Litigation Update: Appeal in Maryland and Proceedings
in North Carolina
Baltimore City
Bradford
v. Maryland State Board of Education has moved
to the Maryland Court of Appeals, the state’s
highest court. The state Board of Education voted in
August to appeal the ruling of Circuit Court Judge Joseph
H.H. Kaplan, after he found the state’s funding
of Baltimore City schools was still in violation of
the Maryland Constitution, which requires that the state
provide all children with a “thorough and efficient”
education. This ruling followed the court’s initial
ruling, which led to the design and implementation of
a new funding program in 2002. The court had retained
jurisdiction over the case, which allowed the plaintiffs
to bring the issue back to court after the state and
city handling of budget deficits derailed the new funding
system.
As reported in the Baltimore Sun, the state
has argued that the City of Baltimore, and not the
State of Maryland, is responsible for decreases in
school spending, while the ACLU
of Maryland, which is representing the plaintiffs
contends that the state has miscalculated and misconstrued
increases in state aid. The state also rejects Judge
Kaplan’s order that the state immediately provide
$30 million in new money to the school system, arguing
that setting spending levels is the responsibility
of the legislature. Many advocacy groups, including
the
Campaign
for Fiscal Equity, the National
School Boards Association, the Rural
School and Community Trust, and the Education
Law Center, have filed an amicus
brief in
support of the plaintiffs, noting that numerous
state judges have imposed specific, and higher,
funding levels after a state has failed to comply
with a court order to implement a constitutionally
sound finance system.
North Carolina
Wake County Superior Court Judge Howard Manning, Jr.,
has turned the focus of the Leandro
v. State lawsuit to the current programs and
further needs of individual school districts. The Leandro
case has been ongoing since 1997, when the state’s
supreme court determined the plaintiffs’ adequacy
claims were legitimate and remanded the case for trial.
The court bi-furcated the urban and rural claims for
trial and heard evidence on the rural districts first,
in Hoke County v. State. Recently, the state
supreme court affirmed the trial court’s ruling
in Hoke County
with strong language in favor of the plaintiffs. The
urban districts are now under review by Judge Manning.
The judge is trying to determine whether the resources
provided to these districts, and the programs implemented
by them, provide the “sound, basic education”
mandated by the state constitution.
The latest series of hearings in the case has centered
around high school academics. Judge Manning heard from
several successful school districts, as well as from
Charlotte-Mecklenburg, a district that has struggled
to reach state standards. Judge Manning has not made
clear what the next step in this long-running proceeding
will be.
South Carolina
The parties in Abbeville
v. State, South Carolina’s school funding
adequacy case completed the trial and anticipate the
court’s decision in June. As the legal proceedings
have progressed, advocates, including clergy, business
leaders, parents and educators, have become actively
involved in pressuring the state to improve the inadequate
education being provided to the plaintiffs in the predominantly
poor, black counties along the I-95 corridor.
Prepared by Nelly Ward, March 15, 2005 |
