A day after the Legislature opens its 2007 regular session on Jan. 8, a federal judge will begin a hearing on a high-stakes education funding issue that has twisted state lawmakers and advocates in legal and political knots for years.
U.S. District Judge Raner C. Collins has scheduled a four-day hearing to consider whether changed circumstances, including a new state law enacted last spring, still warrant enforcement of another judge’s 2000 judgment that Arizona’s programs for students learning the English language were inadequate.
Judge Collins scheduled the hearing after an appeals court overturned his orders holding the state in contempt and imposing daily fines that totaled $21 million earlier this year. The fines stopped when the Legislature passed a new state law to revamp English Language Learning programs.
Here are some questions and answers about the court proceedings and what’s at stake for lawmakers, taxpayers and students.
What’s at issue in the hearing≠
A 1992 class-action lawsuit contends that Arizona’s ELL programs violate a federal law requiring equal opportunities in education because of shortfalls in teacher training, facilities, instructional material and other aspects. The Legislature has increased state funding since the lawsuit was filed but the plaintiffs contend that the changes and additional cash aren’t enough to provide adequate programs for the approximately 160,000 ELL students.
How will the judge decide whether it is≠
Good question. State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne wants the judge to consider only conditions and student achievement gains in the Nogales Unified School District, the district whose students and parents were cited in the suit as the affected “class.” The plaintiffs argue that the scope is broader because the statewide school funding system is at issue and that adequacy of ELL programs in schools elsewhere in Arizona also should be considered.
Are there other issues involved≠
Yes. Judge Collins’ ruling on the ELL law passed last spring by the Legislature said provisions of that law requiring certain funding offsets violate prohibitions in federal law. Also, Mr. Horne contends that there’s a big-picture issue of whether an appointed judge should be able to dictate how the state’s elected policy-makers decide funding priorities.
How much money is involved≠
Tens of millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars annually, depending on whose plan for improving ELL instruction ultimately is adopted. The state’s per-student funding goes up for English-learning students because of the extra costs involved.
What happens after the Jan. 9-12 hearing≠
The judge likely won’t rule immediately but instead do so within a few weeks or months. The lawyer for the lawsuit plaintiffs likely will remind him that lawmakers will have already started their 2007 session. If the judge rules that conditions have improved and that the ELL programs and their funding are adequate, then the law passed by the Legislature last spring could take effect. But there’s also the issue of the offsets provisions in the new state law. A new ruling by Judge Collins that the state’s programs are inadequate would send lawmakers back to the drawing board, though that could be put on hold if Mr. Horne appeals.
Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.