The Ohio Supreme Court said earlier this year it would "expedite" the DeRolph school funding case against the state – possibly making its decision by July 1 to ease the legislature’s budgetmaking.

Thursday, July 05, 2001

The Ohio Supreme Court said earlier this year it would "expedite" the DeRolph school funding case against the state – possibly making its decision by July 1 to ease the legislature’s budgetmaking.

Although no announcement has been made yet, officials close to the action in Columbus said this week they expected a decision soon after Wednesday’s holiday, as early as Friday or next week.

Meanwhile, educators’ eyes are on the court. And, no matter how long they have to wait, educators will likely leave the interpretations of law in justices’ hands.

"Is it constitutional? I can’t answer that," Washburn said. "Does it fix the problems, absolutely not and that’s from everybody in education."

The former school superintendent from Lawrence County issued that message on camera before an Ohio News Network television program June 19 – the day before the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in DeRolph. The court has twice ruled 4-3 against the state in the decade-old lawsuit that declared school funding unconstitutional.

Washburn led Dawson-Bryant Schools when the district became a plaintiff in the suit, and testified before the legislature that the state’s reliance on property taxes created an unfair funding mechanism.

Statewide, about 45 percent of school funds comes from Ohio while local districts must raise the remaining 55 percent of their budget from local property taxes, Washburn said.

Often in rural areas or in districts with little and poor property the districts have less total money that others across the state, even if enrollments are the same.

Now, after years of budget work by lawmakers and previous court action, those percentages remain the same as they were 10 years ago, Washburn said.

"Have they done away with the over-reliance on property tax? No."

The $1.4 billion in extra funds the state also talks about is, first, closer to $1.3 billion; second, it’s money going to districts that didn’t get full state funding for their increased enrollments because the budget had been capped; and third, it’s money that takes up the slack from where deregulated utilities are not paying districts anymore, Washburn said.

"It’s frustrating, and the (funding) formulas are so complicated that it’s extremely difficult for people not thoroughly familiar with school funding to understand," he said.

And, at least three Lawrence County districts get less money in the second biennium of the state’s budget than they do in the present, Washburn added.

"I’m not in a position to say it’s constitutional or not, but certainly the present budgeting does not fix the system. In the long run, it may be one of the worst formulas."

During June 20’s Supreme Court hearings, attorneys for the coalition of schools that challenged the state also said nothing had changed, and found some favor on the court.

During arguments, for instance, Justice Francis Sweeney, who has voted twice against the state, said it seems that the burden has increased on the local property tax rather than decreased, which was one of the main problems with the system – reliance on property tax.

On the other hand, Justice Evelyn Lundberg Stratton, who twice ruled with the state, questioned the coalition. She also said there’s nothing wrong with the state declaring, ‘If you can’t raise this money locally, we’re going to help you, and if you can raise it locally, you don’t need our help.’

Earlier this week, a spokesperson for the Ohio Supreme Court said justices had not announced when a decision will be issued.