Advertising

The Seattle Times Company

NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds | seattletimes.com

Editorials / Opinion


Our network sites seattletimes.com | Advanced

Originally published Thursday, March 5, 2009 at 4:23 PM

Print

Editorial

Lawsuits over Seattle school-closure plan obstruct benefits for all students

The four lawsuits filed against Seattle Public Schools for its school-closure plan ask the wrong question. The most important point is not whether the plan affects children of color from lower-income households disproportionately. Rather, does the plan single out these students for something good, including improvements in their success. The Times editorial page thinks it does.

Seattle Times editorial

WASHINGTON law allows those who feel wronged by school boards or school officials to seek legal recourse.

The statute gives legal cover to the four lawsuits filed this week against the Seattle School District over its school-closures plan. But it does not hide their lack of substance.

The suits are separate but all carry a similar theme. The district's plan to close five buildings and move around programs falls squarely on the shoulders of poor children and students of color.

From a statistical standpoint, this is true. Students of color make up nearly 60 percent of the district's 46,000-student population. In the South End, where most of the schools affected by the closures are located, minority students are 72 percent of the population.

Not a single systemic change could be made that wouldn't impact these kids.

When it comes to government, the public must have a route to appeal, and in the case of harm, seek remedy. But a foundation held up by taxpayers has a high threshold. Nuisance lawsuits and those that seek not to remedy, but to obstruct, should be swiftly ferreted out and dismissed.

When the district decided to close schools, it was tfaced with flat enrollment and too many schools, many underenrolled. It was also facing a $24 million deficit.

The question isn't whether the plan affects these children to a greater extent, but whether that effect is an adverse one. Or as one of the suits contends, if the plan is arbitrary, capricious and contrary to law. If the plan results in better-resourced schools, more successful students and district efficiencies that free up the money to pay for it, those children are being singled out for something good.

Lawyers behind the current round of lawsuits will have to prove otherwise, largely by betting that students involved in the closures won't emerge successfully and in better academic shape.

This page bets just the opposite.

The last closures process brought with it lawsuits. Those were beaten back. Time to do it again.

Copyright © 2009 The Seattle Times Company

More Editorials & Opinion headlines...

Print      Share:    Digg     Newsvine

Comments
No comments have been posted to this article.


Get home delivery today!

More Editorials & Opinion

NEW - 12:45 AM
Leonard Pitts Jr. / Syndicated columnist: The peril of lower standards in the 'new journalism'

George Will / Syndicated columnist: Huckabee's detour from reason in Obama theory

Lance Dickie / Seattle Times editorial columnist: Empower health care reform close to home

Rewind | Seattle Times Editorial Board interviews school officials

Leonard Pitts Jr. / Syndicated columnist: When punishment is a crime

Advertising

Video

Marketplace

 
Most read
Most commented
Most e-mailed
 
 

Most viewed imagesMore

Advertising