Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Threemil replaces father tonight
Next Post: New law does have a price, but it’s pretty small
Posted in:
*** UPDATE *** Mayor Daley told reporters today that the funding lawsuit was “very constructive”…
“I think it’s a good lawsuit,” Daley said. […]
“They have been talking about this for 25 years,” he said. “It’s not good for Illinois in the long run … Other states have done this … Other states have been very successful in these lawsuits, and we think we can be here.”
Daley joked that the courts should mandate school funding change because “they mandate everything else.” A federal judge appointed a monitor to police city hiring in 2005 amid a patronage hiring scandal in Daley’s office.
* Mary Mitchell takes a look at the school funding inequity lawsuit that was filed yesterday…
“The State’s failed school funding scheme has left many school districts, particularly those who serve high concentration of low income and minority students, with a mounting educational crisis,” the complaint claims.
Until now, the school funding disparity has been endured like a necessary evil.
But now [Rev. Sen. James Meeks] and others argue that given the high drop-out rates, low college attendance rates, and high incarceration rates, those concerned about this issue can no longer sit back.
The lawsuit could create a sense of urgency that will force parents to take notice.
Jenner & Block, a firm that is known for its aggressive representation of government officials, intends to seek a temporary injunction that forces the General Assembly to tackle the problem sooner rather than later.
In other words, Meeks ain’t playing.
* It still remains to be seen whether the courts will stick their noses into a legislative issue. Patterson points to the Supreme Court’s opinion in a previous case…
While the present school funding scheme might be thought unwise, undesirable or unenlightened from the standpoint of contemporary notions of social justice, these objections must be presented to the General Assembly.
* More on that history from the Sun-Times…
In the lawsuit that Nickels ruled on, the arguments for change hinged on whether the state Constitution requires all schools to be funded equally. In a second case, filed by parents in East St. Louis and decided in 1999, the question was whether the Constitution required the state to guarantee adequate school facilities.
In both instances, the high court held that the Constitution offered no such guarantees and punted the issue back to the Legislature, which has resisted higher taxes to finance education.
“Whether this case can thread its way through the two decisions already on the books is something that remains to be seen,” former state senator and 1994 Democratic gubernatorial candidate Dawn Clark Netsch said of the Urban League effort.
“It is a tough obstacle,” said Netsch, who teaches law at Northwestern University.
* More about the suit itself…
The lawsuit claims that under the Illinois Civil Rights Act of 2003, the current system “disparately impacts” racial and ethnic minority students. […]
The suit also claims that the school funding system violates the Illinois Constitution’s Uniformity of Taxation provision, right to equal protection and right to attend “high-quality educational institutions” guaranteed by its education article.
Lisa Scruggs, the lead attorney and Jenner & Block partner, expressed confidence in the lawsuit’s likelihood of success based on its civil rights claims. Two previous challenges to Illinois’ system in the 1990s — based only on the constitution — failed.
* And still more…
llinois’ current system of funding exacerbates the state’s segregated housing problem, especially in Chicago, said Lisa Scruggs, a lawyer for the group. Because homes in neighborhoods with high percentages of minorities have lower values than homes in white neighborhoods, schools in minority districts get less funding.
“The basic fact that you have a distinction between low property-wealth districts and high property-wealth districts, ultimately that leads down the road to gaps in education performance,” Scruggs said.
* More…
Property values in highly-segregated, low-income neighborhoods become even lower when the school district is underfunded, the suit said, making the problem even worse for schools in those districts.
High drop-out rates and low test scores are in line with the lack of resources at certain schools — mostly in minority neighborhoods or communities, the suit said. Large class sizes and cuts in sports and art and music education leave many students “behind.”
* The governor is staying away…
The governor’s office did not return calls for a response.
* And the attorney general is treading lightly…
A spokesman for the Illinois Attorney General’s Office said the lawsuit will be reviewed.
* But AG Madigan was touting a new study this week…
An increase in Illinois high school graduation rates would bring about a sharp reduction in violent crime statewide, according to a study released Wednesday.
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids, a national organization of law enforcement officials and former crime victims, sponsored the report in an effort to investigate the root causes of crimes committed by young adults.
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, who presented the report with the organization’s Vice President Jeff Kirsch, said the study revealed a growing need for the state to play an active role in ensuring quality early education and on-time high school graduation.
* Related…
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 10:58 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Threemil replaces father tonight
Next Post: New law does have a price, but it’s pretty small
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Operating Expenditures Per Pupil:
Chicago SD 299 - $10,409
Edwardsville CUSD 7 - $8,073
State Average - $9,488
Local Property Tax Share:
Chicago SD 299 - 44.1%
Edwardsville CUSD 7 - 55.9%
Equalized Assessed Valuation Per Pupil:
Chicago SD 299 - $150,017
Edwardsville CUSD 7 - $120,762
Is Chicago really ready to start talking about inequities in the state’s education system compared to downstate schools (where property taxpayers are beaten down for funds)?
Comment by Madison County Watcher Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 11:19 am
Might be a winning argument in Chicago vs. Suburbs, but not a winning argument Upstate vs. Downstate.
Comment by Madison County Watcher Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 11:20 am
This is not a new situation. Law suits have been forcing courts into making state education funding decisions since the 1980s. The results of these suits, if successful, do not result in better education. While South Carolina saw improved test scores in lower grades after their equitable funding went into effect, in other states as diverse as New Jersey, Kansas and others, no improvements were measured.
The issue here is education and quality, not money. These lawsuits assume too much and have not yet produced results to resolve the problems found in poor and minority neighborhood schools.
Instead of charting a course to educate these children, these school districts claim that their problems are because they don’t get enough money. Tell us how much money they think their schools need, and tell us how they will reform their schools to produce measurable results. Going to court to get a blank check has not resulted in education improvements. They need more than cash.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 11:21 am
MCW, do you really believe that operating costs in Chicago are the same as in Edwardsville?
Lies, darned lies and statistics.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 11:23 am
Disparate impact claims come down to basic statistics. A bit of a simplification, but unlike the consitutional claims if they can show disparate impact they will most likely prevail.
Comment by Ghost Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 11:41 am
Rich — your point is the crux of the issue. It does cost more to educate a student in Chicago vs. Edwardsville, just as it costs more to educate a student in Oak Park than in Odell. We have moved away from using the word “equity” in favor of using “adequacy.” Those involved in the debate agree that the adequacy level in school funding is unacceptable, thus the need to increase the statutory foundation level, thereby increasing the state’s share in public education.
Plus, let’s not forget the untouchable issue of home life that all but determines if a child will succeed in school. Yes, we need to have great teachers, curriculum, and support services for all students regardless of where they live. However, we also need to think about the imact of violence, malnutrition, low expectations, and devaluing education on a student’s success.
Comment by Come on, now Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 11:47 am
Operating costs may be lower in downstate schools (and those in western IL as well) but not that much. Maybe $1000 per student would be the difference. The problem is that many of Chicago’s students are a needier bunch that require more resources–they’re more likely to be special needs, they’re more likely to start out behind, more likely to move schools from year to year (this has been found to have a significant impact on the student’s performance), and more likely to live in an economically segregated neighborhood.
However, it is a bit odd to hear Chicago, land of glittering skyscrapers and neighborhoods full of trendy 3 flats and condos to cry poverty. Yes, Chicago has a lot of poor folk and poor neighborhoods, it also has a lot of rich & middle class folk and neighborhoods. How much money for schools is lost to TIFs, corruption and other such things?
Comment by cermak_rd Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 11:53 am
The only winners in this lawsuit will be the LaSalle Street law firm that will be hired to defend the state. They’re going to rack up a lot of hours and it won’t be pro bono.
Where’s the urban/rural coalition in the GA for adequate funding?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 11:53 am
Rich, I wanna see the courts or the legislature try to come to agreement on a funding system that accounts for the different costs of living throughout Illinois.
That should be a fun debate.
My kids are worth this because we live here, but your kids don’t need as much because you live there.
Now that actually is the case, but just try to write and pass that law.
Comment by Frank Booth Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 11:58 am
C’mon people. When you look at the statistics for unit districts (since that is what Chicago is), you will find that Chicago is in the Top 25 highest spending unit districts when it comes to operating expenditures per pupil (OEPP). Others in that Top 25 list include the low income areas of Venice, Brooklyn, North Chicago, Cairo, East St. Louis, etc. These same areas also have low test scores. Why? Is there a correlation between money spent and academic achievement? Or could it be something else? This data proves otherwise.
Now lets talk about the current school funding formula. There is a poverty grant embedded in the school funding formula already. The higher percentage of low income children a district has, the higher the grant they receive.
This argument has been framed entirely wrong. It is not a civil rights debate, or a money debate. What it should be is how do you teach students that were raised to not value education? How do you overcome family situations and cultural environments? The legislature cannot legislate common sense and responsibility — there are some things that individuals have to figure out on their own.
Comment by Tired of the whining Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 12:39 pm
They are dead wrong if they are linking this civil ights issue to race. Should have done it with income as rural white kids are not funded as well as suburban black/hispanic kids.
Comment by Wumpus Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 2:44 pm
“In other words, Meeks ain’t playing.”
Well, he ain’t legislating either. If his tax swap proposal is so great, then for gosh sakes, call the darn thing for a vote already. Will one of these reporters please ask the good rev/senator to explain why he hasn’t been able to bring about change after eight years in office?
Comment by The Unlicensed Hand Surgeon Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 2:52 pm
Vouchers!
Comment by The Dude Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 4:19 pm
Lies, darned lies and statistics.
Rich: If it’s a civil rights issue related to “[t]he State’s failed school funding scheme [having] left many school districts, particularly those who serve high concentration of low income and minority students with a mounting educational crisis,” how do you explain these numbers?
Operating Expenditures Per Pupil:
East St Louis 189 - $10,916
Edwardsville CUSD 7 - $8,073
State Average - $9,488
Local Property Tax Share:
East St Louis 189 - 7.8%
Edwardsville CUSD 7 - 55.9%
In some districts, more than 90% of the money can come from state and federal taxpayers, the per pupil spending amounts can be higher, even within regional comparisons, and the school district can STILL fail.
I’m not saying there are not education funding disparities that exist, but I think it’s hard to blame all the educational woes of low-income and minority districts on an out-dated tax structure.
Some talk of local accountability thrown into the discussion would have been more productive than a lawsuit.
Comment by Madison County Watcher Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 4:40 pm
Another good question is why a school district that is 92.2% funded by taxpayers outside of the geographical boundaries of the district still have a locally-elected school board. I would love to see the Governor or legislature empower a group of the best seven or so retired superintendents in the state to take over that district for four years and see what improvements could be made.
Comment by Madison County Watcher Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 4:47 pm
MCW, now you are showing mere silliness.
Because we all know that Edwardsville has the same social and economic problems as E. St. Louis, so a bit more spending shows money doesn’t mean anything.
Right.
Stick with that.
Statistics can say anything you want if you have the soul of a bean counter.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 5:02 pm
Those that think sending this case into the courts hands, might want to think about the case of the Kansas City Missouri School District and what they went through about 20 years ago. I was there then, and saw what a ridiculous outcome it had.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-298.html
Comment by trafficmatt Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 5:52 pm
Rich if meeks loves to point to how much money new trier gets why do you feel it is unfair to point out how much less downstate school get than Chicago schools. This isnt a problem that can be solved by throwing money at it. Education has to be valued by the students and parents for it to be succesful. Until we solve som of the inner citys other problems, Drugs, gangs, single mothers, violence. Throwing money at the underperforming schools wont solve the problems. Stableizing the homes is the only way education will become more effective.
Comment by fed up Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 7:35 pm
Which would be easier, putting more money and innovation into schools or fixing all the families’ problems?
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 7:40 pm
===why do you feel it is unfair to point out how much less downstate school get than Chicago schools===
Because it has nothing to do with reality. You have lower costs of living, lower socioeconomic problems, etc. It’s unfair because it’s not a valid argument. Period.
It’s like saying that it somehow shouldn’t cost more money to build a skyscraper in the middle of Lake Michigan than in the Loop.
This logic makes no sense, and IMHO is based on either envy, classic and mindless “Chicago hatred” (based on the false assumption that downstate money is funding Chicago - the suburbs’ taxes, in reality, fund downstate) or, possibly, bigotry.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 7:42 pm
I costs more to live in Winnetka than Englewood or roseland so your arguement can go both ways rich.
Comment by fed up Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 7:45 pm
Maybe Meeks should sue the chicago teachers union the city has one of the shortest school days and shortest school years in the country. More time in school would be very helpful.
Comment by fed up Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 7:47 pm
Statistics can say anything you want if you have the soul of a bean counter.
Thanks, but I’d like to think I have a valid argument worth response. How far is the taxpayers responsibility to provide the same educational outcomes at dramatically different prices?
I’ve compared the richest and poorest communities in the metro-east, where salaries and operational costs should be somewhat comparable.
In East St Louis, local property taxpayers are paying $1,154 per pupil. In Edwardsville, property taxpayers are paying $4,593 per pupil.
In East St Louis, state/federal taxpayers are paying $13,625 per pupil. In Edwardsville, the state/federal is $3,625 per pupil.
Fully counting the beans, students in one district are receiving $10,000 more per pupil of state/federal funds.
Certainly there are additional socioeconomic problems needing to be addressed, but money obviously isn’t the ONLY answer to this equation. If money was the answer, students in East St Louis would be excelling way beyond students in Edwardsville.
It’s one perspective from an area far outside the Chicago area, but is my perspective any less worthy than any other Illinois taxpayer’s opinion?
If the Edwardsville school district wasn’t balancing 55% of school funding on the back of the property taxpayer, there would be little opportunity to serve the needs of the students.
Simply not the case in East St Louis, where immense out-of-district funds are spent with very little accountability.
Would $10,000 more per pupil solve this disparity? $20,000 more per pupil? It’s feels crass to ask that question, but isn’t the lawsuit fundamentally about funding disparities?
Comment by Madison County Watcher Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 9:58 pm
MCW –
Of course your point is valid, but you have to realize that better education is not the goal of Meeks — better political advantage is. Better education is not the objective of the teachers unions, more money to subsidize existing incompetence is. Consider this - - every 9th grade teacher should like to have qualified malleable clay with which to work — from whatever elementary school. Instead they hunker down is support of the K-8 public school fellow union members and keep the dirty little secret. Better that than school choice for all.
If better education were the objective — purely — those union teachers would love to see more schools resulting in higher levels of student learning. They know what the problem is.
Senator Meeks knows what the problem is. Mayor Daley and Arne Duncan know what the problem is — and how it got that way.
The home environment. Two generations of prior graduates and drop outs who do not believe that education is either an economic or a social good. We wasted their lives — both the public welfare system which kept people in their palces subservient to the politicians and the schools which did not equip them to compete in the real world. Unable, and unwilling to move to where the jobs are and without the training to take the entry level jobs, the politicians have them firmly in their grasp, assuring a long and profitable career, while keeping their hands out for money from the teachers union lobby.
Comment by Truthful James Friday, Aug 22, 08 @ 9:30 am
And so it will always be. Union solidarity forever.
Comment by Truthful James Friday, Aug 22, 08 @ 9:32 am