And the big news of the day - the school lawsuit proceeds on
According to an Associated Press article appearing on the Rapid City Journal's website, the School Lawsuit is proceeding full steam ahead (at taxpayer expense, I might add).
Here's a thought to ponder - how many school districts involved in the lawsuit have members up for election this year? And how are they faring in their re-election efforts.
Because it should be a factor for their voters to consider. Do they support the actions of their boards to sue the state for more money? Or do they condemn it?
A circuit judge agreed Tuesday to consider whether the state's system for funding school districts violates the South Dakota Constitution, but she said she has no authority to order the Legislature to spend more money on education.Read it all here.
After a brief hearing in Pierre, Circuit Judge Lori Wilbur said the case will continue and a trial will eventually be held in the lawsuit, which alleges that the state is falling far short of providing the money school districts need. The trial in the case is now set to start in June 2008.
Here's a thought to ponder - how many school districts involved in the lawsuit have members up for election this year? And how are they faring in their re-election efforts.
Because it should be a factor for their voters to consider. Do they support the actions of their boards to sue the state for more money? Or do they condemn it?
Comments
Why shouldn't school districts ask the Supreme Court whether the state is meeting its obligation to schools?
Lots of pressure, these days, from No Child Left Behind. All students have to succeed. HAVE TO. So, if all students HAVE TO succeed, then doesn't the state have to put schools in a position to succeed?
I'm really interested in your answer.
Many smaller schools districts rely on the schools to keep the town alive instead of other avenues of revenue/investments for their communities.
At this point i would go into what i feel we need to do and/or get going with in this state instead of sitting on our hands.
At the least, it's a legislative question. Not a judicial one.
If I was a legislator, I'd be asking myself "Why does public entity #1 use money given by public entity #2 to sue public entity #2? Further, why do the taxpayers have to bear the cost of such frivolity and pettiness?"
Where is the money really being spent?
No, appropriating money is a legislative question. That's not what the suit is going to do. All this is going to say is: Is the Legislature providing for the students of the state?
What's wrong with that? It's just a check on the Legislative branch. Are they doing their job, or are they ducking beind?
Seems like a fair question.
As far as the question of how to fund small schools with declining enrollment - well, you won't ever be able to counter the effects of declining enrollment.
But, strangling the whole state because enrollment is declining in rural areas is, at best, morally wrong.
You either need to close lots of small schools, or raise taxes. There's no other answer. The problem is, the legislature doesn't have the votes to do either one right now.
The lawsuit isn't the answer, but the small schools realize they have to do it now, because after the 2010 census the legislative districts will be drastically changed. At that point Sioux Falls and Rapid City combined will probably have over 50% of the lawmakers. Throw in a few votes from Aberdeen, Watertown, and Mitchell legislators, and small schools will disappear quickly.
The timing of the lawsuit isn't a coincidence. It's about people trying to save their jobs, not worrying about the quality of eduction.
This is not a check and balance as a previous poster said. This really is a political question and the way you change things of this nature is at the ballot box.
This is not a check and balance as a previous poster said. This really is a political question and the way you change things of this nature is at the ballot box.
The judge dealt a major blow to the schools' lawsuit when she said that the courts cannot determine how much money the legislature can appropriate for education. Incidentally, the judge is to be applauded. She obviously knows the proper role of the judiciary.
The schools' hopes have hinged upon the same type of judicial activism in Kansas, Texas, and a host of other states in which the courts have legislated from the bench. In those cases, the courts have ultimately required tax hikes to accomodate higher doles to the schools. It was judicial activism at its finest.
SD's lawsuit is the direct result of like-cases in other states. When other state courts ruled the way they did, the local administrators got all lathered up and started foaming at the mouth, thinking that the feeding frenzy was on. They commissioned a study at taxpayer expense (by the same group who "studied" the Kansas education funding formula), and once the results of the study had been concocted, some schools zealously moved forward with their lawsuit.
In the end, this will amount to little more than an opportunity for a few administrators to get quoted by the newspapers....all the while neglecting to do the jobs they were hired to do....EDUCATE OUR KIDS! To quote the legislators whose law firm is handling this case, it's time for the schools to "get back to work."
I posted a question of education funding by presenting questions.
I believe that the posters following my posting were answering my question.
Thus i do not feel they were answering anything wrong at all.
When it comes to educaiton and the SDEA there is not amount high enough that they will accept! America could never print enough money for the SDEA.
Also as they keep trying to move younger and younger children into the public schools system the SDEA is going to be crying even louder for more and more money. And as the younger ones move in the more personel they are going to have to hire. What one teacher can do in upper level, even grade school we are going to have to hire 3 times the amount for lower level tot's education. Do you see where i am coming from with this post.
This is most likely off topic, sorry. please excuse any typo's I am not proofing.