9
In July 2012, the Washington State Supreme Court issued a decision in McCleary v. State of Washington. The case challenged the overall funding adequacy of State funding for K-12 education under the Washington State Constitution.
The Court had ruled some 30 years earlier the State’s funding system—specifically the legislative authorization to local districts to supplement insufficient State funding through special excess levy elections—was unconstitutional.
The July 2012, decision highlighted several central points including “to make ample funding for basic education as provided for in the Washington State Constitution.”
The trial Court concluded that the State has failed to adequately fund the “education” required by article IX, section 1. Substantial evidence supports this conclusion. The evidence at trial showed that the State’s now-abandoned basic education funding formulas did not correlate to the real cost of amply providing students with the constitutionally required “education.” As a result, the State has consistently failed to provide adequate funding for the program of basic education, including funding for essential operational costs such as utilities and transportation.
To fill this gap in funding, local districts have been forced to turn increasingly to excess levies, placing them on the same unstable financial foundation as the schools in Seattle School District. No 1 v. State, 90 Wn.2d 476, 585 P.2d 71 (1978).
On July 18, 2012, the Washington Supreme Court ordered the State (Legislative Joint Select Committee) to provide period reports summarizing their actions taken in achieving compliance with the Washington State Constitution and the Court, within 60 days and at the conclusion of each legislative session 2013 through 2018.
The December 2012 report fell short of the Court’s requirements.
In January 2014, the Court ordered the State to submit no later than April 2014 “a complete plan for fully implementing its program of basic education for each school year between now and the 2017-18 school year… and must include a phase-in schedule for fully funding each of the components of basic education.”
In the April 2014 report, the Legislature’s Joint Select Committee on Article IX Litigation stated “there was no political agreement reached among the political caucuses or between the legislative chambers of what the full implementation plan should look like.” The committee acknowledged that the State had not met the Court order. On June 2014 the Court ordered a “show cause” hearing.
In the game of chicken, the Court held the contempt order in abeyance until after the 2015 legislative session. After the regular session and a special session, the Court found “the State still has offered no plan for achieving full constitutional compliance by the deadline the legislature itself adopted.”
On August 15, the Washington Supreme Court issued the fine for Contempt of Court - $100,000 per day for each day the State does not comply with the January 2014 order.
The final warning: “the court assumes and expects that other branches of the government will comply in good faith with orders of the court issued pursuant to the court’s constitutional duties.”
Clearly, the New Mexico Constitution, Statutes and Regulations differ from those in Washington State and the battle between two branches of the government is not new, but it makes for good bedtime reading. Sometimes, it is the reading between the lines that should cause us to pause.