Hidden hero of school funding

Attorney General Lawrence Wasden isn't the enemy.

In fact, we would argue that the school children of Idaho have no greater friend.

"I've been tagged as the guy who hates education," Wasden said matter-of-factly during an editorial board meeting with The Press on Thursday afternoon.

It's a tag that for our humble part we wish to remove.

When Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna pushed for extra funding earlier this month, appealing to newspaper editorial boards across the state as well as the Idaho Legislature's funding arm, his friend, Wasden, ended up getting pushed into a corner. As one of the five constitutionally appointed officers of the Idaho Department of Lands - and the state's highest individual legal authority - Wasden was compelled to insist that Luna do his due diligence before seeking that amount of money from the fund.

To help school districts across the state deal with the same budget challenges that almost every single Idahoan faces, Luna sought $52.8 million in addition to the $31 million already designated to schools from the Land Board's endowments. Wasden did the only responsible thing he could. He followed his constitutional mandate and in the end, Luna's department received $22 million plus the $31 million. And somehow, Wasden was branded as "the guy who hates education" by some newspapers because schools did not get all they'd sought.

We would like to introduce readers to the Land Board's endowment mission, which comes directly from Article IX, Section 8 of the Idaho Constitution. It states that lands are to be managed "in such manner as will secure the maximum long term financial return to the institution to which granted."

In other words, if every member of the Land Board - attorney general, governor, secretary of state, superintendent of public instruction and controller - fulfills his or her fiduciary, constitutionally mandated duty, he or she will secure the maximum long term financial return to the institution to which specific lands are granted.

Obliging Luna's request would have eased the immediate burden on school children but seriously imperiled those same children the next year and the year after, perhaps for many years to come. The massive dollar amount he sought was, in our view, built upon irresponsibly optimistic projections for the performance of timber sales and securities investments, posing unacceptable risk to the heart of this vital component of public school funding.

We are frankly surprised that Luna would have done so. As a member of the Land Board himself, he should have known better.

Wasden has impressed us for the nearly eight years he's served as attorney general, standing firm against the stiff winds of constitutional challenges. For example, at some political and even personal expense several years ago, he correctly interpreted the allowance of gaming on Indian reservations.

This time, by securing "the maximum long term financial return to the institution to which granted," Attorney General Wasden is guilty of just one thing. He's guilty of doing his job.