| Illinois
Recent Events |
Costing Out
Historical Background
Despite the Illinois Constitution's strongly worded
education clause, the Illinois Supreme Court has twice
rejected plaintiffs' challenges to the state's education
finance system, based on the separation of powers principal.
While rejecting "equity" claims and a quality-of-education
claim in Committee for Educational Rights v. Edgar,
672
N.E.2d 1178 (1996), the court held that "the
process of [school funding] reform must be undertaken
in a legislative forum rather than in the courts."
In Lewis E. v. Spagnolo, 710
N.E.2d 798 (1999), the court rejected plaintiffs'
attempt to distinguish its 1996 decision from their
"adequacy" claims and characterized the case
as "once again" asking the court to "enter
the arena of Illinois public school policy."
Recent Events
In November 2007, the legislature approved a $550 million
increase in education spending. This followed Governor
Rod Blagojevich’s August proposal to increase
spending on elementary and secondary education by $597
million, or nine percent, according to the Chicago
Sun-Times.
Chicago Urban League v. State of Illinois
On August 20, 2008, plaintiffs in Chicago Urban
League v. State of Illinois filed a complaint
seeking to declare the state’s current school
funding scheme unconstitutional. Plaintiffs claim that
the education finance system is in violation of the
education provision of the state constitution which
guarantees all students “a high quality education”
and that it also discriminates against families based
on race in violation of the Illinois Civil Rights Act
of 2003.
On April 15, 2009, the Circuit Court of Cook County
held that plaintiffs claim that the state education
finance system has the effect of providing substantially
lower dollar amounts per student in “majority-minority”
school districts states a valid cause of action and
that the case may therefore proceed to trial. Since
the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2001 ruling in Alexander
v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275, individuals can not
file discriminatory impact claims under Title VI of
the 1964 Civil Rights Act in federal court, but a private
right of action is available under the Illinois Civil
Rights Act, the provisions of which are similar to Title
VI.
The Illinois Court dismissed the plaintiffs’
education adequacy claims because of the binding precedent
of Committee for Educational Rights v. Edgar,
672 N.E.2d 1178 (1996), in which the Illinois Supreme
Court held that adequacy claims are not justiciable.
Plaintiffs are considering an appeal to the Supreme
Court to ask it to re-consider that precedent.
Carr v. Koch
In March 2010, two individual taxpayers initiated a
new equity litigation, claiming that Illinois’
education finance system violates the state constitution’s
equal protection clause. Carr
v. Koch. The complaint alleges, among other
things, that residents of property poor K-8 school districts
pay a property tax rate that is 23% higher than that
paid by similarly situated taxpayers in a property-rich
K-8 districts, but that per-pupil spending in the property-poor
districts is 28% lower than in the property-rich districts.
The remedy that the plaintiffs seek is a declaratory
judgment holding that the present education finance
system is unconstitutional. What changes would result
from a plaintiff victory here is unclear. Plaintiffs
reportedly worked with a public interest advocacy group,
Business and Professional People for the Public Interest
(BPI), in preparing the case, and by some accounts their
aim is ensure that more resources flow to students in
underfunded school districts. The fact that two taxpayers
and no students or parents are plaintiffs in the case
may, however, mean that any relief that may result from
this case will inure solely to the benefit of taxpayers
in property-poor districts and not to the students.
Costing
Out
The Illinois General Assembly established the Education
Funding Advisory Board to study the state's system of
K-12 school funding, recommend changes to the state
aid formula, and recommend a new foundation level. The
Board issued its first report in December 2000, recommending
minor changes for fiscal year 2001-02 and hired a nationally-known
school finance consulting firm to perform a costing-out
study on which to develop longer-term recommendations.
The costing-out
report was released August 7, 2001 and can be found
at the Illinois
State Board of Education website. It uses the "successful
schools" or "empirical" methodology and
incorporates costs for educating at-risk students. The
study does not include capital funding, transportation
or special education.
The Board issued its second report in 2005, in which
it used a 2002 cost study to determine that per pupil
spending for the 2005-06 school year should have been
$6,405. In 2004-05, per pupil spending was only $4,964.
Last updated: April 2010 |