Is it enough? Washington state Supreme Court hears school funding case

OLYMPIA, Wash. – Attorneys for the state of Washington told the state Supreme Court Tuesday they have complied with a court mandate to fully fund the state’s basic education system, calling recent legislation a “sea change.” But an attorney for the coalition behind the long-running lawsuit disagreed and asked the court to force the Legislature to amend its most recent efforts.

The state has been in contempt of court since 2014 for lack of progress on satisfying a 2012 ruling that found that K-12 school funding was not adequate. Washington’s Constitution states that it the Legislature’s “paramount duty” to fully fund the education system.

Lawmakers needed a funded plan in place this year ahead of a Sept. 1, 2018 deadline. Lawmakers went into overtime sessions this year far beyond their regularly scheduled 105-day session in order to approve a plan to increase spending on K-12 public schools that allocates billions in new spending over the next four years.

The biggest piece of the court order that the Legislature had to wrestle with was figuring out how much the state must provide for teacher salaries. School districts currently pay a big chunk of those salaries with local property-tax levies.

The plan that was ultimately signed into law relies largely on an increase to the statewide property tax that starts next year. The tax increases from $1.89 to $2.70 per $1,000 of assessed value, with the increase earmarked for education. The plan – which keeps local property tax levies but caps them beginning in 2019 at a lower level – will raise property taxes for some districts and lower them in others. Under the plan, the minimum starting salary for teachers will increase, with adjustment for inflation and regional differences.

One of the questions raised by the court was the fact that the plan isn’t fully phased in by the Sept. 2018 date.

“How is that compliance?” asked Justice Steven Gonzalez.

The case began in 2007 when two families, joined by school districts, teacher unions and community groups, sued the state, saying it was derelict in its duty to adequately pay for K-12 schools education.

Deputy Solicitor General Alan Copsey said the Legislature “has done everything it can do” for the current two-year budget cycle, but said everything is in place for full funding of the teacher salary component by the 2019 school year.

But Tom Ahearne, an attorney for the coalition of school districts, parents, teachers and education groups that sued the state, argued that lessening the money from the local levy system and handing it back through the statewide property tax is not the way to amply fund the schools.

“Changing the name of the dollar doesn’t change the underfunding,” he said.

Ahearne said he wanted an order that the state has not complied and requiring the Legislature during next year’s session “to enact a budget that actually complies with the ruling in this case.”

Justice Sheryl Gordon McCloud asked Copsey whether the Legislature could do more during next year’s 60-day session.

Copsey responded that “predicting what the Legislature will be capable of doing in a short session is a dangerous game.”

Chief Justice Mary Fairhurst noted that the Legislature has had years to come up with a plan, and yet “what has been brought is something that says ‘well we’re not going to do it all, we’ll do some, and we’ll do more later,’ after the time frame.”

Copsey said while he agreed that full funding is not in place before the 2018 deadline, “I do assert that everything is in place that needs to be in place in order for it to be enacted in the 2019 budget.”

There is no set time frame on when the court may rule. The next legislative session begins in January.