| Seattle Times
Published: January 5, 2007
Lawsuit aims to force state to boost money
for education
By ALEX FRYER
School-district officials, union leaders and civic
activists are poised to file the most sweeping lawsuit
against the state of Washington over education spending
in three decades.
The parties will meet today to discuss plans for the
suit, which is expected to be filed next week. It will
ask a court to define basic education and rule whether
legislators have abided by the state constitution, which
calls for the state to make education its "paramount
duty."
The suit will also ask a judge to order the state to
increase funding, although it won't seek a specific
amount.
While the Federal Way School District filed its own,
similar lawsuit in November, the group backing the new
effort boasts some of the biggest players in the state
education system.
Leading the litigation is the 2-year-old Network for
Excellence in Washington Schools, a group of nine districts
that includes Seattle, Bellevue and Snohomish. The Washington
Education Association — the state's largest teachers
union — along with the Urban League of Metropolitan
Seattle and the League of Women Voters are also plaintiffs,
and additional districts are expected to join during
today's meeting.
A Census Bureau report last year ranked Washington
among the bottom third of states in per-student spending.
Washington school districts rely heavily on state money:
In Seattle, for example, state dollars account for about
58 percent of the district's operating revenue.
The lawsuit would come at a politically delicate time.
The Legislature convenes Monday, and Gov. Christine
Gregoire recently announced a two-year budget that included
$12.3 billion for K-12 education, roughly 40 percent
of her proposed general fund.
Members of the network said they supported the governor's
education agenda, but her effort, called "Washington
Learns," wasn't enough to resolve long-standing
complaints that state schools lack money.
Last month, the group voted to proceed with a lawsuit.
While legal action could still be called off, the meeting
today at WEA headquarters in Federal Way will likely
focus on getting more districts on board and making
sure the members present a united platform when the
suit is filed, said Mike Blair, superintendent of Chimacum
School District in Jefferson County and leader of the
network.
On Thursday, the network activated a new Web site.
advertising
Seattle schools Superintendent Raj Manhas said going
to court presented little risk.
"Any lawsuit creates feelings of 'Why can't we
figure this out?' " he said. "If this pressure
helps solve this problem of public education, then any
downside this lawsuit has won't be too great."
Around the country, 45 states have experienced
similar lawsuits. In most cases filed since the 1980s,
the plaintiffs won, and the state government was forced
by court order to do something about education, said
Molly Hunter, managing director of the National Access
Network at Columbia University's Teachers College in
New York.
The lawsuits are fairly similar, alleging that
educational funding is inadequate and violates guarantees
in state constitutions. Washington put even greater
emphasis on education than many other states by declaring
it the state's "paramount duty," Hunter said.
One reason states often lose such lawsuits can be tied
to educational standards established by the states and
high-stakes tests such as the Washington Assessment
of Student Learning. Such standards generate lots of
data about test scores and academic achievement that
can later be used in court.
Some cases take weeks in court and, if plaintiffs win,
the legislative remedy can come quickly. In other cases,
legal wrangling drags on with governors and legislators
arguing with judges over how much of their budget should
be devoted to education.
Seattle's experience with such lawsuits began in 1976,
when city voters rejected two levies, and the district
was forced to slash expenses and lay off teachers. To
resolve its money troubles, the district filed a lawsuit
citing the same "paramount duty" clause in
the state constitution.
A judge agreed, saying districts were too dependent
on local levies. The state was forced to pick up a greater
share of school-district budgets, but there was a downside:
The Legislature capped district levies, so Seattle could
no longer tap its big tax base as needed. Sales-tax
dollars from local skyscrapers and shopping centers
were siphoned away to fund poorer parts of the state.
"We won that lawsuit, but Seattle lost,"
said David Moberly, who was Seattle's superintendent
at the time and now lives part-time in Palm Desert,
Calif. "For the Seattle School District, it was
a bummer."
The situation may be different now, but there are still
pitfalls, he said, arguing that court control over government
spending is tricky. Moberly said the state balances
too many competing responsibilities and economic uncertainties
to mandate multibillion-dollar spending on any one thing.
"You got a surplus now, but economies go up and
down," he said. "You are going to superimpose
on the Legislature that you have to spend X amount of
dollars on education — they are going to cut from
highways and social services."
Lars Erickson, a Gregoire spokesman, said the Governor's
Office does not comment on pending litigation. In general,
though, lawmakers do not support efforts that seek to
transfer budget writing from government to the courts.
Blair, the network's leader, hoped to reassure the
political establishment that they all want the same
thing.
"We're not looking to make history. We're not
trying to embarrass anybody," Blair said. "We're
just looking to help some kids."
Copyright 2007 The Seattle Times Company |