Initiative 1351, which would reduce K-12 class sizes in Washington and is one of three statewide propositions on the upcoming general election ballot, is an unfunded mandate that simply would cost too much to implement, particularly given that its educational benefits remain unclear.

We urge voters to reject it.

Going beyond the McCleary educational funding court decision that the state already is struggling to comply with, this measure would direct the state Legislature to allocate funding for smaller class sizes, with extra reductions for all grades in defined high-poverty schools and for grades K-3 in all schools. 

It also would require the Legislature to provide funding for increased student support staffing, including counselors, teaching assistants, librarians, and others—potentially equating to the hiring of an astonishing additional 25,561 school employees, less than one-third of whom would be classroom teachers.

The increased funding for these changes—estimated at $4.7 billion, not including potential school district capital expenditures needed to provide facilities—would be phased in over four years. 

Class Size Counts, the statewide coalition supporting the measure, contends that smaller class sizes are critical in subjects such as math and science, and are especially important for struggling students, giving them the individual attention they need to get back on track. It claims that Washington ranks 47th out of 50 states on class size, and argues that we can do better.

The accuracy of that ranking is suspect, though, and critics challenge proponents’ assertion that students in smaller classes experience better learning outcomes, saying the research is unconvincing except for in the earliest school years, which K-3 educational reforms already under way seek to address. Teacher quality, not class size, is the most important factor in student learning, some opponents of the measure rightfully contend.

 Also, and importantly, this expensive proposal comes at a time when the Legislature and the state already face huge looming budgetary challenges. In a unanimous decision issued earlier this month related to the McCleary case, the Washington Supreme Court held the Legislature in contempt for its lack of progress on fixing the way the state pays for public education, but it withheld possible punishment until after the 2015 legislative session. 

The cost of the McCleary-related reforms has been estimated at $4 billion or more in each biennial state budget. Even factoring in projections of healthy growth in state revenues for the 2015-17 biennium, the state faces a projected shortfall of nearly $1 billion, and that’s without including whatever actions will be needed to comply with the Supreme Court mandate. To satisfy the court, that deficit could rise to $3 billion, published reports say.

In short, the high spending required to comply with I-1351 would place too great of a strain on other areas of the state budget, and for potentially negligible—if any—gain. For those reasons, the initiative deserves a failing grade at the polls.