OHIO School-funding group reacts to U.S. high court decision

The coalition wanted Ohio legislators to be forced to change school financing.
By JoANNE VIVIANO
VINDICATOR EDUCATION WRITER
When South Range Superintendent James Hall heard that the U.S. Supreme Court had declined to hear an appeal of Ohio's 12-year-old lawsuit over the funding of schools, he wasn't surprised.
The ruling means the high court won't order the state Supreme Court to reopen the case and force state legislators to fix the funding system.
"I believe that the Supreme Court of the nation reflects, in large part, the views of the administration, and I believe the views of the administration in Washington are against public education and for private education," said Hall, who sits on the steering committee of the Ohio Coalition for Equity & amp; Adequacy in School Funding, which requested the appeal.
"I think it's outrageous that the Legislature and the governor in this state with impunity can continue to run a system that's been found unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court," he continued. "I think it's astounding, immoral, anti-child and anti-family."
On Monday, the high court denied a request by the coalition to file a federal appeal of the lawsuit filed in 1991. In May, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled 5-2 to end the case that led Ohio to spend billions of additional dollars on schools.
The state Supreme Court ordered state officials to fix the system, but then gave up jurisdiction in the case and blocked any further action in the state court system. Judges had ruled three times in five years that the state's educational system was unconstitutional because it created disparities between rich and poor districts.
The coalition of about 500 schools wanted the U.S. Supreme Court to order the state court to reopen the case so that Gov. Bob Taft, a Republican, and lawmakers could be forced to comply with the state court's previous rulings to fix the funding system.
"I'm disappointed to hear that because the funding system definitely needs to be fixed," said Girard schools' Joseph Jeswald."It's inequitable as it is now, so that's bad news.
Cites inequities
Jeswald, Girard's administrative assistant to the superintendent, explained that the current system means that not all children are getting the same programs and all taxpayers face a different burden, depending on the school district in which they live.
"The bottom line is, 'Here we go again,' at the price of not thinking of the most valuable resource our country has -- the children." said Dr. Sandi DiBacco, Struthers superintendent.
DiBacco said "not knowing is the scariest thing about school finances," as state legislators cut back in areas they had promised they wouldn't and change the amount of funding given to schools midyear.
"The state Department of Education should respond. They have to fix what's broken and they're not," she added. "Who's going to take the fall? It's the kids."
But William L. Phillis, executive director of the Ohio Coalition for Equity & amp; Adequacy in School Funding, said the fight is not over. He said the denial was not a surprise because the high court hears only about 1 percent to 2 percent of the thousands of cases presented.
Fifteen organizations, including 46 Ohio lawmakers and seven members of Congress, filed six briefs in support of the coalition's petition. Support from several "hard hitters," Phillis said, proves that the petition has merit.
"We're not defeated. It's not as if we're going to close our doors," he said. He said a next step will be to look at litigation strategies to fight the unfairness of high-stakes proficiency testing and federal requirements without a consideration of districts that don't have the resources to make children competitive. He also expects that taxpayers will question whether they have to pay taxes into a system that has been ruled unconstitutional.
XThe Associated Press contributed to this report.