It wasn’t just about the headlines that Washington education has been making with the courts, it was also an honest, frank discussion about the state of Kitsap’s schools, and the battle to fund them.

A crowd of nearly 50 people gathered at the Bremerton High School performance center on Sept. 17 to hear an overview of Washington Supreme Court developments — particularly the McCleary decision — which affects funding for all state K-12 public schools. The event, hosted by the Kitsap League of Women Voters featured Tom Ahearne with the law firm Foster Pepper. Ahearne was lead counsel in the case against the state.

It was also an opportunity to hear from Kitsap’s five school district superintendents and discuss the challenges each district faces.

“This is the good, the bad and the ugly about this process,” said Dr. Aaron Leavell, superintendent of the Bremerton School District.

“In Bremerton, we saw an increase of $45 per student heading into this school year,” Leavell said as an example. “It’s a total of $225,000. It is wonderful and we appreciate it, but it’s not enough to cover the material costs that we are going to be faced with.”

“When the state gave us a little more money, the bad news was that pension and benefits also increased so it was kind of a wash,” he said.

Funding compounds other challenges, such as meeting reduced class size standards.

“Heading into next year, if we fully carry out what the class size reduction is, we will be short nine classrooms in Bremerton alone,” Leavell said. “So that is a problem.”

Bremerton’s funding woes were echoed down the panel of Kitsap superintendents which included Bainbridge Island’s Faith Chapel, South Kitsap’s Dr. Michelle Reid, Central Kitsap’s David McVicker, and North Kitsap’s Patty Page.

“We don’t qualify for funding for full-day kindergarten,” Chapel said of the Bainbridge Island School District. “Full day kindergarten is very popular on the island, but it is tuition based. Most of our parents choose that. We only run one half-day kindergarten class in the district.”

Chapel noted that the district received approximately $1 million of additional funding over the past two years, but it still hasn’t made up for the gap. She cited transportation as an example.

“We are considered fully funded for transportation, but 25 percent of the cost of transportation is being funded locally,” she said. “So the state’s full funding is only 75 percent.”

While the night ended with discussions on the local lack of educational funding, the main topic was the McCleary decision, which is expected to raise funding to the state’s K-12 schools over the next few years.

What has become known as the “McCleary decision” stems from a 2007 lawsuit that worked its way up to the Washington Supreme Court. Matthew and Stephanie McCleary, and Robert and Patty Venema alleged that the state wasn’t meeting its constitutional duty to fund K-12 education in the state.

Washington’s constitution sates “It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste or sex.”

Ahearne briefed the crowd about the court battle over interpretation of the constitution.

“The state said ‘ample’ means ‘enough to get by,’” Aheanre said. “The court said ‘no, ample is considerably more than just adequate.’”

Ahearne also noted that after funding cuts, what the state is now giving schools is far below enough to get by.

The supreme court ultimately agreed with the families in 2012. Since then, the state legislature has been tasked with getting school funding up to par by 2018.

Ahearne paraphrased the court’s findings, stating “our children in Washington have a positive constitution right to an amply funded eduction.”

“A constitutional right for every single one of our kids,” he said. “And the state is violating that constitutional right.”

But that was then, in 2012. Recently, the Supreme Court revisited the case and determined the state was failing to get school funding back on track in a timely manner.

Ahearne laid out the numbers. The state would need to fund each student at $12,701 by the 2017/18 school year to be compliant with the constitution. In 2013, the state was at $7,219 per student, and $7,646 at 2014. At this rate, Ahearne noted, the state would be far below where it needs to be to fully fund by 2018.

The supreme court noticed this and found the state in contempt.

“The fact they came down so quickly and unanimously says to me that they are less than happy,” Ahearne said.

Local school districts are hoping that the recent finding of contempt will usher in more dollars after the legislature forms its next budget in 2015. While the districts have seen a rise in funding over the past year, there is still a ways to go toward full funding.

“We did received about $2.3 million in additional funds this year,” Reid said of the South Kitsap School District. “The majority of the increase has made up shortfall we previously felt. While we appreciate the money, it’s like filling up a leaking bucket, so it’s not enough to patch up the bucket.”

McVickers said that Central Kitsap voters “generously” approved a funding levy which has contributed toward the district’s transportation costs. He also noted the need to further fund special education.

North Kitsap also passed a funding levy with “strong support,” Page said.

With McCleary coming into action, it is hoped that the districts won’t have to rely as much on levy’s to fund local education.