| Stateline.org
Published: February 9, 2007
N.D. could solve ed funding feud out of court
By PAULINE VU
Like custody battles in divorces, messy state disputes
over school funding regularly land in court. North Dakota
is one state trying to break the chain.
North Dakota’s Legislature this session will
make or break an experiment by Gov. John Hoeven (R)
and key stakeholders in public education to avoid the
path that has embroiled 45 states, including North Dakota
previously, in school-finance lawsuits that can drag
on for years and sow long-lived bad feelings.
In January 2006, a month before the start of a trial
that would have pitted the state against nine school
districts demanding more taxpayers’ money, Hoeven
came up with an alternate solution: he would push for
an additional $60 million in school funding in the 2007
legislative session if the districts would hold off
on the lawsuit.
The districts agreed. A special Commission on Education
Improvement comprising mostly legislators and school
district representatives was set up and met regularly
to hash out an acceptable funding system. It released
its recommendations in August, and now it’s up
to the Legislature to follow through – or risk
a lawsuit.
If the dispute is resolved without going to court,
it would be a novel event in the world of school-funding
battles, where acrimonious and drawn-out lawsuits have
turned into the most popular path for plaintiffs like
school districts, parents and advocates who filed the
first such lawsuit more than 30 years ago.
“We felt that reasonable minds could come up
with a good plan for the kids,” said Warren Larson,
a member of the commission and superintendent of the
Williston School District, one of those that sued. “We
basically felt that we can accomplish more by working
together than by getting in a fight, which is what a
lawsuit is. And I believe we have.”
This session the four legislators on the commission
– including the chairmen of the House and Senate
education committees and the Senate minority leader
– introduced a bill to revamp the state’s
funding system based on the commission’s formula.
Thanks to a budget surplus, the bill would provide an
extra $80.5 million of state money -- even more than
the $60 million Hoeven proposed -- and ensures that
in the first year every school district would see an
increase of at least 2 percent. The bill passed out
of the Senate Appropriations Committee Feb. 8 and is
headed to the full Senate soon.
“People are amazed that we could sit across the
table and do this, but we think it’s in the best
interests of all involved that we decide as education
stakeholders how to best handle the situation and not
let the courts decide,” said state Sen. Tim Flakoll
(R), the bill’s primary sponsor. “The courts
aren’t what our constituents want. They want us
to handle it.”
Nationwide, 22 other states currently are enmeshed
in lawsuits over how much money they award for education
or how they disperse it, according to the National Access
Network, which supports increasing funds to schools.
Some of the cases have been going on for years, mired
in appeals. All but five states have been sued at some
point, some more than once.
The effect of the lawsuits is palpable today. In Wyoming,
for example, any major education funding change by the
Legislature must get court approval first, according
to Mike Griffith, a school-finance consultant for the
Denver-based Education Commission of the States.
Antipathy from a lawsuit can run deep. Lawmakers in
Kansas and New Hampshire have attempted, and failed,
to pass constitutional amendments to limit the court’s
role in school-funding issues. In South Dakota, school
district officials have stopped using their state e-mail
addresses to discuss their lawsuit for fear the state
could monitor their correspondences, according to The
Argus Leader.
“Lawsuits are time-consuming, cost a lot of money,
and create a lot of adversarial relationships in states,”
Griffith said. “Once you start going through discovery,
that’s when you start getting hurt feelings and
that’s when your lawyers start attacking the other
side.”
If the North Dakota scheme works, it would result in
the biggest K-12 funding overhaul in North Dakota history.
In addition to the $80.5 million in extra money, the
commission has come up with what its members say is
a more equitable system to distribute the money.
The current system, which relies on a mix of property
taxes and state funding, leaves disparities in per-pupil
spending across the state. A large part of the problem
is that some school districts are property-tax rich
and others are property-tax poor. The state already
gives supplemental payments to poor districts, but those
districts say it isn’t enough to narrow the gap
in the amount each district has to spend on its students.
A complex new formula that takes districts’ property
values into account tries to ensure that all North Dakota
students receive at least 90 percent of the statewide
average in funding per student. The state would give
more money to poorer districts and less to richer districts.
Some lawmakers have complained because the formula
counts oil tax revenues and out-of-district tuition
payments as part of a district’s wealth. Others
aren’t happy that their districts are getting
smaller increases than others.
Still, Flakoll said he expects the bill to pass thanks
to the state’s booming economy, the governor’s
support and the “Herculean effort” all parties
put into the commission. While lawsuits in other states
have yielded court-ordered masters or studies to determine
a fair funding system and amount, North Dakota set up
its commission and made sure every education group was
represented, including the state’s teachers union,
school board associations and school administrators.
More importantly, the commission unanimously signed
off on its findings.
“That’s what we believe is the real strong
point to what we have,” said Larson of the Williston
School District. “The key players in education
were at the table, they developed this formula, and
they all support it.”
Copyright 2007 Stateline.org
|