9/28/04 -- The school funding system in Texas has been declared unconstitutional. Judge John Dietz of Travis County ruled Sept. 16 in West Orange-Cove v. Neeley that the state's school funding law violates the Texas Constitution's requirements that the state provide sufficient and equitable funding for public schools.
"Are we prepared for a future in Texas that is dismally poor, needy, and ignorant?, asked Dietz. "The answer is, 'I think not.'"
He set a deadline of October 2005 for lawmakers to come up with a new system. If they fail, he vowed to halt state funding.
"Judge Dietz made the right decision, and we are confident that the appellate courts will affirm him," says George W. Bramblett, an attorney with the Haynes and Boone LLP law firm, which represented 47 school districts known as the West Orange-Cove Plaintiffs.
The existing school finance law is the result of a previous court battle over funding equity between property-rich and property-poor school districts. Known as the Robin Hood system, it relies heavily on property taxes and requires 13 percent of the state's 1,037 districts to share a portion of their revenue with less wealthy districts.
More than 300 districts joined the latest lawsuit, including Dallas and Houston. They complained that the state cut its share of education funding to a historic low of 38 percent while rising local property values and higher school tax rates made up the difference.
Many districts have reached the legal limit for property taxes, and districts complained the state inadequately funds education in general.
Of the $28 billion in state and local funding for public education in Texas, 62 percent comes from local property taxes. A cap on property taxes -- $1.50 per $100 valuation -- limits school districts' ability to raise money.
Dietz' ruling found the system does not provide enough money for schools charged with meeting higher state and federal standards and that lower test scores among low-income students indicate a widening gap in student achievement between rich and poor districts.
Dietz ruled that the state's financing system does not meet the constitutional requirement of being efficient because of "a significant gap of more than 10 points in education achievement" between economically disadvantaged students and other students.
"The solution seems obvious," Dietz wrote. "Texas needs to close the education gap. But the rub is that it costs money to close the educational achievement gap. It doesn't come free."
"The state has been under funding the system, even while raising the bar by imposing higher and higher standards," Bramblett says.
During the six-week trial, the plaintiff districts submitted evidence that they have been forced to cut academic and extracurricular programs, eliminate teaching positions, and increase class sizes.
With districts unable to raise additional funds, they had no way to address rising costs. At the same time, districts' budgets were further pressured by the state's new assessment requirements, the No Child Left Behind Act, and a growing population of students with special needs.
The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), which represented a group of 22 property-poor districts known as the Edgewood Intervenors, also applauded the ruling.
The decision "reaffirms the fundamental principle that all children, regardless of where their parents can afford to live, are entitled to a quality education," says MALDEF President and General Counsel Marie Tallman.
The state announced it would appeal to the Texas Supreme Court. "Just because the education system in Texas is not perfect, that does not make it unconstitutional," says Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott. In 1995, the state Supreme Court upheld the Robin Hood law.
Gov. Rick Perry and legislative leaders plan to work on a new school finance plan in the next legislative session.
House Speaker Tom Craddick says he will urge the governor to declare school finance an emergency measure to expedite action on the issue when the legislature reconvenes in January.