As we announced in June, the Coalition has new leadership this fall. Co-Presidents are Janis Traven of Seattle and David Berg of Puyallup. Barbara Poyneer continues as Treasurer and sender of these “From the Coalition – message #” emails.
You can reach us at either of two email addresses:
Our Government Relations representative in Olympia continues to be Donna R. Christensen.
———————————————–
A coalition is a group of people and/or organizations coming together to achieve a common goal.
Our primary goal is full implementation of Highly Capable as a mandated part of basic education. (ESHB 2261 states in section 708 “The legislature finds that, for highly capable students, access to accelerated learning and enhanced instruction is access to a basic education.”)
Part one of this goal was the promulgation of the revised WAC governing the Highly Capable Program. This was done in April 2013. http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=392-170
Next is the very important goal of ample funding to allow districts to fulfill the requirements now laid on them. Remember, no unfunded mandates!
Despite our best efforts last session we made no progress in getting the Legislature to enact an ample funding formula.
We are happy to report that the McCleary plaintiffs’ response to the Legislature’s Article IX filing with the court calls attention to the failure to make any progress or to plan such progress on ample funding of HCP.
The following is a direct quotation from the September 30th filing by NEWS. To shorten the length of this message, footnotes are omitted. They can be found in the HCP NEWS pdf file.
In short, plaintiffs acknowledge the State has made some net progress moving in the general direction of the 2018 finish line for full compliance with the State’s ample funding mandate under Article IX, §1. But “some net progress moving in the general direction of” that finish line is not what this Court Ordered. This Court Ordered the State’s 2013 filing to demonstrate steady, real, and measurable progress crossing that finish line by 2018.46 The State’s 2013 filing did not do that.
[There follows a long list of items setting out the Legislature’s failure. to show progress and to provide a plan for progress.]
G.
1.
Defendant Submits No Plan Or Steady Progress For ESHB 2261’s “Highly Capable Program”
“The current system isn’t designed well for those kinds of kids,… it bores them and they don’t learn very much, and they oftentimes more often than you would expect turn out to be the kids who drop out.”
Basic Education Finance Task Force member Senator Fred Jarrett’s trial court testimony explaining why the Task Force explicitly included a “fairly robust program” for gifted/advanced students 114
The “Highly Capable Program” Finish Line.
This Court’s January 2012 decision expressly recognized that “ESHB 2261 broadened the instructional program of basic education by specifically adding … the program for highly capable students.”115
The State has accordingly issued regulations requiring school districts to implement highly capable K-12 programs beginning this biennium.116
2. The State’s Highly Capable Program “Plan” & “Progress”.
(a) The State’s “Detailed Plan”.
The State’s 2013 filing does not submit any plan or any periodic benchmarks for full funding of the highly capable program added by ESHB 2261.
Instead, defendant completely disregards the “detailed plan” requirement in the Supreme Court Order.117
(b) The State’s “Progress”.
The State’s 2013filing does not claim any progress towards funding the highly capable program added by ESHB 2261. 118
No progress is not the steady, real, and measurable progress this Court Ordered. 119
If you want to read the entire filing, NEWS 2013 post budget filing pdf is also attached. Much that does not directly refer to HCP is a strong argument for Legislative action, including action on full funding for HCP.
To support this strong reminder to the Legislature, the Coalition has statistical evidence of the actual underfunding of the HCP going back more than a decade. We will be using both items in the next session. With your support, we will achieve our goal of ample funding by 2018. As the Court stated in its December 2012 ruling on the State’s 2012 report:
“Full funding of the reforms initiated by ESHB 2261 is therefore an established finish line in this case, which the State must cross by 2018.”