The state Superior Court has agreed to hear Mccleary v. Washington, which deals with an important constitutional question about public education funding.
The case is on direct appeal from King County Superior Court, where Judge John Erlick ruled that our state is not meeting its constitutional duty of adequately funding basic education ("state funding is not ample, it is not stable, and it is not dependable"). A group of school districts, students, and teacher unions are trying to increase funding provided by the legislature.
The long and short of Mccleary v. Washington
A group of school districts, parents, and educational organizations filed a declaratory judgment action claiming that Washington does not adequately fund basic education as required by Article IX, Section 1 of the State Constitution. The trial court agreed, and ordered the state to determine the actual cost of providing education to all students and to identify “stable and dependable” state-only funding sources.
The state argues that the trial court erred by making up its own definition of “basic education,” by requiring the state to provide funding beyond basic education, by requiring the state to provide enough money to make all students learn instead of merely giving them the opportunity, by requiring “stable and dependable” funding to come from state-only sources, and by finding that the state does not adequately fund basic education.
The schools argue that the court should have set a deadline for the state instead of merely requiring it to make progress.
And you can watch it live at 1:30 p.m.