Texas high court upholds 'Robin Hood' school funding scheme

The state's system of distributing local property taxes is 'undeniably imperfect' but constitutional, the Texas Supreme Court said Friday, striking down a ruling that sided with hundreds of school districts.

|
Eric Gay/AP
Texas Supreme Court Justices (from l.) Don Willett, Paul Green, Nathan Hecht, and Phil Johnson listen to oral arguments in Texas' school finance trial at the state Supreme Court in September in Austin, Texas.

Texas's complex "Robin Hood" school funding system, where wealthy districts share revenue from local property tax with poorer districts, is constitutional, the Texas Supreme Court ruled Friday.

The surprise decision marked the end of a contested battle over school finance, where more than 600 districts had sued the state after the legislature cut $5.4 billion from the public education budget in 2011.

In its decision, the all-Republican court reversed a lower court’s ruling that had called the funding set by the GOP-controlled legislature unconstitutional and said the school funding scheme was unfairly distributed among wealthy and poor parts of Texas.

"Our Byzantine school funding 'system' is undeniably imperfect, with immense room for improvement. But it satisfies minimum constitutional requirements," Justice Don Willett wrote for the court. Other justices also filed concurring opinions.

"Our judicial responsibility is not to second-guess or micromanage Texas education policy or to issue edicts from on high increasing financial inputs in hopes of increasing education outputs," he wrote.

The court overruled a 2014 decision by Travis County District Judge John Dietz, a Democrat, who had called the system of sharing local property tax revenues inadequate and unfairly distributed.

Districts in Texas are particularly dependent on property taxes because the state doesn't have an income tax. The case was also the largest of seven attempts to challenge the state's funding scheme, dating back to the 1980s, the court noted.

Following the legislature's 2011 cuts, the more than 600 districts, which represent both rich and poor areas of the state joined together to sue, argued the cuts made it impossible to continue to educate students as public school enrollment jumped by nearly 80,000 each year.

The cuts came as lawmakers pushed districts to maintain strict accountability standards for students and teachers and enforced tougher curriculum standards, the districts said. 

In 2013, Judge Dietz found that the state's system didn't meet the state’s constitutional requirement for a fair and efficient system that provides a "general diffusion of knowledge." State lawmakers then restored more than $3 billion back to the schools and cut the number of standardized tests required to graduate from 15 to five.

Dietz briefly reopened evidence to consider the lawmakers' change, but opted not to change his mind before issuing a written ruling.

"We are dooming a generation of these children by providing an insufficient education, and we can do better," Dietz, who has since retired, told a group of teachers gathered in Austin last year. "It's in our best interest to do better.”

Gov. Greg Abbott, then the state’s attorney general, appealed the ruling to the Texas Supreme Court, while the legislature last year added another $1.5 billion back into the schools’ budget. 

The increase came along with $118 million in funding for a pre-kindergarten program championed by Governor Abbott, but it wasn't enough to replace previous cuts as enrollment had grown. The attorney general's office has said that while the system isn't perfect, it meets constitutional standards.

Abbott called the ruling a "victory" for taxpayers. "The Supreme Court's decision ends years of wasteful litigation by correctly recognizing that courts do not have the authority to micromanage the state’'s school finance system," he said in a statement.

This report contains material from the Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Texas high court upholds 'Robin Hood' school funding scheme
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Education/2016/0513/Texas-high-court-upholds-Robin-Hood-school-funding-scheme
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe