The Maricopa County Superior Court in Arizona handed down a ruling on Wednesday, finding the current K-12 school funding system unconstitutional and siding with the schools after a years-long lawsuit.
The plaintiffs in this case are several school districts in Arizona, taxpayers, and organizations Arizona School Boards Association, the Arizona Education Association, and the Arizona School Administrators. The defendants include the state of Arizona and the school facilities board.
In his decision, Judge Dewain Fox ruled that the system used for funding K-12 schools violates the Arizona Constitution. The court found that the public school capital finance system being used does not meet the minimum standards created by the Arizona Supreme Court. Judge Fox also awarded permanent injunctive relief, but did not set a deadline for compliance with the injunction since he anticipates appellate proceedings.
One of the cases the court looked to as precedent in its decision includes Governor Hull v Hon. Albrecht (Albrecht II), which affirmed the test that "(1) the state must establish minimum adequate facility standards and provide funding to ensure that no district falls below them; and (2) the funding mechanism chosen by the state must not itself cause substantial disparities between districts." When applying the test to this case, the court found that the current system fails the first prong of the test because of the disparities in the quality of facilities between districts. For the second prong, the system also fails because the "legislature has chosen to fund public schools" using a system that "itself causes substantial disparities."
Shortly after Albrect II, the final version of Students FIRST was enacted by the Arizona legislature, with the understanding that the state would "provide funding to ensure that all educational facilities in school districts meet state standards." Students FIRST created the School Facilities Board to oversee the funding system and adopt minimum adequacy guidelines for ensuring school building standards are sufficient. However, in an expert opinion given by Dr. Judy Riachardson at trial, she shared that the lack of sufficient state funding has not allowed for schools to "meet the minimum guidelines" set out and that even the "State admits" its standards are outdated.
Moreover, there was a moratorium placed on state funding for new school construction as a result of the recession. Some schools chose to continue building to account for their growing populations. After the lifting of the moratorium in 2013, schools were overcrowded, and the New Schools Facilities Formula was found to be insufficient.
Since this was a decision by a lower court, it could be appealed by the defendants to the Arizona Supreme Court.