Senate leaders held a media availability this week to outline what’s on their table for discussion during the special session.
According to a tweet from Melissa Santos with the News Tribune, the Senate argues that the McCleary decision is a mandate for education reform as well as an education funding mandate.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
The reforms “talked about” in McCleary are funding reforms, not policy reforms.
There are 56 references to “reform” in McCleary. The vast majority of those are either in a historical context or financial context.
The Court did not create any mandates for policy reforms with McCleary. In referencing a broken K-12 funding system, the Court stated:
Fundamental reforms are needed for Washington to meets [sic] its constitutional obligation to its students. Pouring more money into an outmoded system will not succeed.
We couldn’t agree more, which is why we enacted HB 2261 and HB 2776 in 2009 and 2010 respectively. These are the fundamental reforms the Court was talking about that were needed to fix our outmoded system and get us back on track with our students.
As stated in their decision summary:
The legislature recently enacted a promising reform package under ESHB 2261, 61st Leg., Reg. Sess. (Wash. 2009), which if fully funded, will remedy deficiencies in the K-12 funding system.
There’s no mention of giving schools A-F grades in the McCleary decision. No mention of holding back third-graders. No mention of removing due process to make it easier to fire teachers.
McCleary is about one thing and one thing only – fully funding basic education.