Vol. 29, No. 1 #8 (February 2006). WYOMING SCHOOL FINANCE CASE.

• Author: By Marv Tyler and Ford T. Bussart

Wyoming Bar Journal

2006.

Vol. 29, No. 1 #8 (February 2006).

WYOMING SCHOOL FINANCE CASE

WYOMING LAWYERFebruary 2006/Vol. 29, No. 1WYOMING SCHOOL FINANCE CASE - POINT/COUNTERPOINTThe Changing World of Education PolicyBy Marv Tyler and Ford T. Bussart

Trial of the School Finance case was absolutely necessary. The overarching justification necessitating the trial is our 84,000 students. Each student has a fundamental right to an equal educational opportunity and to the best education possible. Providing this educational opportunity requires that our schools be staffed, built, maintained, and equipped to achieve excellence. The Constitution requires the State to provide the resources for the costs of this best educational opportunity. For over a quarter of a century, the State has failed to equitably and adequately fulfill this responsibility. The State's chronic failure to meet this obligation has made several generations of our children the victims of constitutional failure.

In spite of the State's failure to satisfy its constitutional mandates perpetuating the litigation, its rhetoric is prolific. "Wyoming is spending about $9,000 per student and this funding amount is higher than in almost any other state." "There is no incentive to end the litigation because government is paying for both sides of the case." "School districts are always seeking to obtain more money through endless litigation." "Why don't districts use the money they are paying their lawyers to educate their students?" "Nothing can be gained by having the trial because the State is in the process of reforming funding laws." "School finance litigation has done a disservice to the people of Wyoming." Such misleading and untrue statements have been repeated at every phase of this litigation since the Campbell trial in 1993. Sadly, many of these public utterings have been made by Wyoming lawyers.

To understand the reasons necessitating the trial, one must understand what has transpired. Although there were very important earlier school finance holdings, the 1980 landmark Washakie case confirmed education as a fundamental right. After Washakie, State action and an upturn in the economy changed funding. No parties returned to the Court to demonstrate compliance with Washakie.

By the early '90's, funding legislation produced wide disparities. The 1995...