Funding for K-12 Public Education in Oregon:

Bold Rhetoric to Effective Action

The Legislature’s PromiseThe Legislature’s Promise

1991—The Oregon Education Act 1991—The Oregon Education Act for the 21for the 21stst Century: Century:

““the best educated citizens in the the best educated citizens in the nation by the year 2000 . . .”nation by the year 2000 . . .”

Statutory K-12 quality goals Statutory K-12 quality goals among the most ambitious in the among the most ambitious in the countrycountry

but merely aspirationalbut merely aspirational

The People’s DemandThe People’s Demand

2000—Measure 1 (Or. Const. art. 2000—Measure 1 (Or. Const. art. VIII, sec. 8):VIII, sec. 8):

Legislature “Legislature “shallshall appropriate in appropriate in each biennium a sum of money each biennium a sum of money sufficient to ensure that the state’s sufficient to ensure that the state’s system of public education meets” system of public education meets” the goals established in 1991the goals established in 1991

Effect: 1991/1995 quality goals no Effect: 1991/1995 quality goals no longer aspirationallonger aspirational

The Legislature’s (In)actionThe Legislature’s (In)action 1992: Oregon ranked 161992: Oregon ranked 16thth nationally in per nationally in per

pupil K-12 fundingpupil K-12 funding 2004: Oregon ranked 28th2004: Oregon ranked 28th

1992: Oregon ranked 111992: Oregon ranked 11thth nationally in per nationally in per pupil funding as a percentage of citizens’ pupil funding as a percentage of citizens’ average incomeaverage income 2003: Oregon ranked 34th2003: Oregon ranked 34th

Are tough economic times to blame?Are tough economic times to blame? No. Drop in real funding (measured in No. Drop in real funding (measured in

1990-91 dollars) from $4,100 per student in 1990-91 dollars) from $4,100 per student in 1990 to $3,300 in 1998, during period of 1990 to $3,300 in 1998, during period of economic prosperityeconomic prosperity

Results of the Legislature’s InactionResults of the Legislature’s Inaction

By 2000, Oregon’s classrooms, with an By 2000, Oregon’s classrooms, with an average of 23.9 students, were the second average of 23.9 students, were the second most crowded in the nation;most crowded in the nation;

As of 2002, our 71% high school graduation As of 2002, our 71% high school graduation rate ranked 32rate ranked 32ndnd;;

2004 Natl. Assessment of Education Progress 2004 Natl. Assessment of Education Progress revealed that only approx. one-third of revealed that only approx. one-third of Oregon’s 4Oregon’s 4thth and 8 and 8thth graders are proficient in graders are proficient in math and reading; andmath and reading; and

Only one-half of Oregon’s 10Only one-half of Oregon’s 10thth graders are graders are “meeting standards” in reading, math and “meeting standards” in reading, math and writing.writing.

Cost to Taxpayers of the Legislature’s Inaction

Cost to Taxpayers of the Legislature’s Inaction

Cost of DropoutsCost of Dropouts

80% of Oregon prison inmates are 80% of Oregon prison inmates are dropouts, at average cost of $23,000 per dropouts, at average cost of $23,000 per inmate per yearinmate per year

Four times more likely to be covered by Four times more likely to be covered by OHPOHP

More than twice as likely to be More than twice as likely to be unemployedunemployed

How Can We Fix It?How Can We Fix It?

Quality Education CommissionQuality Education Commission non-partisannon-partisan

tasked with formulating a plan to achieve tasked with formulating a plan to achieve statutory quality goalsstatutory quality goals

conclusions based on extensive research conclusions based on extensive research from state and national expertsfrom state and national experts

recommended specific qualitative changes recommended specific qualitative changes based on comparison of current Oregon based on comparison of current Oregon practices with “best practices”practices with “best practices”

How Can We Fix It? (contd.)How Can We Fix It? (contd.)

Characteristic Current Service Level Required Service Level Kindergarten School Day Half-Day Full-Day Average class size 24 (K-3)

26 (4-5)

24 (middle school)

25 (high school)

20 (K-3)

25 (4-5)

22 (middle school)

22 (high school)

Classroom Teachers 12.8 FTE per 340 K-5 students

16 FTE per 340 K-5 students

Staffing in Core Subjects 41 FTE per 1,000 high school students

44 FTE per 1,000 high school students

Specialists for art, PE, etc. 2.0 FTE per 340 K-5 students 4.5 FTE per 340 K-5 students Extra teachers in math, English, and science

None 1.5 FTE per 500 middle school students 3.0 FTE per 1000 high school students

Textbooks $36 per K-5 student $43 per middle school student $55 per high school student

$72 per K-5 student $69 per middle school student $96 per high school student

Who Will Fix It?Who Will Fix It?

The Legislature?The Legislature? 15 years since passage of the Education Act 15 years since passage of the Education Act

for the 21for the 21stst Century Century

5 years since voters passed Measure 1 by a 5 years since voters passed Measure 1 by a 2-1 margin2-1 margin

3 QEC Reports with dire warnings3 QEC Reports with dire warnings

3 reports from the Legislature itself 3 reports from the Legislature itself concedingconceding that schools aren’t measuring up that schools aren’t measuring up

But But no actionno action

Who Will Fix It? (contd.)Who Will Fix It? (contd.)

Municipalities?Municipalities? Measures 5, 47, and 50 drastically reduced Measures 5, 47, and 50 drastically reduced

ability to raise revenueability to raise revenue Those measures have flipped the funding Those measures have flipped the funding

burden on its head: State now has burden burden on its head: State now has burden for more than 70% of K-12 fundingfor more than 70% of K-12 funding

In short, municipalities are In short, municipalities are largely largely powerless to fix this problem and in fact, a powerless to fix this problem and in fact, a recent Supreme Court decision found that recent Supreme Court decision found that cities cannot levy funds to support local cities cannot levy funds to support local schools outside of the $5 per $1000 limit schools outside of the $5 per $1000 limit imposed by Measure 5.imposed by Measure 5.

Who Will Fix It? (contd.)Who Will Fix It? (contd.)

The “Political Process”?The “Political Process”?We’ve already tried that—voters We’ve already tried that—voters

passed Measure 1 in 2000 by a margin passed Measure 1 in 2000 by a margin of 2-1of 2-1

directed that the Legislature “shall directed that the Legislature “shall appropriate” funds sufficient to appropriate” funds sufficient to satisfy K-12 quality goalssatisfy K-12 quality goals

The People have spoken, but the The People have spoken, but the Legislature hasn’t listened.Legislature hasn’t listened.

What options remain?What options remain?

Who Will Fix It? (contd.)Who Will Fix It? (contd.)

The CourtsThe Courts

38 funding “adequacy” cases filed to 38 funding “adequacy” cases filed to date in other statesdate in other states

20 plaintiff victories20 plaintiff victories

7 state victories (12 cases still pending)7 state victories (12 cases still pending)

How have things changed in other states?How have things changed in other states?How have things changed in other states?How have things changed in other states?

In Kansas, the legal action resulted in a $755.6 million In Kansas, the legal action resulted in a $755.6 million increase for public schools by 2008-09, a 26% increase increase for public schools by 2008-09, a 26% increase over state funding in 2004-05over state funding in 2004-05

The North Carolina decision resulted in a 9.6% increase in The North Carolina decision resulted in a 9.6% increase in K-12 education spending for 2006-07, and an additional K-12 education spending for 2006-07, and an additional $17.9 million from lottery proceeds will expand their pre-$17.9 million from lottery proceeds will expand their pre-K program.K program.

In New York, the state complied with the court ruling by In New York, the state complied with the court ruling by allocating $11.2 billion for capitol construction to be allocating $11.2 billion for capitol construction to be phased in over the next 5 years. During compliance phased in over the next 5 years. During compliance proceedings, the trial court ordered an additional $5.6 proceedings, the trial court ordered an additional $5.6 billion in operating dollars; subsequently revised by the billion in operating dollars; subsequently revised by the appellate court to a range of $4.7 to $5.6 billion.appellate court to a range of $4.7 to $5.6 billion.

Fundamentals of an Adequacy Challenge in Oregon

Fundamentals of an Adequacy Challenge in Oregon

PlaintiffsPlaintiffsEighteen school districts and four Eighteen school districts and four

individual families (parents on behalf of individual families (parents on behalf of their school-age children) representing a their school-age children) representing a broad perspective of Oregon’s schools in broad perspective of Oregon’s schools in demographic make-up.demographic make-up.

DefendantDefendantState of Oregon State of Oregon

Fundamentals of an Adequacy Challenge in Oregon (contd.)

Fundamentals of an Adequacy Challenge in Oregon (contd.)

Two Primary Constitutional Two Primary Constitutional Arguments:Arguments:

1)1) Article VIII, section 3Article VIII, section 3 requires the Legislature to “provide requires the Legislature to “provide

by law for the establishment of a by law for the establishment of a uniform and general system of uniform and general system of Common schools” Common schools”

courts in many other states have courts in many other states have recognized implicit “adequacy” recognized implicit “adequacy” requirement in similar languagerequirement in similar language

Fundamentals of an Adequacy Challenge in Oregon (contd.)

Fundamentals of an Adequacy Challenge in Oregon (contd.)

2)2) Article VIII, section 8Article VIII, section 8 ““The Legislative Assembly shall The Legislative Assembly shall

appropriate in each biennium a sum of appropriate in each biennium a sum of money sufficient to ensure that the state’s money sufficient to ensure that the state’s system of public education meets quality system of public education meets quality

goals established by law, goals established by law, andand publish a publish a report that either demonstrates the report that either demonstrates the appropriation is sufficient, or identifies the appropriation is sufficient, or identifies the reasons for the insufficiency . . .”reasons for the insufficiency . . .”

““And” doesn’t mean “or”!And” doesn’t mean “or”!

Oregon School Funding Defense Foundation

Oregon School Funding Defense Foundation

Board of Directors:Board of Directors:

• Paul Kelly, Board Chairman, Attorney and former Global Director of Public Affairs for NIKE, Portland

• Arthur Johnson, Vice-Chair, Attorney, Eugene• Bruce Samson, Secretary, Attorney and former General

Counsel for NW Natural, Lake Oswego• Bill Deatherage, Attorney, Medford• Marva Fabien, Attorney and Multicultural Director at

Willamette University College of Law, Salem• Dennis Karnopp, Attorney, Bend• Betty Roberts, former Oregon Supreme Court Justice,

PortlandStaff• Kathryn Firestone, Executive Director, past President Kathryn Firestone, Executive Director, past President

Oregon PTA and former Commissioner, Quality Oregon PTA and former Commissioner, Quality Education CommissionEducation Commission

Current StatusCurrent StatusCurrent StatusCurrent Status

March 21, 2006 -- Pendleton School District, et al vs. State of March 21, 2006 -- Pendleton School District, et al vs. State of Oregon filed in Multnomah County Circuit CourtOregon filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court

May 19, 2006 -- Plaintiffs prevail on State challenge to May 19, 2006 -- Plaintiffs prevail on State challenge to change venue to Marion County. The case specially change venue to Marion County. The case specially assigned to Judge Christopher Marshall.assigned to Judge Christopher Marshall.

September 15, 2006 -- Hearing on Motions for Summary September 15, 2006 -- Hearing on Motions for Summary Judgment. Court finds for the state; Judgment. Court finds for the state; no implied or no implied or explicit funding adequacy standardexplicit funding adequacy standard, of any kind, in , of any kind, in Oregon’s Constitution.Oregon’s Constitution.

Fall 2006 -- case proceeds to Oregon Court of Appeals.Fall 2006 -- case proceeds to Oregon Court of Appeals.

Need more information?Need more information?Need more information?Need more information?

On the net:On the net:www.osfdf.orgwww.osfdf.org

• Pertinent legal documentsPertinent legal documents• Press releasesPress releases• Background informationBackground information

By mail:By mail:121 SW Morrison Street, 11121 SW Morrison Street, 11thth Floor FloorPortland, Oregon 97204-3141Portland, Oregon 97204-3141

By email:By email:info@osfdf.orginfo@osfdf.org

By phone:By phone:Kathryn Firestone (503) 704-0504Kathryn Firestone (503) 704-0504Paul Kelly (503) 553-3230Paul Kelly (503) 553-3230

You can help!

    We believe that every Oregonian benefits from a high-We believe that every Oregonian benefits from a high-quality, sufficiently funded public school system. Our quality, sufficiently funded public school system. Our

supporters – groups such as the Oregon Business supporters – groups such as the Oregon Business Association, Oregon PTA, Stand for Children and Association, Oregon PTA, Stand for Children and individuals from across the state – believe it too. individuals from across the state – believe it too.

But we need your help. But we need your help. 

OSFDF is an Oregon Non-profit 501(c)(3) Corporation.  OSFDF is an Oregon Non-profit 501(c)(3) Corporation.  Your tax deductible donation will be used solely in Your tax deductible donation will be used solely in

support of the litigation – our only project. Please make support of the litigation – our only project. Please make your check payable to OSFDF, and send it c/o Paul your check payable to OSFDF, and send it c/o Paul

Kelly, Jr., 121 SW Morrison Street, 11th Floor, Portland, Kelly, Jr., 121 SW Morrison Street, 11th Floor, Portland, Oregon 97204-3141.  Oregon 97204-3141. 

Please, send a check today.  Thank you!Please, send a check today.  Thank you!