What's the "McCleary Promise"?

Gazette Editor

“Keep the McCleary Promise” was enclosed in a logo design which was included in an advertisement in Sunday’s editon of the Spokesman Review. In the center of the logo was “Education is a civil right.” The advertisement encouraged readers to join forces with local educators and voice support for public schools and support the state house budget by calling a legislative hotline.

The bottom of the advertisement listed 26 educators in the eastern region school districts as sponsors. All were officers in Washington Education Association groups or other teachers groups.

“McCleary” is the tag line for what has become the chief assignment for this year’s session of the Washington Legislature, now in an extended session.

McCleary is actually a Supreme Court decision which decrees the State of Washington should pay the costs of basic education for all students in Washington state. McCleary is the last name of two of plaintiffs who sued the state in King County superior court in 2007. They prevailed in 2010 and an appeal went to the Supreme Court.

That decision was confirmed by the Supreme Court after hearing the appeal in June of 2011. The court never told the legislature how to get state funds directly hooked to cover all basic education.

Prompting the legislature to solve McCleary this year was a court order in August of 2015 which decrees the state should be fined $100,000 a day for not complying with its decision. In its statement on the McCleary decree, the Washington Education Association pointed out the state had rolled up $40 million in fines, a sum which could otherwise have been used by the state to comply with the court order.

The Republican majority in the State Senate and the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives are in a deadlock on how to fund McCleary.

What has evolved over the years is a funding structure in which districts with a bountiful tax base wind up with more funds to finance schools. Some of this takes the form of special levies which are used to bolster operating budgets.

In January, the Republicans in the senate rolled out their answer. A key was to have districts all over the state install a levy at the same rate. The revenue would go to the state and be distributed out to all the districts on a per student rate.

One predicted impact would be higher tax bills in districts with high valuation bases and low levy rates. Seattle envisioned a levy bump of 48 cents per $1,000 assessed. In effect, more funds would come out of the Seattle district’s tax base and eventually be distributed by the state to rural school districts with higher levy rates.

The senate solution was described as a “trojan horse” by a top WEA official.

Gov. Jay Inslee in December took the initiative for the Democrats with a proposed $4 billion in new taxes with hikes on business and occupation taxes for accountants and attorneys, a carbon emissions tax, and a 7.9 percent tax for capital gains earning more than $25,000.

Inslee’s plan would drop special levies in 119 of the state’s 225 districts, but, with the new money, no district would see an increase on its school tax bill.

Sen. Mark Schoesler, senate majority leader for the ninth district, labeled Inslee’s plan as “far and away the single biggest tax increase in state history.”

House Majority Leader Pat Sullivan, a Democrat from Covington, at that time said he appreciated that Inslee did not shy away from dealing with teacher pay.

A budget update issued last week by House Democrats quoted a non-partisan comparison of the two opposing budget proposals at this stage:

The average funding increase per student in school year 2020-21 (when both plans would be fully implemented) would be $2,926 under the Democratic house plan and only $1,913 under the Republican plan. Total net new funding statewide over the next four school years would be $8.5 billion under the Democratic plan, and only $4.5 billion under the Republican plan.