Special Masters Urge State to “Regain the High Ground” in Arkansas

In their report to the Arkansas Supreme Court on October 3, 2005, two court-appointed special masters reviewed Arkansas's 2005 legislation on school funding in detail, and concluded that “[it] is difficult to defend.“ The concluding call to action in the masters' report said:

We recognize how difficult it may be to avoid the tendency to slip back onto the track of “business as usual.” We have no doubt, however, that the means are present for the governor and the members of the 85th General Assembly and their successors to regain the high ground and eventually to erase the stain of unconstitutionality from Arkansas's public schools.

In extensive hearings, the masters heard testimony from state officials, some legislators, and several school district superintendents. In their report, they point out unspent state surplus funds, cost-of-living raises for all state agencies and for the legislators themselves, and school funding promises made in the preceding legislative session – now broken– before reaching their conclusions.

Reactions

Naturally, plaintiffs' attorneys were pleased, and the lead counsel said,

Arkansas has a right to be proud of the progress made in the last two years in education funding and academic improvement. However, much remains to be done…We must act to assure adequate funding, not just talk about it. When the State fails to act in ways that fulfill the constitutional obligations, education advocates will be forced to resort to the Courts to compel the required actions.

However, as reported in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, legislators expressed strong disappointment and claimed that legislative “decisions to provide $35 million to the teacher health-insurance program and more than $100 million for school buildings will save school districts money they can spend on other things.” The Arkansas News Bureau reported that the governor was angry enough to propose reducing the number of school district superintendents from over 200 to 75 and making them state employees with significantly lower salaries.

Lake View v. Huckabee

The supreme court's involvement stems from the Lake View v. Huckabee school funding litigation, in which the supreme court held the then-current state education finance system unconstitutional in late 2002, set a January 2004 deadline for the legislative and executive branches to remedy the constitutional violation, and released its jurisdiction in June 2004, after the state enacted new funding laws. Foreshadowing this latest round of hearings, the court's June 2004 opinion, after praising the state's progress, stated that it would

not waver in our commitment to the goal of an adequate and substantially equal education for all Arkansas students; nor will we waver from the constitutional requirement that our State is to "ever maintain a general, suitable, and efficient system of free public schools." Make no mistake, this court will exercise the power and authority of the judiciary at any time to assure that the students of our State will not fall short of the goal set forth by this court. We will assure its attainment.

Nonetheless, the court's decision to recall its mandate was by a narrow 4-3 margin.

Other States

State courts in Idaho, Kentucky, New Jersey, New Mexico, and New York have also used special masters in school funding cases. These special masters have played a variety of roles to assist the court in their deliberations.

Prepared by Molly A. Hunter, October 7, 2005