Arizona school funding ruled unconstitutional by state judge
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Shoshana Gordon/Axios
Arizona's system for funding K-12 facilities violates the state constitution because it doesn't provide for some school districts' minimum needs, a judge said Wednesday in what could be a landmark ruling.
Why it matters: If the ruling withstands a planned appeal, the Arizona Legislature will have to provide substantial new funding for school facilities and other capital needs at some point in the future.
The big picture: Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Dewain Fox ruled in a major lawsuit that the funding system violates the Arizona Constitution's requirement that the state establish "a general and uniform public school system."
Yes, but: The ruling isn't likely to be the final word. Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Steve Montenegro will appeal, their spokespeople told Axios.
- Attorney Danny Adelman of the Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest, who led the case for the plaintiffs, said it'll likely be several years before the matter is fully resolved.
Flashback: In 1994, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled in Roosevelt vs. Bishop that Arizona's system for funding capital needs — including buildings, buses, technology and books — violated the state constitution's requirement that there be a "general and uniform" school system.
- Because districts relied on taxes based on property value, the system left districts in less wealthy areas short on funding.
- To comply with that ruling, the Legislature created the Students FIRST program, which added building renewal grants and funding for new school construction and for districts that exhausted other resources.
- A group of school districts and education organizations sued the state in 2017, arguing that it hadn't met its obligations from the Roosevelt vs. Bishop ruling. The case finally went to trial in May 2024.
Zoom in: On paper, Students FIRST rectified the funding disparities, Fox wrote in his ruling. But in reality, the state hasn't provided sufficient funding for school facilities.
- Districts can obtain additional funding through bonds and budget overrides, but those are at voters' whims.
- As a result, many schools are forced to operate with deficient facilities for months or years while they await funding.
- Adelman told Axios that districts have lost between $6 billion and $7 billion over the past 25 years or so.
Between the lines: While disparities in districts' ability to raise money through voter-approved bonds and overrides aren't unconstitutional, inadequate funding leaves some unable to meet their needs without them.
- "In short, Arizona has returned to a system that forces districts to rely largely on local property taxation to fund their capital needs, and as such, property value is crucial to a district's ability to fund its schools," Fox wrote, comparing it to the system that the Arizona Supreme Court struck down in the original Roosevelt case.
What they're saying: "It's a huge win for Arizona schools," Adelman told Axios.