State doesn’t fund basic education. Now what?

A ruling from the Washington State Supreme Court will effect about one million public school students.

Courts have been battling over this provision in the state constitution: “It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, cast, or sex.”

Paramount, defined by a lower court as “more important than all other things concerned.” Ample, meaning “more than just adequate or merely sufficient.”

Today the State Supreme Court ruled Washington is not meeting its constitutional duty to fund basic education. What is basic education? Lawmakers and education leaders have been arguing about that for decades, and with today’s ruling the high court leaves it up to the Legislature to define and fully fund public schools.

Parents think they know when schools are not fully funded.

Mathew and Stephanie McCleary live in Jefferson County with their two children Carter and Kelsey. Robert and Patty Venema live in Snohomish County with their kids Robbie and Halie. The McClearys and Venemas started the lawsuit against the state when they didn’t think the state was giving their kids a solid education. Dozens of school districts, teachers’ associations and education groups joined the legal action.

The McClearys say when their daughter went to Port Townsend High School she didn’t have textbooks in many of her classes. In French class, the textbooks were so old that they couldn’t be taken home because they were fragile. In other classes, there were handwritten worksheets and photocopies of workbooks, reduced in font size to save paper. Stephanie McCleary says her son spent “a fair amount of class time” preparing various types of crafts for fundraising purposes. He ended up failing his fourth grade WASL (standardized test) and she says in court papers her daughter’s academic performance also trended downward because of inadequate funding.

Is a school facility part of basic education? The original lawsuit that started led to today’s State Supreme Court decision contends adequate schools are a part of the state’s financial responsibility. Patty Venema pointed out at the middle school her children went to there was only one girls’ bathroom, with five stalls, in a building for 800 students.

Almost every public school parent can look at their childrens’ schools and find examples – big or small – of inadequate funding. Students can’t write in math workbooks so they can be used for years to come. Is having an individual math book necessary for a basic education? And at what cost? Washington spends about $6,500 per student on public education. What would be enough?

The State Supreme Court decision doesn’t say.

“While we recognize that the issue is complex and no option may prove wholly satisfactory, this is not a reason for the judiciary to throw up its hands and offer no remedy at all. Ultimately, it is our responsibility to hold the State accountable to meet its constitutional duty,” according to a ruling signed by a majority of justices.

With that, the justices kick the issue back to the state Legislature which has grappled with the issue for years. It needs to have a plan to fully fund education by 2018.

The Legislature convenes Monday. On top of figuring out what constitutes a basic education and how to adequately fund it, the Legislature has to deal with a $1.4 billion budget shortfall.

Related: Washington Supreme Court Ruling McCleary v. State, filed 1/5/2012

AP file photo