Initiative 1351 would seem to be painfully unrealistic — which means the reality facing lawmakers will be a harsh one when they convene in January in Olympia.
The statewide ballot measure, which passed with 50.9 percent of the vote, calls for mandated class-size reductions in K-12 public schools throughout Washington, and also specifies increases in the number of support personnel at schools. Reducing class size requires more teachers and more classrooms, which, in some districts, could result in the construction of new schools. According to estimates from the Office of Fiscal Management, the measure will cost the state $4.7 billion over the next five years and will lead to an additional $6 billion in costs for individual school districts.
The problem is that the measure identified no funding mechanism, making for a pie-in-the-sky feel-good idea that was detached from reality. As Rep. Jim Moeller, D-Vancouver, said, “When you’re running against flags and puppies — that’s what this is, it’s all-American, mom and apple pie. That’s pretty much why there was no organized opposition, because who is going to vote against smaller class sizes?”
Moeller, who rarely has met a tax increase that he didn’t like, said he voted against the measure — a telling indicator about the reality of the proposal. So did Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee. But, rather than lament the decision of the voters, the time has come to consider how I-1351 can be made to work.
As detailed in a recent article by Columbian reporter Lauren Dake, lawmakers have a couple of options. They could ignore the law, which Moeller admits would not be a wise public-relations move; they could suspend the law through a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate; or they could suspend it, devise a funding mechanism, and send it back to voters for approval. “Say, ‘How do you want to pay for this in light of the other needs we need to meet?’ ” explained Sen. Ann Rivers, R-La Center.
Devising a funding proposal and sending it back to voters would be the most prudent course of action. If the public truly believes that spending some $4.7 billion over five years to reduce class sizes is a wise investment, let them see the black-and-white of an extensive sales-tax increase and details about which state services would need to be cut. For now, voters have opted in favor of unicorns and rainbows without a suggestion of how to pay for them.
All of this, of course, lands atop the Legislature’s obligation under the McCleary v. Washington ruling from the state Supreme Court. That decision has mandated that lawmakers come up with roughly $3 billion in additional spending for K-12 education by 2018. As Battle Ground School District Superintendent Mark Hottowe said, “The McCleary (requirements) are a more balanced look at the needs for education, where I-1351 prioritizes only one of the factors that influence a district’s health.”
That touches upon a goal that likely everybody can agree is a worthy one. The desire to improve public education and provide the best possible learning environment for Washington students is the bottom line; the arguments arise over how best to achieve that goal. The McCleary mandate is inviolate; legislators already have been held in contempt for failing to make enough progress toward fulfilling the mandate, and McCleary will be an unavoidable priority for the 2015 session. But I-1351 leaves lawmakers with a little wiggle room.
The notion of reduced class sizes sounds like a good idea. But taxpayers haven’t truly faced the reality of what that will entail.
