Local school officials happy with high court education ruling

Local school officials are satisfied with Thursday's state Supreme Court ruling upholding arguments that the state does not adequately fund public education, but they say the tangible impact of that decision is likely a long way off.

"I'm very pleased that (the court) ruled that way," said Naches Valley superintendent Duane Lyons. "But I don't hold out a lot of hope for an immediate relief."

The ruling in the McCleary v. State of Washington case comes more than four years after the lawsuit was filed in 2007 by a coalition of more than 70 school districts, who argued that the state was failing to uphold its constitutional duty to fund basic education. The suit was filed on behalf of two schoolchildren from the Chimacum School District in the Olympic Peninsula.

Basic education is listed in Washington's Constitution as the state's "paramount duty." In 2009, the Legislature passed an education reform bill that promised to funnel several billion dollars more into K-12 by 2018.

The court's ruling Thursday didn't spell out new deadlines for the Legislature if that promise isn't kept, but stated instead that the court will "retain jurisdiction of the case to help ensure progress in the State's plan to fully implement education reforms by 2018."

It's a good step forward, educators say.

"They've put themselves in the position of being the watchdog so the state complies with its plan," said Grandview School District superintendent Kevin Chase. Improvements won't come right away, he says, but "it's better than having nothing, which is what we've had for 30 years."

In 1978, a similar suit was brought against the state after a series of school levy failures led the state Supreme Court to rule that requiring local levies for basic education funding was unconstitutional. The court sided with the schools then, too.

For many property-poor districts in the Yakima Valley, using levies to pay for basic elements like teacher salaries and textbooks puts a heavy burden on taxpayers. About a dozen local districts passed levies in 2010, and about 10 will try to pass new levies in February's special election. Statewide, the system is largely regarded as inequitable, since property-rich districts can raise more money with lower tax rates.

But pumping more money into education will be difficult, given the state's current $1.4 billion deficit and lack of new revenue sources. Legislators go back into a 60-day session next week to tackle the budget.

Sen. Curtis King, R-Yakima, said he has the same concerns now that he did when the Legislature passed the reform bill in 2009: No one knows where the money will come from.

"(This bill) committed us to these changes in education that we have no funding for," he said. "Now we have a court ruling that says, 'You have to have these things implemented by 2018' ... I think we've put ourselves in a box, and now we have to figure out how to get out of it."

Providing more money for education would mean cutting other areas like heath care, social services and corrections, he said.

"I think to be blunt, there's a lot of whining going on," King said. "Everybody wants to tell you how much they've cut education, and yet (the state is) spending $556 million more (on education) in this biennium than we did in the last."

Still, local educators feel that several years of consecutive budget cuts from Olympia have stripped districts down to the bare minimum, and hope the new ruling convinces the state to prioritize education.

"We're talking about basic education needs. We're not talking about extra money for fountains in the courtyard," Lyons said. "We're talking about teachers and textbooks and enough gas to run the buses."

* Molly Rosbach can be reached at 509-577-7628 or mrosbach@yakimaherald.com.