Scheidler then noted that under Washington’s Constitution, we have two “educational” provisions — Article 9 schools and Article 13 Schools. Scheidler noted that both the legislature and the judicial branch have combined two DIFFERENT school systems into one. Scheidler said that Article 13 Schools are specifically established to provide (2) special education, (3) some pupil transportation, (4) the learning assistance program (remediation), (5) transitional bilingual education, and (6) the institutional education program for juveniles in detention. Under Article 13, the “schools” are funded differently than Article 9 Schools, which require “Ample” funding, and should NOT BE COMBINED under the Court’s McCleary reasoning. He claims both the legislature and the courts are betraying our constitution by lumping two distinct school systems into one and it is nothing more than a “manufactured crises” intended to burden citizens with higher taxes.
Scheidler went on to say that the Court’s analysis of our state’s obligations to “amply fund” Article 9 schools delibertely left out and important element in their analysis, which is the “PROHIBITION” in article 9 schools being under “sectarian control”. the word “sectarian” is a broad term that would include organizations such as “religions, political and labor unions (such as the Washington State Education Association). Scheidler claims the Court’s blind-eye to this PROHIBITION is to protect the union’s control of our teachers and schools. (Article 13 schools have no such prohibition — which means these schools may be religious, political or union controlled so long as the curriculum remains “non-sectarian”.)