WA school funding ruling appealed to high court

The state of Washington filed notice Thursday that it plans to appeal the recent decision in a basic education funding lawsuit to the state Supreme Court.

A King County judge ruled in February that the state is not fulfilling its constitutional obligation to fully pay for basic public education.

The lawsuit was filed by a coalition of school districts, parents, teachers and community organizations.

The notice from Attorney General Rob McKenna did not detail the reasons for the appeal. But spokeswoman Janelle Guthrie said the attorney general decided the appeal was warranted to ensure the Legislature has the greatest flexibility to address public school funding in the future.

Guthrie said the appeal is based on three points: the Superior Court decision does not seem consistent with the legal framework previously set forth by the state Supreme Court in other school funding cases; the decision raises questions about what it would take to achieve compliance and, as the Legislature continues toward reform, there could be a threat of additional lawsuits.

"Given the magnitude of public tax dollars at stake if this decision were to stand, we believe our highest court should have an opportunity to review the case and clarify the standards for determining whether the state is meeting its legal duty under the constitution," she said.

Gov. Chris Gregoire said Thursday that the Legislature needs clear direction for its work on school reform.

"I am pleased we will have direction from the state's highest court as we work to ensure a world-class education for our children," she said in a statement.

The state Superintendent of Public Instruction's office agreed.

"While we are in agreement with the general thesis of the ruling that the state is not amply funding schools, we don't have a problem with the appeal because some of the language needs clarification," spokesman Nathan Olson said.

Thomas F. Ahearne, lawyer for the coalition, called the appeal absurd, but said he had no doubt his side would prevail.

"The state on one hand is cutting overall education funding," he said. "On the other hand, it's saying it has plenty of money to pay its lawyers to stall and delay. Our constitution is clear: education not litigation is the paramount duty of the state."

In his ruling, Erlick acknowledged the state's efforts at reforming the way it pays for education and encouraged lawmakers to continue that work. But he said he based his decision on a state Supreme Court ruling from 30 years ago that found the state must amply provide for basic education. Relying so heavily on local levies fails that standard, he said.

The Legislature approved the next step in education funding reform this year, but because the state is facing a large budget deficit, lawmakers did not put a down payment on the new system. The Legislature also approved a measure that would give local school districts the option to raise more money through levies.

"The court is left with no doubt that under the State's current financing system the State is failing in its constitutional duty to make ample provision for the education of all children," the judge wrote. "This court is convinced that basic education is not being funded by a stable and dependable source of funds provided by the state."

The judge didn't set a specific timeline for reform but urged the Legislature to proceed with real and measurable progress to establish the cost of basic education and find a stable way to pay for it.

The Legislature has committed to reform the way it pays for basic education by 2018.

"I am committed to meeting the state's paramount duty to provide for the education of our children," Gregoire said. "With legislation passed last year and this year, our state is poised to make major reforms to improve the way we educate our children and fund our schools."

---

Associated Press Writer Rachel La Corte contributed to this story from Olympia.