Court prompts an overdue conversation about education funding

A JUDGE'S ruling that Washington state underfunds public schools should launch an uncomfortable conversation about our state's priorities and values.

There is no need to appeal King County Superior Court Judge John Erlick's astute view that state funding of education is neither ample, stable or dependable. In some parts, Erlick's 103-page decision reads like pie-in-the sky dreaming of a perfect educational system. Yet, on a cosmic level, few disagree with it, including those on the other side of the lawsuit — most notably Gov. Chris Gregoire and key state lawmakers.

Attorney General Rob McKenna should accept this court loss. Why force the issue and have the state's apathy toward education funding confirmed by the Court of Appeals or the state Supreme Court? Worse would be a court order constricted by a set dollar amount and timetable from judges who've never balanced a state budget.

This is an overdue dialogue. The state's portion of education funding has progressively shrunk. A corresponding dependence by local districts on voter-approved levies has been the result.

Creating a plan to improve learning for the state's 1.1 million public schoolchildren was the easy part. Last year, the Legislature approved a logical road map for upgrading public education in every aspect, from increasing the number of class periods the average high school offers to providing preschool. It is a linear plan that makes sense. Quality early learning leads to an easier fourth grade and better-prepared high-school graduates less likely to spend their freshman year of college in remedial math and English.

The case has been ably made what the public is paying for. Needed now is the political courage and will to begin writing the check. It won't happen this legislative session, nor the next. This isn't the federal government and lawmakers can't print money.

If the state is to comply with the constitution and Erlick's ruling that it provide "ample" funding, a slow ramp up is in order. Currently, Washington spends $13 billion a biennium on public schools. In the worst economic downturn in decades, Gregoire proposes trimming this amount only slightly.

This is an appropriate down payment on the state's constitutional duty.

To keep the rest of their promise, lawmakers should not run first to tax increases. Public spending should decline in other areas as it increases in education. Tough choices are in store. For example, when Washington ranks 45th in the nation in per-pupil spending, it is unacceptable for lawmakers to go beyond a small array of social services to provide an adequate public safety net. Yet spending on health care, public housing and other things has grown faster than it should have. Education is the most effective anti-poverty program.

Money cannot be decoupled from the need for strict accountability and other important education reforms. Lawmakers are making strides in this direction. Bills in the House and Senate include giving Randy Dorn, state superintendent of public instruction, authority to force low-performing schools into improvement plans.

Another bill creates alternative teaching certification routes that will open the doors to teachers, for example, from the New Teacher Project and Teach for America.

Yet another bill envisions common academic standards and stretching out tenure for teachers from two to three years. A worthy proposal from Sen. Joe Zarelli, R-Ridgefield, would allow principals to begin removing a teacher after three years of unsuccessful help and professional development. That's hardly radical.

Our state's higher-education institutions understandably worry additional money for K-12 will come at their expense. Lawmakers cannot be allowed to abandon higher ed by using the K-12 court ruling as an excuse. A closer link must be forged between economic recovery and a jobs plan. A quality K-12 system only creates more demand for higher education.

Erlick set the moral and legal tones for the coming conversation. Lawmakers must find a practical approach to match.