If Oregon schools were expected to get a lot more money next year, Rudy Crew would receive standing ovations wherever he went. He would wax lyrical about equity and quality, and people would cheer his ideas.

But schools are likely to be poorer next year, not richer, based on early budget forecasts. This makes Crew’s job as chief education officer much harder: He tries to move the conversation beyond funding, but the conversation marches right back.

Crew took the hot seat in Portland last week during a forum at Reed College on the future of education in Oregon. Three state lawmakers, a parent advocate, a teachers union leader and Crew fielded questions from a crowd of mostly parents and educators.

Crew disarmed the room in his usual easy way, with quips about getting fired and inspirational words about schools that provide hope and opportunity. People clapped when he characterized Oregon classrooms as overcrowded, underfunded and overtested.

But when Crew spoke of closing the achievement gap mostly by repurposing existing resources, the crowd’s enthusiasm dimmed. And when he said Oregon schools should do a better job with the money they have, the room started to grouse like the British Parliament.

The general sentiment went something like this: You want us to do more with less? You want to starve my school of resources, then extol the virtues of personal relationships between children and their teachers, coaches and counselors? Are you kidding me? 
Crew pushed back, arguing that positive change is possible even when money is tight. The crowd pushed further, fueled by Oregon’s below-average per-student spending on K-12 education.

“We can do this all night,” Crew said at one point. “I’m not afraid to have this conversation.”

Things never got hostile, and if they had, Crew would have been fine. (He’s the former head of schools in New York and Miami, so he can take a lot more heat than Portland can muster.) But the evening provided a preview of the tensions to come in the legislative session — between a state with big goals and local schools with overwhelming money problems.

Gov. John Kitzhaber hired Crew last year to oversee Oregon education from preschool to college. Crew’s job is to help more children show up ready for kindergarten, help more teenagers succeed in college and at work, and improve the system for low-income, minority and immigrant students. He’s especially passionate about the third goal, calling Oregon’s yawning achievement gap an “unforgivable tragedy.”

Crew and the Oregon Education Investment Board — Kitzhaber’s advisory group — are searching for ways to make progress within the state’s budget reality of rising costs and limited new revenue. They’re looking at achievement compacts, teacher evaluations, professional development, you name it. Many of their ideas are good, and Crew is exceptionally talented at laying out a vision, even when he skimps on details.

But the prospect of more cuts and bigger class sizes next fall creates tremendous anxiety and drains much of the collective tolerance for change, risk and reform. Many teachers aren’t thrilled about rigorous evaluations, for example, when they face the further deterioration of their working conditions. Many parents don’t want to hear about high-level restructuring when they’re just trying to get their kid a diploma before the lights shut off altogether.

Fortunately, state lawmakers of both parties agree that Oregon classrooms are getting shortchanged. Many say they want to improve on Kitzhaber’s recommended budget for K-12 schools, which school officials say is not enough to cover a full school year or compensate for the massive increases in next year’s pension bills.

“There is a budget being put together as we speak,” state Sen. Diane Rosenbaum, D-Portland, assured the audience Thursday night.

I’m hoping the Legislature can get creative and cobble together a no-cuts budget for schools early in the session. A huge reinvestment may be unrealistic this year, but holding steady — and avoiding months of local school-budget limbo — is both doable and essential. Otherwise, Crew will make little progress on his most ambitious goals for making schools more joyful and functional again.

And he’ll learn the first rule of education in Oregon: When money is always disappearing, always uncertain, it’s hard to get people to think about anything else.