Legislators miss first assignment from state Supreme Court

Imagine the domed state Capitol as a classroom, with 147 state lawmakers as students, and you may get a better picture of the challenge facing Washington’s Supreme Court this summer.

Justices in January gave the “students” a two-part assignment, which was due April 30.

They told them they needed to put more money into education, reminding them the state must be paying the full cost of basic education in public schools by 2018.

The other part of their homework required legislators to draw up a timeline showing what will be spent year-to-year, to ensure the state meets the court-imposed deadline in the McCleary case.

Well, those “students” didn’t get either done.

On Wednesday, a bipartisan committee of lawmakers representing the Legislature turned in a required progress report that described how they tried, and how political and philosophical divisions prevented them from completing their assignment.

They also explained that supplemental budgets, like the one adopted in 2014, are not the ideal vehicle for making a billion-dollar investment, as the court might have desired. A decision like that will be best made in 2015 when the next two-year budget is adopted.

And in the 58-page report, lawmakers expressed appreciation of the justices’ prodding to get them to live up to their constitutional obligations for education. But they also not-so-subtly said “Don’t mess with us” in a section arguing why they didn’t think the justices could force them to do the homework as assigned.

How will the court deal with such recalcitrance?

The Supreme Court could deliver another scolding — there have been two so far — then wait to see if lawmakers next year come up with “the grand agreement” they deem necessary for doing as they’ve been told.

Or it could exact punishment, as has happened in other states. In March, the Kansas Supreme Court directed the Legislature to provide more funds for education by July 1, or else part of the state budget will be voided.

Washington justices in January warned of a potentially bumpy road ahead should lawmakers not turn in a completed assignment.

“Our decision in this case remains fully subject to judicial enforcement,” Chief Justice Barbara Madsen wrote. “We have no wish to be forced into entering specific funding directives to the State, or, as some state high courts have done, holding the legislature in contempt of court.”

Lawmakers candidly admit in the report they did not do what the court asked them to do, said Thomas Ahearne, who is the attorney for the plaintiffs.

“Frankly, the Supreme Court is going to have to make a decision,” he said. “They are going to have to decide whether they meant what they said.”

More in Local News

Mill Creek councilman no longer lives in city, panel finds

The Canvassing Board determined Sean Kelly is not eligible to vote there.

A Democrat and ex-Republican team up to end two-party politics

Brian Baird and Chris Vance unveil a new organization called Washington Independents.

The beavers weren’t happy, either, about Mill Creek flooding

A tree fell on their dam, sending a rush of water into a neighborhood near Jackson High School.

Two windsurfers rescued from Port Susan near Kayak Point

The men had failed to return to shore during Sunday’s windstorm.

Herald photos of the week

A weekly collection of The Herald’s best images by staff photographers and… Continue reading

Stranger offered candy to student walking home from school

The Granite Falls School District is warning families about… Continue reading

Coming together as family

Special-needs students and teachers at the Transition Center cooked up a Thanksgiving feast.

Lynnwood’s property tax promise to homeowners sort of true

They were told consolidation of fire departments would save, but new rates likely will be more.

Woman who died in 5-car crash identified

A car driven by Susan E. Sill rear-ended another vehicle Wednesday on Smokey Point Boulevard.

Most Read