In yet another lawsuit against the state, plaintiffs are alleging Idaho lawmakers have failed to live up to a constitutional requirement to adequately fund public schools.

The latest legal action challenges the many fees public schools across the state have enacted for classroom supplies and activities. It does not address the “pay to play” fees most school districts have in place for extracurricular sports participation. And that is wise.

The real issue is: What level of support does the Idaho Constitution mandate for the public school learning environment? Here’s what the constitution states:

“The stability of a republican form of government depending mainly upon the intelligence of the people, it shall be the duty of the legislature of Idaho, to establish and maintain a general, uniform and thorough system of public, free common schools.”

In a lawsuit being considered in Ada County’s Fourth Judicial District, a former superintendent of the Nampa School District is contending Idaho’s lawmakers are violating the state’s constitution when they force individual school districts to assess student fees to make ends meet and provide instructional opportunities. The state is arguing the case should be dismissed for procedural reasons because individual school districts — not the state — need to be sued.

The argument from the Idaho Attorney General’s office might seem plausible if not for the fact that a large share of the money for public education in Idaho comes from the state. And that funding has been declining.

Idaho’s former chief economist for 25 years, Michael Ferguson, who is now director of the independent Idaho Center for Fiscal Policy, has compiled the facts and has shared them with civic groups all over Idaho for the past year.

In an extensive report that examines Idaho’s tax structure and spending for education, Ferguson has revealed a steady decline in Idaho’s contribution to public education measured against its economic resources, including median income, since 2000.

“Since fiscal year 2000 there has been a dramatic reduction in the share of total state spending that goes to public schools,” Ferguson said in his report. “The average over the 13-year period fell 11 percent from the previous two decades.”

When coupled with inflation and increasing enrollments, individual school districts were strapped for cash. Cuts in staff and programs were made, but fees were also implemented in many school districts to pay for the supplies and materials. Classes involving lab activities were the first to put the squeeze on students and their parents.

But the largest squeeze actually came from the Idaho Legislature in 2006, according to Ferguson. That was the year unelected Gov. Jim Risch held a one-day special session of the legislature and it eliminated the state property tax for maintenance and operation of school districts in Idaho. The $260 million property tax cut was replaced with a penny increase in sales tax — and that move fell $50 million short. Idaho took the balance out of its “rainy day” fund.

Ferguson’s report points out that not only was the shift to sales tax inadequate, it eliminated a system that equalized the tax burdens between rich and poor school districts in Idaho. And it made public school funding more susceptible to economic downturns.

Voters in individual districts across the state have taxed themselves to shore up the deficit in state funding the past several years. Parents have written checks to pay fees for their children. But the state continues to lose ground and is ranked 50th in per-student spending for public education.

Politicians pay lip service to the idea Idaho needs to provide better educational opportunities if it hopes to compete in the 21st Century. Much focus has been given to the need for more technology and the best qualified teachers. 

But, there’s a price tag for progress and lawmakers must accept that.