track courses, whether their students will be challenged or left without the resources to succeed.

The sales-tax cut is a symbol, all right. But not in the way the governor intended.