Issue link: http://digital.copcomm.com/i/610158
WINTER 2015/16 | ADVOCATE 7 Settlement Details Settlement Details The plaintiffs in Cave Creek v. DeWit— Cave Creek v. DeWit— Cave Creek v. DeWit a coalition of fi ve school districts, Arizona School Boards Association, Arizona Education School Boards Association, Arizona Education Association, and Arizona Association of School Association, and Arizona Association of School Business Offi cials – sued the state in 2010 to Business Offi cials – sued the state in 2010 to force the Legislature to comply with the infl ation force the Legislature to comply with the infl ation funding mandate established when voters approved Proposition 301 in 2000. Settlement approved Proposition 301 in 2000. Settlement discussions in the case have been going on since discussions in the case have been going on since February 2015 over state funding that the Arizona February 2015 over state funding that the Arizona Supreme Court last year ruled is owed to Arizona Supreme Court last year ruled is owed to Arizona public schools. The key elements of the funding proposal are: The key elements of the funding proposal are: • An increase in per-student base-level funding An increase in per-student base-level funding to $3,600, an increase of $173 for each to $3,600, an increase of $173 for each student, which is 72 percent of what the courts student, which is 72 percent of what the courts ruled at the appellate level —and what the ruled at the appellate level —and what the plaintiffs demanded. Within two years, the plaintiffs demanded. Within two years, the base level will reach the full amount the court base level will reach the full amount the court ordered. • Infl ation language to continue as it currently Infl ation language to continue as it currently exists (2 percent or the rate of infl ation whichever is less) with compounding in perpetuity. • Additional funds, in consideration of back pay, Additional funds, in consideration of back pay, to be distributed annually: • $50 million per year for the fi rst fi ve years $50 million per year for the fi rst fi ve years • $75 million per year for the second fi ve years $75 million per year for the second fi ve years • This will account for 50 percent of what the This will account for 50 percent of what the courts identifi ed was owed in back pay. courts identifi ed was owed in back pay. • No policy strings or specifi c requirements will No policy strings or specifi c requirements will be placed on how the money should be spent. be placed on how the money should be spent. • Contingencies to account for a severe downturn in the state economy.