(Disclosure: Rose Law Group represents Ann Siner of My Sister’s Closet and Judge John Buttrick in their litigation efforts against 208.)
By Robert Robb | Arizona Republic
According to Proposition 208 proponents, the recent decision by the Arizona Supreme Court that the initiative contained a likely fatal constitutional defect was a political, not a legal, conclusion rendered by Gov. Doug Ducey’s lackeys on the bench.
Although there are grounds to fault parts of the court’s decision, the finding of a constitutional defect was sound. That part of the decision was unanimous.
In fact, the drafters of Proposition 208 have mostly themselves to blame for its impending legal demise.
Voters put a cap on spending in the 1980s
In 1980, as part of a comprehensive package of spending and property tax constraints, voters approved a constitutional limit on aggregate operational expenditures by school districts from state and local taxes. Increases couldn’t exceed student growth and inflation.
The Legislature could approve exceedances on an annual basis by a two-thirds vote, which it has done on occasion. In 1986, the Legislature submitted to voters a bump in the limit of 10%, which was approved. And in 2002, it submitted an amendment to exempt the proceeds of Proposition 301’s education sales tax from the limit, which was also approved.
Prop. 208 lesson: Never sidestep lawmakers on school funding
