NEWS lawsuit
McCleary v. State: Why You Should Read This
Posted on 08. Feb, 2010 by Mike.
The following is a guest blog post by Buzz Porter, an attorney at Dionne & Rorick, about the recent decision in McCleary v. State.
When a court issues a written opinion, most people (including their lawyers) immediately jump to the end of the decision to read the conclusion. Who won, who lost, and what’s the court ordering somebody to do? Just skip past all the pages of fact-finding and analysis and find the answer on the last page.
I’m sure that’s what most people did with Judge John Erlick’s decision last week in McCleary v. State, the broad-based challenge to the state’s funding of public schools under Article IX, § 1 of the state constitution. Especially with a document that is 103 pages long, and especially with a conclusion that is so clear, it is very tempting to simply read the result and set aside the rest of the document to read some other day–which will likely never come. The average parent, educator, advocate or policy maker is too busy trying to educate kids or close a $2.6 billion dollar hole in the state budget to read every line in a court opinion.
But let me suggest there is something worth reading between the 3-page table of contents at the beginning and the comprehensive conclusion on page 73 of the McCleary decision.
First, if you ever wanted to know why education is the preeminent, supreme, highest ranking, first priority duty of Washington state government (his words, not mine), then read Judge Erlick’s 10-page explanation of the special relationship between public education and Washington’s populist democracy. Washington has its own brand of democracy that requires more direct and better informed participation from its citizens than most other states. To sustain this type of democracy, public education is simply more important. Drawing upon sources as diverse as Horace Mann, Newt Gingrich and Sandra Day O’Connor, as well as at least ten prior court decisions, Judge Erlick finds this conclusion to be more than a philosophical or political statement–it’s embedded in our law.
Second, if you are a policy maker interested in ending the recent stream of school finance litigation, Judge Erlick’s decision very clearly identifies the fundamental flaw in the state’s current school funding scheme and explains how to fix it. Hidden beneath layers of complex formulas, our current system of funding of schools is built on a foundation of circular logic: full funding is whatever the legislature says it is. Without regard to whether that amount is ample. Without regard to whether that amount provides students with the tools to succeed. Without regard to whether that amount provides a program of basic education.
This flaw has not really been hiding for 32 years. You can find it audaciously stated in the landmark Basic Education Act of 1977 and in our legal code every year since then: “Basic education shall be considered to be fully funded by those amounts of dollars appropriated by the Legislature . . . .” RCW 28A.150.250. But basic education is not an amount of dollars–it is the skills and knowledge we want students to acquire. And to comply with the state constitution, the legislature must determine what it costs to provide that substantive content, and then fund it.
Finally, Judge Erlick’s decision is surprisingly important reading for anyone concerned with fairness and equity in public school finance. All school finance lawsuits in the last forty years have been labeled as either “adequacy” lawsuits (concerned with whether enough funding is provided) or “equity” lawsuits (concerned with whether the funding was distributed fairly). The McCleary case is primarily an “adequacy” lawsuit–it’s about the amount of funding provided. (Although in Washington, adequate is not good enough and “ample” is our constitutional standard.)
But Judge Erlick’s opinion demonstrates that the division between adequacy and equity cases is often artificial, and sometimes wrong–at least under the Washington Constitution. Article IX, §1 of our constitution requires more than the “ample provision” for education, it requires that the state make “ample provision for the education of all children.” And underlying almost all of Judge Erlick’s step-by-step decision making in the McCleary opinion are conclusions that the current system is not ample because it is not fair. The current system is not ample, he finds, because it does not provide sufficient opportunities for disadvantaged students to succeed. The current system is not ample, he finds, because there are disparities in the quality and functioning of school facilities within and between school districts. The current system is not ample, he finds, because some school districts rely on levies to attract high quality teachers–levies which are not passed or even submitted to the voters in other districts.
So, I recommend you assign yourself an extra credit project and read all 73 pages of Judge Erlick’s decision. It may not make the New York Times best-seller list, but it will educate you on what Newt Gingrich and Horace Mann have in common.
Buzz Porter is a 1990 magna cum laude graduate of Pomona College and a 1993 graduate of the University of Washington School of Law where he was an Executive Editor of the Washington Law Review. Prior to joining Dionne & Rorick in 1993, Buzz worked with elected officials in Seattle, California and Washington, D.C. Buzz is a past president of the Washington Council of School Attorneys.
Continue Reading
State House members urge governor not to appeal school-funding decision
Posted on 05. Feb, 2010 by Mike.
This week, King County Superior Court Judge John Erlick ruled that the state is failing to meet its “paramount duty” to amply provide for the education of all Washington students. This was a huge victory for Washington’s kids and for the plaintiffs, the Network for Excellence in Washington Schools (NEWS)–a coalition of parents, school districts, unions, and community-based organizations
Following the decision, Gov. Gregoire released a statement saying she “will be reviewing this decision to determine where we go from here.” The statement leaves open the possibility that Judge Erlick’s ruling may not be the final answer. An appeal by the state would send the case to the State Supreme Court.
Now, Rep. Ross Hunter (D-Medina) is sending a letter to Gov. Gregoire and Attorney General Rob McKenna urging them not to appeal McCleary vs. State of Washington. The letter is signed by 30 other state house members, including Rep. Skip Priest (R-Federal Way). The letter says:
The court did not tell us anything that we do not already know. The Legislature is not giving schools the money they need to provide the quality of education we want. The court has rather bluntly reminded us that we are required under our state’s constitution to make the education of our children our number one priority.
Click here to view the full letter.
Continue Reading
Huge victory for a million school kids!
Posted on 04. Feb, 2010 by Lisa.
This morning, King County Superior Court Judge John Erlick ruled that “state funding [for basic education] is not ample, it is not stable, and it is not dependable.”
This is a HUGE victory for a million Washington school kids!
It’s been over two years since an impressive group of parents, school districts, unions, and community-based organizations filed suit against the state of Washington for its failure to make ample provision for the education of all children, pursuant to the Washington State Constitution.
At issue in this case is the nagging question that has been burning in school communities for decades. Is Washington State fulfilling its constitutional duty to amply provide for the education of all Washington students?
Eight weeks of trial, 28 witnesses, 300 + exhibits, and 70 bulging large three-ring binders later, Judge John Erlick has issued his ruling in McCleary vs. State of Washington. Here’s the conclusion from his opinion:
Thirty years have passed since our State Supreme Court directed the State to provide stable and dependable funding for basic education. The State has made progress toward this Constitutional obligation, but remains out of compliance. State funding is not ample, it is not stable, and it is not dependable. Local school districts continue to rely on local levies and other non-State resources to supplement state funding for a basic program of education. Recent legislation addresses, but does not resolve, the perennial underfunding of basic education. Accordingly, the State is directed to determine the cost of amply providing for basic education and a basic program of education for all children resident in the State of Washington. The State must also comply with the Constitutional mandate to provide stable and dependable funding for such costs of basic education. Funding must be based as closely as reasonably practicable on the actual costs of providing such programs of basic education. The means of fulfilling this Constitutional mandate properly fall within the prerogative of the Legislature.
Is Judge Erlick’s ruling a final answer? Probably not. Most court watchers expect a case of this importance to end up in the Supreme Court. The appellate process would likely take another year or so.
In the past, court rulings have forced the State of Washington to step up to the school funding plate. Today’s ruling suggests that the Legislature is going to need to feel heat from other sources. With school funding levels at 43rd in the country, it is pretty clear that having the strongest constitutional language in the country is not helping the current generation of our school children. School districts all across Washington State are struggling to keep up their current services to kids and staffing levels, in the face of another wave of state budget cuts.
Therefore, it’s crucial that parents, educators and students continue to provide pressure on the Legislature. This session, besides protecting funding for education, advocates are also fighting to pass legislation that will make the state start complying with the judge’s ruling (House Bill 2776). The bill would begin implementation of the landmark education reform bill passed last year.
For more information:
- McCleary vs. State of Washington Opinion
- Seattle Times: King County judge rules that state isn’t providing ample money for schools
Continue Reading
NEWS decision expected in February
Posted on 20. Jan, 2010 by Mike.
Education advocates have been expecting a decision this week on the NEWS trial, however we just received this email from NEWS:
While this week marks the 90-day point following the end of the NEWS trial — the time period set for a ruling to be issued by King County Superior Court Judge John Erlick — NEWS has now learned that the court is considering the 90-day period to have begun following the submission of post-trial briefs by both NEWS and the State. Those briefs were submitted approximately one month after the end of the trial. The court has advised us to expect a ruling to be issued on or before Feb. 23. We will keep you posted on the exact ruling date and share the news with you on the court’s decision as soon as possible.
NEWS (Network for Excellent Schools in Washington) is a lawsuit filed by more than 70 school districts, education associations, and non-profit organizations alleging that the state is failing to meet its constitutional and paramount duty of making ample provision for the education of all children
Continue Reading
NEWS and the Federal Way lawsuit
Posted on 13. Nov, 2009 by Mike.
This week, the Washington Supreme Court rejected a lower court’s ruling that pay disparities between school districts violate the state Constitution. The folks at NEWS have posted information about how the NEWS lawsuit differs from the Federal Way lawsuit, and how the recent Supreme Court decision could impact the NEWS case. Here’s an excerpt below:
Although the Federal Way suit and recently completed NEWS trial both involve Article IX of the State Constitution, they deal with different issues. NEWS did not argue section 2 requires a uniform statewide salary figure. NEWS did not argue section 1 requires the State to fund all districts’ salaries at the same level. And, the NEWS case proceeded to a lengthy trial, with witnesses testifying about actual harms to actual people.
Click here for the full story.
Continue Reading
Update on the NEWS lawsuit
Posted on 21. Sep, 2009 by Lisa.
The petitioners (the 70 + school districts, education associations, and community organizations) have to wrap up their case this week.
Today, Judge Erlick heard testimony from James Kelly, Roberto Maestas, and Erin Jones. Tomorrow, Mary Jean Ryan will finish up. Nick Brossoit, Edmonds Superintendent, will then bat clean up.
Roberto told the court his story of growing up in a small village in New Mexico to being one of six Latino students at UW, to the occupation of Coleman School and founding of El Centro. The judge let in the picture of Roberto being hauled off to jail over the state’s objection.
Roberto spoke eloquently about José Martí Child Development Center which serves children aged 1-5 with a staff ratio of 1 to 8. When they got funding to increase the education and training of the center’s staff, they saw a huge boost in quality. When asked whether they tracked kids afterwards, he said he wished that they could have done so. They applied for a research grant, but didn’t get it. Roberto had no doubt that El Centro’s preschool program helped children be successful later on.
On cross examination, the state’s attorney asked Roberto if he knew of any country that had closed the achievement gap. He mentioned the UN report about the schools in that “tiny republic on the tip of Florida”. When she asked him about the value of another study, he quoted Gertrude Stein, “A rose is a rose is a rose. “ And then said, “A study is a study is a study. We have to get some action.”
Continue Reading
After 16 years, school funding advocates finally have their day in court.
Posted on 18. Sep, 2009 by Lisa.
After 16 years of waiting for the state to fund education reform, school funding advocates finally have their day in court.
More than 70 school districts, education associations, and non-profit organizations have filed a lawsuit alleging that the state is failing to meet its constitutional and paramount duty of making ample provision for the education of all children. The case name is McCleary vs. State of Washington, and it is also known as the NEWS (Network for Excellent Schools in Washington) lawsuit.1
Click here to learn how you can keep up to date with the NEWS lawsuit.
You don’t have to be a lawyer or school finance nerd to find the proceedings fascinating. As state officials, parents, superintendents, and experts answer questions posed by lawyers on both sides and the judge, you hear things like this:
“If you are serious about maximizing educational attainment, early learning can’t be ignored,” said Mary Jean Ryan, State Board of Education.
“The failure to fully fund K-12 education is the Achilles heel in every step forward the State has taken for decades in education reform,” said Representative Skip Priest.
If you are in the Seattle area, come watch some of the trial, even if it’s just for a few hours. You won’t be disappointed.
On Monday, James Kelly, CEO of the Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle, is expected to testify about the achievement gap. Mary Jean Ryan, chairperson of the State Board of Education, will resume her testimony on Tuesday.
When it’s the state’s turn to present evidence, we expect to hear the same tired old arguments from out-of-state experts about how money doesn’t matter. We know that that’s just plain wrong.
Click here to get daily trial updates.
We know our school finance system is broken. What’s on trial is our state’s commitment to a quality education system. The stakes couldn’t be higher. Now is the time to deliver on the promises of education reform, so tomorrow’s leaders can flourish.
Continue Reading
School funding advocates finally have their day in court
Posted on 18. Sep, 2009 by Lisa.
After 16 years of waiting for the state to fund education reform, school funding advocates finally have their day in court. The case name is McCleary vs. State of Washington, also known as the NEWS (Network for Excellent Schools in Washington) lawsuit.
Tune in however you can to the NEWS lawsuit. The stakes are high.
If you are in the Seattle area, come watch some of the trial, even if it’s just for a few hours. You won’t be disappointed.
Location
King County Superior Court
West 1060 (Tenth Floor)
The Honorable John Erlick
516 Third Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104
Trial Schedule
Monday through Thursday
9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
No trial on Sept 28th
No trial the week of October 5th
If you live outside the Seattle area, the next best thing to being in the court room and listening to the witnesses testify is to read the daily trial reports at
http://www.waschoolexcellence.org/daily_trial_updates.
If you sign up as a friend of NEWS, you will get them automatically.
Who’s testifying next:
On Monday, James Kelly, CEO of the Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle, is expected to testify about the achievement gap. Mary Jean Ryan, chairperson of the State Board of Education, will resume her testimony on Tuesday.
When it’s the state’s turn to present evidence, we expect to hear the same tired old arguments from out-of-state experts about how money doesn’t matter. We know that that’s just plain wrong.
