August 28, 2014 2:53 PM

The gist of the Dietz ruling-funding system fail on multiple counts

Fails to provide meaningful discretion in application of property taxes so that it can not provide a constitutionally adequate system of education. Students do not have substantially equal access to educational funds.

“On the final day of trial, this Court orally announced its ruling on the plaintiffs' claims, finding the Texas school finance system unconstitutional in several respects. Before this Court entered its findings of fact and a final judgment, the 83rd Legislature passed several bills that potentially affected the claims in this case. On June 19, 2013, the Court granted a motion to reopen the evidence to consider the impact of the 2013 legislation, and held a ten-day evidentiary hearing beginning on January 21, 2014.

“Based upon the competent evidence admitted at trial (both the main trial and upon the reopening of evidence), the arguments of counsel, and this Court's contemporaneously-entered Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (incorporated herein by reference), 8 the Court finds that the Texas school finance system effectively imposes a state property tax in violation of Article VIII, Section 1-e of the Texas Constitution because school districts do not have meaningful discretion over the levy., assessment., and disbursement of local property taxes. The Court further finds that the Legislature has failed to meet its constitutional duty to suitably provide for Texas public schools because the school finance system is structured, operated, and funded so that it cannot provide a constitutionally adequate education for all Texas schoolchildren.
“Further, the school finance system is constitutionally inadequate because it cannot accomplish, and has not accomplished, a general diffusion of knowledge for all students due to insufficient funding. Finally, the school finance system is financially inefficient because all Texas students do not have substantially equal access to the educational funds necessary to accomplish a general diffusion of knowledge. Consequently, the Court enjoins further funding under the system until the constitutional infirmities are corrected.”