OPINION: Legislators must perform their constitutional duty for education

Parents, teachers and school boards have raised their unanimous voices about the funding crisis in education. The Base Student Allocation needs to be increased to offset the ravages of inflation, address the disruption of COVID-19 on student achievement, and fund the state-imposed Reads Act mandate. The yearslong erosion of school districts’ general fund revenues guarantees a failure of Alaska’s education system. The Legislature must override the governor’s veto of Senate Bill 140. Failure to overrule the veto will guarantee a constitutional crisis.

A critical element missing from the current discussion about education funding is the state’s constitutional duty. Article VII, Section 1 of Alaska’s Constitution provides “The legislature shall by general law establish and maintain a system of public schools open to all children of the State.” This constitutional mandate imposes a duty on the Legislature to provide adequate funding to educate Alaska’s children, even when the governor refuses.

In the early 2000s, parents, school districts and educational organizations brought the Moore case, challenging the state’s failure to meet the educational needs of students in low-performing schools. Similar to today, the Base Student Allocation had been frozen for many years. Critical education needs were ignored.

Judge Sharon Gleason conducted a month-long trial as the state court judge assigned to the Moore case. Gleason is one of the hardest-working, most conscientious judges to ever serve Alaska’s judiciary. Gleason is independent and impartial. She gets the law right. In Moore, Gleason had to interpret and apply Article VII, Section 1. Her rulings gave substance and life to the Education Clause, finding the Alaska Constitution required the state to do the following:

“First, there must be rational educational standards that set out what it is that children should be expected to learn. These standards should meet or exceed a constitutional floor of an adequate knowledge base for children. Second, there must be an adequate method of assessing whether children are actually learning what is set out in the standards. Third, there must be adequate funding so as to accord to schools the ability to provide instruction in the standards. And fourth ... there must be adequate accountability and oversight by the State over those school districts so as to insure that the districts are fulfilling the State’s constitutional responsibility to (provide an adequate education) as set forth in (the state’s) constitution.”

Gleason found that school funding is constitutionally inadequate if existing resources are not sufficient to accord children with a meaningful opportunity to be educated. Gleason’s opinion explained this requires “a meaningful opportunity to achieve proficiency in the State’s performance standards, and meaningful exposure on the remaining content standards.”

The funding crisis today is worse than at the time of the Moore case. Districts today face a perfect storm of high inflation, educational regression caused by COVID, reduced federal funding, and declining teacher retention. The state must address the educational regression many students suffered during COVID closures. The ongoing discussion of education funding must consider the needs of students.

Judge Gleason’s prescient decision should no longer be ignored in the debate over the current funding crisis. The low scores on proficiency tests at all grade levels statewide suggest that funding is not adequate to afford many students a “meaningful educational opportunity.” Adequate funding is not just about the ravages of inflation; student needs are equally important to the conversation.

The only funding proposal under consideration that would comply with the constitutional duty to “adequately fund” education is Senate Bill 140. Like a tide that lifts all boats, a Base Student Allocation increase is distributed fairly and equitably across the entire educational system, treating all school districts and communities equitably. The governor’s preference for charter schools and teachers’ bonuses falls dismally short of a rising tide lifting all boats fairly and equitably.

The governor’s desire to establish more charter schools is an educational approach that depends on a highly motivated group, usually parents, to organize a school. Charter schools only serve a limited number of students, who may already enjoy the advantage of strong family support for education. A one-time teacher bonus will have short-lived effects on stemming the exodus of teachers, who cannot look forward to a secure retirement with the current meager retirement system.

The governor chose to neglect his constitutional duty to “adequately fund” education with his veto. Each vote by a senator or representative to override the veto is a vote in support of the constitutional duty to adequately fund education. Each legislator took an oath to uphold the Alaska Constitution.

Complying with a constitutional duty to adequately fund education should be an easy choice. Alaska’s future is at stake. Today’s students are the future workforce, citizens, public servants, military servicemen and women, voters, scientists, doctors, engineers, jurors, and teachers. At the Alaska Constitutional Convention, Delegate R. Roland Armstrong served on the committee that drafted the Education Clause and provided the reasons to the convention delegates for proposing the clause: “We had to recognize that the public schools were our responsibility and that it was our duty to provide for all children of the state in matters of education.”

Howard Trickey is a partner in the law firm of Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt, P.C. He represented the plaintiffs in the Moore case. He has represented school districts, among other clients, for more than 48 years.

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.