Campbell County School Dist. v. State

• Decision Date: 08 January 2008
• Docket Number: No. 06-75.,No. 06-74.,06-74.,06-75.
• Parties: CAMPBELL COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, State of Wyoming, et al., Appellants (Plaintiffs), Laramie County School District No. One, et al.; Wyoming Education Association; Wyoming School Board Association, Appellants (Intervening Plaintiffs) Big Horn County School District No. One, et al., Appellants (Plaintiffs), v. The STATE of Wyoming, Appellee (Defendant). The State of Wyoming, Appellant (Defendant), v. Campbell County School District, State of Wyoming, et al., Appellees (Plaintiffs), Laramie County School District No. One, et al.; Wyoming Education Association; Wyoming School Board Association, Appellees (Intervening Plaintiffs), Big Horn County School District No. One, et al., Appellees (Plaintiffs).
• Court: Wyoming Supreme Court

181 P.3d 43

2008 WY 2

CAMPBELL COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, State of Wyoming, et al., Appellants (Plaintiffs),

Laramie County School District No. One, et al.; Wyoming Education Association; Wyoming School Board Association, Appellants (Intervening Plaintiffs)

Big Horn County School District No. One, et al., Appellants (Plaintiffs), v. The STATE of Wyoming, Appellee (Defendant).

The State of Wyoming, Appellant (Defendant), v. Campbell County School District, State of Wyoming, et al., Appellees (Plaintiffs),

Laramie County School District No. One, et al.; Wyoming Education Association; Wyoming School Board Association, Appellees (Intervening Plaintiffs),

Big Horn County School District No. One, et al., Appellees (Plaintiffs).

No. 06-74.

No. 06-75.

Supreme Court of Wyoming.

January 8, 2008.

Representing Campbell County School District, State of Wyoming, et al.: Ford T. Bussart and Marvin L. Tyler of Bussart, West, Tyler, P.C., Rock Springs, Wyoming.

Representing Laramie County School District No. One, et al.: Paul J. Hickey and Richard D. Bush of Hickey & Evans, LLP, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing Big Horn County School District No. One, et al.: Timothy J. Kirven and Benjamin S. Kirven of Kirven and Kirven, P.C., Buffalo, Wyoming.

Representing the Wyoming Education Association: Patrick E. Hacker, Gregory, P. Hacker and Erin M. Kendall of Patrick E. Hacker, P.C., Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing the Wyoming School Board Association: Tracy J. Copenhaver, Powell, Wyoming.

Representing Teton County School District No. 1: Sara E. Van Genderen of Mullikin, Larson & Swift LLC, Jackson, Wyoming.

Representing Natrona County School District Number One: Kathleen B. Dixon and Stefanie L. Boster of Murane & Bostwiok, LLC, Casper, Wyoming.

Representing the State of Wyoming: Michael R. O'Donnell, State School Finance Counsel; Rhonda Sigrist Woodard, Special Assistant Attorney General, Woodard & White, P.C., Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Before VOIGT, C.J., and GOLDEN, KITE, JJ; DONNELL and YOUNG, DJJ.

KITE, Justice.

[¶ 1] Since 1971, Wyoming courts, legislators, educators, and parents have acted to eliminate wealth-based and educational opportunity disparities in Wyoming's school finance and capital construction systems. This enormous undertaking was necessitated by the unique provisions of Wyoming's state constitution, which directs the legislature to provide a thorough and efficient education to every Wyoming student beginning at age six. The boundaries and breadth of a fundamental right to a thorough and efficient education without disparities had not previously been charted. However, by the 1990s, the severe negative impact of inadequate resources an^ wealth-based disparities on a school system not built upon the constitutional principles of equality, efficiency and thoroughness was apparent across the state and the cooperation and full commitment of all branches of Wyoming's government was required to rectify those disparities.

[¶ 2] The Wyoming constitution entrusts the Wyoming legislature with defining, developing, and implementing a thorough and efficient education system. The legislature, in reliance upon research and information from its agencies, consultants, local school districts, educators and parents, enacted statutes to correct the deficiencies in the state school system. Some of those statutes produced legitimate legal challenges. We issued significant decisions in 1995 and 2001 clarifying the constitutional mandate to be met by legislation. Since then, and continuing today, the legislature has generously responded to our decisions and its constituency by developing and refining a comprehensive, sophisticated system that meets the complex demands of delivering a thorough and efficient education to the individualized needs of Wyoming students in the 21st century.

[¶ 3] Having fulfilled its constitutional duty to define what constitutes a "thorough and efficient education," the legislature entrusted local school districts with the task of delivering it by developing appropriate educational programs, hiring quality teachers, reducing class size, and designing appropriate facilities. The legislature passed laws to fund education from state wealth and then delivered that funding to local school districts in a block grant. The level of trust the legislature has placed in the people of Wyoming is admirable and certainly one important reason that it has achieved so much since 2001.

[¶ 4] This case presents the issue of whether the legislature's efforts meet the constitutional mandate. We hold that the system is constitutional. Some deficiencies exist, some changes are required and new issues will arise; however, this Court is satisfied that the legislature has in place a thorough and efficient educational structure funded from state wealth as required by our state constitution. This Court's jurisdiction, retained since 2001, is ended.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

[¶ 5] In State v. Campbell County School District, 2001 WY 19, 19 P.3d 518 (Wyo.2001) (Campbell II), we ordered the district court to retain jurisdiction of the issues until the state could demonstrate compliance with the decision's mandate on or before July 1, 2002. In State v. Campbell County School District, 2001 WY 90, 32 P.3d 325 (Wyo.2001) (Campbell III), at the request of all parties we agreed to retain jurisdiction. On March 10, 2004, the state filed a Petition for Resolution of Constitutional Interpretation Questions with this Court. We were unable to resolve the issues presented without factual development and denied the state's petition. Thirty school districts, the Wyoming Education Association and the Wyoming School Board Association (challengers) filed a Petition for Resolution of Constitutional Questions in the district court. The challengers claimed that the state had failed to comply with the mandate of Campbell II for both operations and capital construction funding.

[¶ 6] Specifically, the challengers claimed that the operations funding formula was not yet cost-based for utilities, vocational education, small schools and small districts, and at-risk students; failed to properly account for inflation and the regional cost adjustment; and contained computational errors that had harmed school districts and resulted in money damages. The challengers also claimed that the latest capital construction funding formula produced inadequate facilities incapable of delivering all educational programs and improperly shifted costs to school districts under the guise of local enhancements to be funded by local bonding. The challengers claimed, and the state conceded, that it had failed to either repair or replace, immediate need facilities by the deadline imposed in Campbell II.

[¶ 7] Following a trial on the merits in 2005, the district court issued a lengthy decision holding that the state met the Campbell II mandate for: at-risk students, with some adjustments required; cost of living differences, with some adjustments; administrative and classified salaries, small schools and small districts; teacher beginning and average salaries; and funding of health insurance costs. The district court also found that the recalibration of the MAP model in 2001 was cost-based and reasonably and accurately captured the cost of education.

[¶ 8] The district court rejected the challengers' claim for money damages for computational errors and found that the state violated the Campbell II mandate by imposing a 20 year experience cap on teacher salaries, capping funding for routine and major maintenance when space exceeds state standards, failing to provide for funding in cases of extreme hardship during great price volatility for utilities, failing to properly fund vocational education and failing to use a specific index for the inflation cost adjustment.

[¶ 9] On capital construction, the district court found that in 2002 the legislature had created a comprehensive system to provide safe, efficient, adequate and equitable school facilities in Wyoming by enacting statutes and creating the School Facilities Commission (SFC) which promulgated rules and regulations. Nevertheless, the district court found that the state had failed to meet the Campbell II and III deadlines for immediate need facilities and technology readiness. The district court held that the SFC rules and regulations were constitutional except those related to adequate space for cocurricular activities, dedicated long distance learning rooms, adequate computer rooms and utility installation and road costs. The district court also ruled that the state was not constitutionally required to build facilities for athletic activities. All parties appealed the ruling and the cases were consolidated.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

[¶ 10] We review findings of fact made by the district court after a bench trial using a clearly erroneous standard. A finding is clearly erroneous when, even though substantial evidence supports it, the reviewing court is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake was made. We review legal conclusions de novo. Mullinnix LLC v. HKB Royalty Trust, 2006 WY 14, ¶ 12, 126 P.3d 909, 916 (Wyo.2006). This standard is central to our jurisprudence generally and to every case we have decided involving the Wyoming public school financing statutes. Some of those cases did not involve review of a district court decision after a trial. Although we did not specifically address the standard of review in the cases involving purely legal issues, our review was clearly de novo. Washakie County School District No. One v. Herschler, 606 P.2d 310 ` (Wyo.1980); Campbell County School Dist. v. State, 907 P.2d 1238 (Wyd. 1995) (Campbell I); Campbell II, 2001 Wt 19, 19 P.3d 518; Campbell III, 2001 WY'90, 32 P.3d 325.

[¶ 11] The parties' briefs in this case indicate some confusion about the difference between the standard of review guiding this Court's consideration of the decision being appealed and the...