Facts: The petitioner School Districts’ Alliance for Adequate Funding of Special Education filed suit against the respondent state of Washington in the Superior Court for Thurston County seeking a declaratory judgment that the state’s procedures for funding special education violate the state’s duty under Article IX §1 of the Washington State Constitution to provide for public education. The trial court ruled that special education is adequately funded when basic education allotments are included in calculating the amount of funding directed toward special education and that Article XIII §4 of the Washington State Constitution does not preclude applying basic education allotments to special education. The Washington Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision. The School Districts’ Alliance for Adequate Funding of Special Education appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Washington.

Question(s): Does Article XIII §4 prohibit the application of basic education allotments to special education?

If not, did the trial court properly include basic education allotments in calculating the amount of funding directed toward special education?

Conclusion: Justice Owens’ opinion for the Court affirmed the Washington Court of Appeals, concluding that although appropriations may only be directed toward their specified purpose under Article XIII §4, in appropriating basic education allotments the legislature had not stated that the allotments were to be used solely to fund basic education to the exclusion of special education. Thus, as special education students also receive basic education services, the Court also held that the trial court properly included basic education allotments in its calculation of the amount of funding directed toward special education.

Docket No. 82961-6 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 36294-5)

Petitioner: School Districts' Alliance for Adequate Funding of Special Education

(Counsel: John Craig Bjorkman, Christopher Lee Hirst, Grace Tsuang Yuan, and Gregory J. Wong)

Respondent: State of Washington

(Counsel: William Gerard Clark, Newell David Smith, and David Alan Stolier)

Briefs:

Argument: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 1:30pm

[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]

Decided: Thursday, December 9th, 2010

Prevailing Party: State of Washington (Respondent)

Vote: 8-1

Citation: Pending

Court: Madsen1 Court (2010-2011)

Madsen

Johnson

Alexander

Sanders
(Dissent)

Chambers
(Partial)

Owens
(Majority)

Fairhurst

Johnson

Stephens
(Concurs)