Public education needs court oversight

The state of New Mexico wants the Yazzie/Martinez lawsuit dismissed, claiming it has done enough to improve public education because of the millions of dollars being poured into improving schools over the past two years.

The state’s argument is that the school system is drastically different than the one the late Judge Sarah Singleton ruled did not meet constitutional standards back in July 2018. That’s especially true when it comes to educating English-language learners, Native and low-income students to a “sufficient” standard, the state is claiming.

Not so fast.

New Mexico, under Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s leadership, has pushed hard to improve education. Still, there is no way of knowing whether the efforts have worked to fix the deficiencies in the system.

Lujan Grisham, to her credit, also did not contest the lawsuit and appeal to higher courts once Singleton ruled. Instead, the governor got to work and persuaded a willing Legislature to spend more money on public education, with many of those dollars directed toward at-risk students.

Public education funding now takes up 46.2 percent of the state budget compared to 43.8 percent in 2008. That’s because of an 18 percent increase in education funding between the start of the 2017-18 school year and the start of the 2019-20 school year.

However, with the state budget in free fall, thanks to the COVID-19 crisis and the falling price of oil, we can’t afford to leave the funding of education completely at the discretion of elected officials and the Public Education Department.

Santa Fe Public Schools Superintendent Veronica García, a former education Cabinet secretary, remembers how universal pre-K fell apart in the 2008 recession cutbacks. She thinks the lawsuit remaining in place is necessary guidance. And she is correct.

Despite what soon will be a budget crisis, investment in education can’t be up for debate. Court oversight is prudent and needed, with Judge Matthew Wilson in charge of the case since Singleton’s death.

The state, using private law firm Robles, Rael & Anaya, wants the court to determine whether New Mexico has complied with the terms of Singleton’s order rather than deciding whether the state’s education system actually is constitutional. A hearing has been set for later this month.

We agree with lawyers for the plaintiffs that Singleton’s order does require the state to meet its constitutional mandate for providing “sufficient” education for all. That can’t be measured simply by effort but through outcomes — and there simply has not been enough time to determine whether recent efforts are working. A budget crunch is around the corner, perhaps a tighter budget retraction than occurred during the recession of 2008.

Lawyer Gail Evans, who represents the Yazzie/Martinez plaintiffs, has it exactly right: “And trusting them has never worked in the past. That’s why we filed the lawsuit in the first place — we couldn’t trust the Legislature or the governor or the Public Education Department to provide the school system we deserve. We need the court to be a watchdog and hold the state’s feet to the fire.”

Now is no time to turn back.