Judge sends lawsuit over school spending to trial

A King County Superior Court judge declined Friday to rule on the merits of a lawsuit calling for an overhaul of the way the state pays for education, sending the matter to a trial next June.

Judge Paris Kallas said too many facts were in dispute for her to grant a motion for summary judgment brought by a coalition of teachers, parents, community groups and school districts. The coalition wants to require the state to calculate exactly how much it costs to provide an adequate education for all pupils, then figure out a way to pay for it.

Even parents in the courtroom noted the contrast between the picture presented by the lawyers representing the group calling itself Network for Excellence in Washington Schools and the state Attorney General's Office.

"I did find it interesting to hear both sides," said Stephanie McCleary, parent of an 8-year-old and a 13-year-old. McCleary is a Chimacum School District employee and a named plaintiff in the lawsuit. "I just hope the court case will benefit my kids when they are in the school system."

Kallas said a trial would be needed to sort out the facts. She noted that a related case upon which this lawsuit was based -- Seattle School District v. State -- took nearly two months to decide at the trial court level.

Court briefs filed by the network call for an end to the "state's 29 years of foot-dragging and excuses for not yet fully complying with the Supreme Court's ruling in Seattle School District v. State," the 1978 ruling on school spending.

Bill Clark, an assistant state attorney general, maintains the state is meeting the education duties defined in the Washington Constitution and the mandate of the state Supreme Court from 1978.

"If it's been 30 years of foot dragging ... then where have these petitioners been?" Clark asked Friday, calling this only the second lawsuit filed in the wake of the 1978 Supreme Court decision.

Seattle lawyer Thomas Ahearne, who spoke for the coalition, used test scores, graduation rates and comments in a recent state study aimed at education reform as evidence that the state is not fulfilling the requirements set out in the state constitution and clarified by the state Supreme Court.

He compared the delay in fulfilling the Supreme Court's ruling to the pace of school desegregation after the U.S. Supreme Court ordered that change.

"My wife was born and raised in Mississippi. Her school district didn't desegregate for 10 years after Brown v. Board of Education," Ahearne said, adding that a 29-year delay would have been even more unacceptable.

The coalition says the state's education system relies on an outdated formula for allocating money that leaves schools financially strapped and unable to adequately educate children.

The state uses sales, business and state property taxes to pay 84.3 percent of what it costs to educate Washington's 1 million school children. The other 15.7 percent comes from local levies and some federal money, primarily for education of special-needs children.

The bulk of state dollars go to teacher salaries. The state also matches local bond money for school construction.

The coalition's lawsuit seeks to force the Legislature to pay 100 percent of the cost to educate K-12 students.