Perhaps if Federal Way students had done worse on tests, they would have fared better in court.
The fact that Federal Way students score above state average on testing than their neighboring schools was one of the state’s main arguments against Federal Way’s fair funding lawsuit, which the State Supreme Court heard arguments about on Thursday.
“It’s nice of the Attorney General’s Office to publicly recognize how well our students are doing,” Superintendent Tom Murphy said afterward. “We are very proud of our teachers. It goes to dedication and hard work, not equality. It’s an issue of fairness and unequal treatment.”
The court case began more than two years ago when the Federal Way School Board voted to sue the state over unequal funding. The district won its case, but the state appealed the decision. Although arguments were heard for 40 minutes on Thursday, a decision could take several months.
The Federal Way district seeks funding on the same level as other school districts. At the time the lawsuit began, Federal Way ranked 263 out of the 296 districts in dollars-per-student funding.
Federal Way is the seventh-largest school district in the state. If the district had received the same amount as the highest-funded districts in the state, in the 2006-2007 school year, when the lawsuit was started, Federal Way could have received an additional $11.5 million in funding.
Assistant Attorney General David Stolier, who argued for the state, claimed that the case should be appealed because it was a policy case for the Legislature, not a constitutional issue — and that the constitution says that education is the paramount duty of the state and should be amply funded. He said that although there are disparities between districts, all districts are amply funded.
The justices found several flaws with that theory. Justices asked if the degree of disparity made any difference, and that if funding requires local fundraising, does that mean the funding is not good enough.
“The court should not assume that funding is a proxy for education,” Stolier said. “Students in Federal Way are doing better than state average and the surrounding area.”
Justice Susan Owens also asked Stolier a frequently heard judicial question.
“Isn’t it a simple separate but equal?” she asked. “How is that equal?”
“The constitutional question is, is it ample, is that sufficient,” Stolier answered. “We don’t have any evidence that it isn’t ample.”
Federal Way’s turn
Then it was the Federal Way School District’s turn, with its attorney Buzz Porter.
Porter argued that there are almost 230 different levels of funding throughout the state. If one student were in school in Federal Way, then chose to go to the Tacoma school district, the state would pay Tacoma more for that student than if the same student went to Federal Way.
The court quickly stepped in with questions on how this was a court issue and not a legislative issue.
“It is within the duty and the authority of this court,” Porter responded. “It’s very clear under the separation of power.”
The court argued back that in comparison to the case Seattle brought against the state 32 years ago, when the disparity was over one hundred percent and Seattle could not pass any levies to fund education, the current gap of around 5 percent was minimal.
The state and the court also jumped on the admittance by Porter that some disparity was inevitable due to cost of living, small school districts and local levies paying for the extras in wealthier school districts.
Porter was adamant that for basic education, students around the state should be receiving the same amounts.
“You’re really talking about putting the entire system on the table,” Justice Debra Stephens said.
The court also brought up the state’s arguments of higher than average test scores.
“They are treated different,” Porter said. “It’s the educational opportunities they are denied. The Seattle case said that dollars are related to education. (Federal Way) has been shortchanged for 32 years.”
The state was allowed a chance of rebuttal as well, and took the district to task for not being consistent with the level of disparity allowed.
“Where would the constitutional line be?” Chief Justice Gerry Alexander asked Stolier. “If this isn’t the case, what is? How do we define enough? Money’s not totally irrelevant.”
It’s still up in the air which way the court will decide, as both sides got hammered in the courtroom.
“I’m not really sure,” Federal Way School District spokeswoman Diane Turner said. “How can you tell? It’s a really complex issue.”
“I thought our attorney did an excellent job…made several great points,” Murphy said. “Our students have been suffering for 32 years. They shouldn’t have to suffer another 32.”
