Joint Lake View report to the Masters

is online -- read it here.

Contentions (since the 12/15/05 Opinion [2006 special session]):
1. Education needs were not funded first -- funding was based on available funds;
2. Facilities' funding was insufficient;
3. Foundation funding was not based on local tax collection rates;
4. Categorical funding was not increased;
5. Adequacy study did provide a cost of living adjustment;
6. Appropriations for declining enrollment districts were compliant;
7. Teacher salary disparity was adequately addressed;
8. Actions were mandated in 2006 for which there was no funding;
9. Health insurance is no longer an issue;
10. Bonded indebtedness is no longer at issue; and
11. The districts seriously question the "recalibrated matrix."

Reflecting on the initial weeks of this still early session, no. 1 concerns me a little bit. Still, I recognize the obligation to fund education first, but it becomes problematic if it gets to a point when we're acting unconstitutionally if the first bill filed and considered is not educational funding, especially when it is prudent to gather information on pending litigation, as is the case this session.

Hopefully, the strikethroughs have been laid to rest (so long as we continue the steps we've taken to address these particular issues). At least this joint report gives legislators an idea of concerns among the petitioners as we move forward this legislative session. A joint conference will be held on Thursday at 1:30 at the Supreme Court building.