Over 15 years ago, in 2000, voters passed Proposition 301, directing the Arizona State Legislature to provide additional funding specifically for education. Unfortunately, the Legislature circumvented the intent of Proposition 301 by using a loophole in the language which permitted them to ignore the funding mandate completely. The Legislature was then ordered by the Arizona state courts, on more than one occasion, to comply with Proposition 301, but the Legislature chose to ignore the court order by using the same loophole. Consequently, the Arizona Department of Education has failed to receive billions of dollars in lost funding that had been designated for Arizona schools by the state’s voters.
Prop 123, in essence, is Governor Ducey’s compromise proposal with the AZ Education Association (and others) to begin to correct this deficit. In the intervening years since the passage of Proposition 301, Arizona has fallen anywhere from 45th to 50th in the top three education funding categories (per pupil spending, student/teacher ratio, and teacher salaries), depending on the poll. The bottom line is that AZ is now the worst state in the nation in education funding. Even from a pure business perspective, if we are to be successful in attracting more commerce and industry to our state, don’t we need an educated citizenry to fill those positions? And what company would be attracted to establish itself in a state with the poorest schools in the nation?
Although imperfect, Proposition 123 appears to be the best offer the citizens and schools of Arizona are going to receive from our state government at this time. Period. Proposition 123 should be viewed simply as this: a springboard used to correct a 17- year-old injustice that will move us toward the massive reconstruction of education now required in this state. For the detractors on the left, who refuse to vote for anything the governor proposes or may take credit for, and those on the right who are, in my opinion, overly concerned about the value of state lands (I’ve done the research), let me simply ask this: Would you rather play politics with education, yet again, or would you rather the state begin funding our students, decreasing class sizes, and increasing teacher salaries NOW? Voting “No” on this proposal is a vote against the children, teachers, and schools of our now floundering state, and may set us back another 20 years. Is that notion even remotely acceptable? The answer to me is rather obvious: Vote “Yes” on Proposition 123.
P.S. There is $74 million of one-time money that will be continued annually if Proposition 123 passes. However, that money will be revoked if Proposition 123 fails. Therefore, schools and the students they serve will face another funding reduction next year if Prop 123 goes down.
—L. Scott Cleaves
Middle School Teacher, Tucson
This article appears in May 12-18, 2016.
A Superior Court judge said our leaders owe the schools $331 million this year to cover it, and ordered them to pay it. The Republican Legislature refused to obey the law, and instead countered with only $74 million. This is criminal…. literally!
Rather than complying with the law, or appealing the decision, the two sides settled on raiding the land trust for the next 10 years!!?? That is like butchering the dairy cow. You may eat well for a short time, but you will miss out on having milk for all the years after.
Why should we let them off the hook, when the court has found them guilty and ordered them to pay up? The fantasy that $74 million will be given to education every year is just that… a fantasy! Even in the best possible scenario, that would end in less than a decade. Then what??!!
What we should be doing is taking to the streets with signs and banners and bullhorns demanding that the state legislature find ways to pay up on what is owed to education. Instead of cutting taxes for the rich, they should be raising taxes on the wealthiest individuals and corporations who currently benefit at the expense of everyone else… esp. our kids!
We should be demanding that our legislature begin representing the working class instead of the wealthy elite. ENOUGH! NO ON 123! IT IS A SELL OUT OF ALL FUTURE EDUCATION IN ARIZONA!
Unfortunately, the Legislature circumvented the intent of Proposition 301 by using a loophole in the language which permitted them to…………
Unfortunately, the Legislature circumvented the intent of Proposition 123 by using a loophole in the language which permitted them to……..
Mr. Cleaves: thank you for all that you do for public schools, and your thoughtful letter above.
As a staunch and vigorous advocate for fully funding our public schools, and an ardent foe of Doug Ducey’s campaign to privatize our schools, may I clarify gently that many voters that oppose Prop 123 are not “..voting against children, teachers and schools….” You mistake these voters for our Legislative majority that continues to unlawfully under-fund our schools as we have demanded.
We must resist being divisive—people of good will, thoughtful and expert analysis that support properly funding our schools have a right, and a responsibility to fully discuss their concerns with this miserly, torturously complex constitutional amendment cloaked in political subterfuge. The richest men in Arizona, under the guidance of a dark money Governor are bullying teachers and making them carry the do or die, take it or leave it message to the voters. That is wrong. That is unnecessary. That is, quite simply, un-American, isn’t it?
We must encourage constructive dialog, recruit reliable and loyal advocates to the greater cause of forcing our Governor and legislature to follow the will of the people—or be replaced by public servants that will. Prop 123 is a get out of jail free card for the legislature, with our schools posed as hostages, right? Let’s not disparage the good people that can help us get a better outcome.
There is a more fulsome analysis of this amendment from the good people at noprop123.com. I will see you on the the other side of this election, holding up my end of the bargain to get our schools securely funded.