They came to listen and got an earful.
The state Senate’s Education Committee was in Everett on Tuesday night to hear from teachers, school officials, parents and even a couple of students, all who wanted to make sure legislators understand how important it is to fix the way public schools are funded in Washington.
The problem, acknowledged by the Legislature and given added emphasis by the state Supreme Court’s recent finding of contempt, is that local school levies have been used unconstitutionally to bridge the gap between what teachers are paid and what the state provides for pay and benefits. Children in Washington state’s public schools not only are among the bottom two-thirds in the U.S. in terms of money spent per pupil, the disparities among districts, particularly between urban and rural areas, widen the inequality further. As the Supreme Court has reminded the Legislature, the state constitution mandates that funding basic education is its “paramount duty.”
Along with a panel of teachers, administrators and parents, scores of others asked to speak at a meeting at the Everett School District offices that went past its two-hour schedule.
Some were emphatic. One retired teacher, angry that the Legislature had set aside Initiative 1351, which would have required the state to lower class sizes, asked the lawmakers to invite 35 kids to their next birthday party they host for a child, buy the supplies for a craft activity and keep the children occupied.
“I know you can do better,” the retired educator said. “Follow the law; I-1351 was not a suggestion.”
Others were simply frustrated by a system where district differences in levy support have allowed urban districts, Everett in particular, to offer higher pay to teachers than outlying districts can offer.
Todd Setterland, principal at Burlington-Edison High School, less than an hour’s drive from Everett to the south and Bellingham to the north, noted that he recently lost two art teachers, a librarian and a special education teacher to Bellingham because that district offered better pay.
Setterland didn’t fault the teachers for leaving, “but that comes at the expense of Burlington-Edison students.”
Others were there to remind the lawmakers that they will need to define what the state constitution considers basic education; that it includes fully funding teacher compensation, but will have to include supplies, equipment and the buildings to house students. Robert Crosby, whose children attend Marysville schools and is a history and government teacher at Everett’s Jackson High, criticized the reliance on portable classrooms. It’s difficult, Crosby said, for 33 high school students in a small portable to learn. “Give us more space,” he said.
Traci Mitchell, an Everett School Board member, noted that the state mandated new statewide tests for students but didn’t provide funding for the computers necessary to take the tests, requiring the district and parent-teacher groups to provide 3,500 laptops now shared by 19,000 students.
It went on like that for the better part of two hours as people with their own perspectives and insights into the problem reminded the legislators of the needs, inequalities and complexities in fully funding public education. This was only the committee’s second such hearing in their statewide listening tour. The committee will need these comments as guidance as the Legislature moves ahead with legislation to meet its obligation to amply fund basic education.
Five more hearings like Tuesday night’s will follow, where committee members are certain to hear similar stories and advice. But no request will be more concise than from a sixth-grader from Seattle who attends a school where 85 percent of the students meet the family income requirements for free and reduced lunches.
“We need extra help so I don’t fall behind,” said Olivia. “I am your paramount duty.”
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
