State's highest court rejects school funding lawsuit

for the full legal opinion click here  then click on opinions then on Hancock

By Karen Testa, Associated Press Writer  |  February 15, 2005

BOSTON --The state's highest court ruled Tuesday that Massachusetts is meeting its constitutional duty toward schools in lower-income communities, rejecting a lawsuit that challenged the state's education funding formula.

The Supreme Judicial Court voted 5-2 to reject a recommendation issued last year by a lower court judge.

"No one, including the defendants, disputes that serious inadequacies in public education remain," Chief Justice Margaret Marshall wrote. But she said the state "is moving systematically to address those deficiencies and continues to make education reform a fiscal priority."

The lawsuit was brought by students in 19 school districts -- including Springfield, Brockton and Lowell -- who said they had been shortchanged by the state. Overcrowded classrooms, rundown facilities and inexperienced teachers were among the problems cited by the plaintiffs' lawyers.

State attorneys noted education spending has increase $30 billion since 1993, and said problems were limited to certain districts, and that a troubleshooting process was under way.

Superior Court Judge Margot Botsford, who prepared a 350-page report for the high court last year, agreed with the plaintiffs that the state underfunds poorer districts. She recommended that the high court order a cost study and implement whatever funding and administrative changes are needed.

That raised the possibility that lawmakers would have had to rewrite the state's landmark 1993 Education Reform law, passed in response to an earlier an SJC ruling.

Justice John M. Greaney, one of the two justices to dissent, wrote in a separate opinion that he was disappointed the court had turned away from earlier education reform measures at a time when schools most need the help. He said a "crisis" exists in many of the school districts that brought the lawsuit, and said the court could have remained involved without stepping on the toes of the governor or the Legislature.

"The governor has, correctly, identified the education crisis facing our schools as the civil rights issue of our generation," he wrote. "Public support is already behind this task."

Michael Weisman, the attorney representing the students, said the decision puts lawmakers and Gov. Mitt Romney on notice that they have to do more to help students achieve, especially if the state wants to raise the passing grade for the MCAS test.

"The court is patient, but the court is also sending a message that is loud and clear and that message is the commonwealth must meet its duty," Weisman said.

Brockton High School junior Julie Hancock, 16, the lead plaintiff in the case, said classrooms in her school are still overcrowded and there aren't enough computers to go around.

"I'm surprised that the court wants us to be patient and give more time," she said.

Romney acknowledged that more work is needed but applauded the court's decision to throw out the case, saying it removes a long-standing legal impediment to making changes.

"This is a great day for education reform and it is a great day for the kids of the commonwealth," he said.

Kathleen Kelley, president of the Massachusetts Federation of Teachers, said the ruling will allow imbalances in education between wealthier and poorer communities to continue.

"I was horrendously disappointed in the court's non-decision," Kelley said. "To make the leap and say give the state more time is not right for my teachers and students. Right now I have children in urban systems. They only get to go through school once."

Attorney General Tom Reilly, who defended the state, had no immediate comment.

The other districts involved in the lawsuit known as the Hancock case were: Barnstable, Belchertown, East Bridgewater, Fitchburg, Gill-Montague Regional, Holyoke, Leicester, Lynn, Mashpee, Orange, Revere, Rockland, Sandwich, Taunton and Uxbridge. 

**************
for the full legal opinion click here  then click on opinions then on Hancock