1. Brief History of School Finance Litigation 1994: Woonsocket, Pawtucket, and West Warwick receive successful ruling at trial of Pawtucket v. Sundlun. 7/20/95: RI Supreme Court overturns trial court ruling. 2004: Separation of Powers Amendment to RI Constitution calls Sundlun decision into doubt

2. 1997 Student Investment Initiative Act The general assembly recognizes that Rhode Island cities and towns primarily rely on the local property tax to finance education programs, and that the state's highest effective property tax rates are concentrated in the state's urban communities. Therefore, certain communities, because of low tax capacity and high tax effort, are unable to appropriate sufficient funds for the support of core instructional programs. The general assembly also recognizes the need to reduce inequities in resource distribution among the state's cities and towns as well as among the state's districts and schools.

3. 2004: Education Equity and Property Tax Relief Act 16-7.2-1 Legislative findings. – (a) The general assembly recognizes the need for an equitable distribution of resources among the state's school districts, property tax relief and a predicable method of distributing education aid. The general assembly finds that there is a need to reform the way public education is financed because: (1) All children should have access to an adequate and meaningful education regardless of their residence or economic means; (2) A school funding system should treat property taxpayers equably, limit the portion of school budgets financed by property taxes, and establish sufficient cost controls on school spending; (3) The state should ensure that its school funding structure adequately reflects the different needs of students, and closes the educational inequities among the state's school districts; and... (b) The intent of this chapter is to promote a school finance system in Rhode Island that is predicated on student need and taxpayer ability to pay. A new school funding system in the state should promote educational equity for all students and reduce the reliance on the property tax to fund public education. This legislation is intended to ensure educational opportunity to each pupil in each city or town on substantially equal terms. Adequate per pupil support will be provided through a combination of state school aid and local education property tax levies.

4. The Funding Formula under the 2004 Act (1) A state education funding formula that is student population and needs driven. Student counts should include enrollments, students eligible for free and reduced lunch, those participating in language assistance programs, and special education. Provisions should be made for those school districts that experience declining enrollments.

5. Years of Inaction on the Funding Formula 2007: General Assembly commissions Wood Report. Wood Report recommends a basic foundation amount of $9,500-$10,000 per pupil for 2006. 2007: General Assembly’s Technical Advisory Group, on review of Wood Report, develops funding formula that would recommend a foundation amount of $10,607 per pupil for 2008-09. No action. 2008: Smith Report commissioned by Representative Edith Ajello recommends foundation per-pupil formula of $10,600 per student. 2008: Ajello submits bill to enact Smith Report Funding formula. No action.

6. Suit Filed, Formula (?) Created 2/2010: Present action filed. 5/2010: General Assembly enacts present funding formula legislation. Core amount: $8,333 per student. 3/2011: We amend complaint to reflect continued inadequacies of new funding formula. 8/2011: State moves to dismiss. 4/24/2012: Oral argument on motion to dismiss.