Go figure, state funded lawyers are more important then educating our children.
South Dakota students aren’t guaranteed a quality education, a circuit judge ruled Wednesday, finding that the way the state pays for education does not violate the state constitution.
Â
Circuit Judge Lori Wilbur’s decision follows a trial that saw six superintendents complain that a lack of money was hurting South Dakota’s students. An appeal to the state Supreme Court now is likely, according to the lawyer representing students and their families.
Yesterday on several blogs and forums, the conservatives were claiming this to be a victory, but hardly. They also claimed that the case was over, not really.
Scott Abdallah, the lead lawyer for the plaintiffs, said reaching the state Supreme Court was the goal from the outset: Unlike most states, South Dakota’s high court has never decided a school funding lawsuit.
But that wasn’t the only spew the conservatives spittled on themselves, they cried about how much this was costing taxpayers, trying to blame the plaintiffs for the cost, but guess who spent a cool million to defend the case? The state, not the plaintiffs. So who is really wasting taxpayer money?
The state spent almost $1 million from a special litigation fund, and the attorney general’s office spent a lot of time and money defending the lawsuit, he said.
Yes, the same governor who refuses to fund school’s properly, has no problem dropping a cool million on lawyers so he can prevent spending a couple extra million on schools each year. Makes sense. Not.
So how much did the plaintiffs have to pay their lawyer? Zilch.
School districts initially paid for the costs of the lawsuit, but since a judge ordered them to stop last year, Abdallah has been working the case without charge. The matter of whether those school districts can pay for a lawsuit to which they are not a party was argued before the Supreme Court in January but has not been decided; the justices’ decision on that will determine whether Abdallah gets paid.
“I made the decision that we had come this far and my clients deserved to have their day in court,” he said. “I think it’s just a really important issue and it’s an issue that will affect the lives of South Dakotans for years to come.”
Imagine that, principal above profit. Maybe Rounds needs to learn something about that.
If we don’t educate our children adequately, we’ll end up with more semi-retarded bureaucrats like Larry Long and Mike Rounds in positions where they can break things.
It doesn’t matter if you think we should spend more – the point is the constitution doesn’t mandate what the plaintiffs were claiming. You don’t have to agree with the decision, but the judge was correct on this one.
So who is really wasting taxpayer money?
The plaintiffs brought the suit, thus they are the ones who led the state to spend the money. They also spent a large chunck themselves I’m sure, but I guess that is ok….they have all this extra money floating around even though they are whining for more.
Consolidate the small schools and make some honest efforts to eliminate waste in the school systems (have you seen the weight rooms in Sioux Falls high schools) and then I’ll support giving them more money. The way it stands now every time they get a few bucks they remodel something or start a new sport instead of raising teacher pay, so I’m not about to come to their defense.
“constitution doesn’t mandate what the plaintiffs were claiming”
That’s debatable, and I think it should go to the Supreme Court. I almost get the feeling that the judge purposely ruled against them so it would go the SC. Of course either side would appeal it, I guess.
“The plaintiffs brought the suit, thus they are the ones who led the state to spend the money.”
True. But I’m sure the state spent 3 times as much defending themselves.
I agree that school district spend wastefully, and I also thing that some teacher’s make a decent salary when compared to other professionals in the city and state. I think though this lawsuit is more about setting up a permanent STATE FUNDING formula that has to be followed by the legislature, becuase right now, they can do whatever, year to year, it’s pretty willy-nilly how they do it now.
Well I’m not opposed to a formula that adjusts to keep up with inflation and that is fair, but I recall the figures the schools were claiming they would need per student and it was absolutely insane. It would put our per student spending above every other state in the entire region.
I just wish there could be a little give and take here. The schools might be able to justify a need for more money, but it shouldn’t be thousands per student but insted might be a few hundred. However, the schools should also get serious about consolidation where it makes sense. Having Beresford and Centerville have two separate schools for instance… that just doesn’t make sense when there are so few students. I also question the need for every student to have their own laptop or the need to buy new football uniforms every year.
I like to think of schools like franchises. A smart business owner couldn’t put a franchise in a small town that is 10 miles from another small town with that same franchise, because one of them will surely fail. It is time the administration of these small schools step up to the plate and admit they are simply too small of be efficient and be able to offer students the best education possible.
Like I said earlier, I think this is more about consistency then money.
Consolidate the small schools and make some honest efforts to eliminate waste in the school systems (have you seen the weight rooms in Sioux Falls high schools) and then I’ll support giving them more money. The way it stands now every time they get a few bucks they remodel something or start a new sport instead of raising teacher pay, so I’m not about to come to their defense.
Consolidation would be a big step in th eright direction. If this was arbitration instead of a lawsuit, they may be able to offer it as a bargaining chip. Your weight room example may need some work. Do you know for a fact that the weight machines were purchased by the school district? A lot of the equipment for sports and music comes from booster club funds.
The way it’s been in the past, when schools would get extra funds an be expected to hire more teachers, they’d get a special funding boost for a year, and then revert to the standard formula. If I got a bonus from my employer, I woudln’t use it to pay for the first lease payment on a new beamer, I’d use it for something I only have to pay for once – like a bathroom remodel.
I agree. Some people are surprised I use my hot tub everyday, and I’m like, “Hey, it’s plugged in all the time and I paid good coin for it, damn right I’m gonna sit in it everyday.”