Ronald J. Hansen, and Kathryn J Woo

The Republic | azcentral.com

Arizona's League of Women Voters announced its opposition to Proposition 123

The school-funding measure has seen broad support in business and education circles

The league says the state has ignored voter wishes from 2000 for higher-education spending

Arizona's League of Women Voters urged the defeat of Proposition 123 on Thursday, saying the school-funding measure shortchanges education while thwarting earlier voter interests.

The organization's opposition stands in sharp contrast to the broad support Prop. 123 has received from lawmakers, business leaders and educators, who see it as a step toward improving the state's public schools.

Shirley Sandelands, president of the league's Arizona chapter, said the funding problems Prop. 123 would address have happened because Gov. Doug Ducey and the Legislature have ignored Prop. 301, the 2000 measure that collected extra sales tax for education and required inflation-adjustments for schools moving forward.

FACT CHECK: No requirement that Prop. 123 money go 'directly' to classrooms

“We realize educators in Arizona have been placed in the unenviable position of being willing to accept almost anything at this point and the numbers being touted by supporters of Prop. 123 sound good, but it’s not a long-term solution,” Sandelands said. “Voters in 2000 provided that long-term solution, and our political leaders decided to ignore them.”

Kwok: Will anger and distrust sink Prop. 123?

Arizona voters will weigh in on Prop. 123 on May 17. The measure was brokered as a solution to a 2010 lawsuit brought against the state for underfunding education during the Great Recession. The state lost the case, but it remains on appeal and has unresolved legal issues that could leave the matter dragging on for months, if not years, and could be ultimately overturned.

Andrew Morrill, president of the Arizona Education Association, which supports Prop. 123, said the measure avoids a further drawn out court battle while helping today's students.

"I think (the league) is a fine organization, but I think they got this one wrong," Morrill said. "Our students can't wait any longer. ... After passage of Prop. 123, will come rapidly a discussion of the reauthorization of Prop. 301. The momentum to reauthorize 301, we believe, will be greatly increased by passing 123."

Prop. 123 has seen little resistance, in part because the state's financial support for public education has fallen near the bottom of the nation. Ducey has said Prop. 123 is a first step toward a better-funded, better-performing educational system.

Sandelands also noted her concerns about the impact Prop. 123 would have on the state's land trust fund, which would provide most of the $3.5 billion in additional funding over a 10-year span.

Prop. 123 would increase the share of money taken from the trust fund from 2.5 percent to 6.9 percent for 10 years. Jeff DeWit, the state treasurer whose office manages the trust fund, has said the fund is unlikely to earn as much through its investments as Prop. 123 would take.

My Turn: Let's debunk those Prop. 123 myths

DeWit, who has been the most visible opponent of the measure, said the state is supposed to use only the earnings from the trust fund, not dip into its principal.

"Proponents of Prop. 123 will tell you that it’s a solution to the problem. It isn’t," Sandelands said. "It’s a short term Band-Aid that will cause even deeper funding problems in 10, 15 or 20 years. The league is urging the Legislature to get serious about education funding and do it the right way."

The league also said it plans to ask U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch to investigate the state for disenfranchising voters by refusing to follow the will of the people in Prop. 301 and by refusing to follow court orders.