Case Name: LAKE VIEW SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 25 of Phillips County, Arkansas, et al. v. Governor Mike HUCKABEE, et al.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Arkansas
Decision Date: 2005-06-09
Citations: 362 Ark. 520
Docket Number: 01-836
Parties: LAKE VIEW SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 25 of Phillips County, Arkansas, et al. v. Governor Mike HUCKABEE, et al.
Judges: Glaze, Corbin, and Dickey, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Arkansas Reports
Volume: 362
Pages: 520–537

Head Matter:
LAKE VIEW SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 25 of Phillips County, Arkansas, et al. v. Governor Mike HUCKABEE, et al.
01-836
210 S.W.3d 28
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Opinion delivered June 9, 2005
Sharpe, Beavers, Cline & Wright, by: Brad Beavers, for appellant, Barton-Lexa School District, successor in interest to Lake View School District; and amicus curiae, Forrest City School District.
Friday, Eldredge & Clark, LLP, by: Christopher J. Heller, for appellant, Little Rock School District.
Matthews, Campbell, Rhoads, McClure, Thompson & Fryauf, P.A., by: David R. Matthews, for appellant, Rogers School District.
Mike Beebe, Att’y Gen., by: Tim Gauger, Sr. Ass’t Att’y Gen., and Mark Hagemeier, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee, Governor Mike Huckabee.
Wilson Law Firm, P.A., by: E. Dion Wilson, for amici curiae, Earle School District and Helena-West Helena School District.
Sharon Street, for amici curiae, DeQueen School District, et al.
Barrett & Deacon, by: D.P. Marshall Jr., for amici curiae, Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce and Associated Industries of Arkansas, Inc.

Opinion:
Robert L. Brown, Justice.
On May 5, 2005, this court issued a per curiam order setting the various motions to recall the mandate and reappoint the masters for oral argument. Forty-nine school districts were represented as either movants for the recall of the mandate or movants for intervention or as amici curiae. W e asked that the parties focus their attention on these issues in rebriefing and at oral argument:
(1) this court's jurisdiction to hear the instant motions;
(2) whether the General Assembly at its 2005 regular session retreated from its prior actions to comply with this court's directives in Lake View Sch. Dist. No. 25 v. Huckabee, 351 Ark. 31, 91 S.W.3d 472 (2002), particularly with respect to the General Assembly's actions or inactions in relation to Act 57 and Act 108 of the Second Extraordinary Session of 2003;
(3) whether the foundation-funding levels for the next biennium assure a continual level of adequate funding for Arkansas students; and
(4) whether the General Assembly's commitment to facilities funding meets the adequacy criterion.
Oral argument was then held on May 19, 2005.
We first conclude that this court has jurisdiction to recall its mandate and appoint masters to make findings of fact. See Lake View Sch. Dist. No. 25 v. Huckabee, 355 Ark. 617, 142 S.W.3d 643 (2004) (per curiam). See also Ark. Const. amend. 80, § 2(E).
We further made it radiantly clear in our supplemental opinion handed down on June 18, 2004, that although we were releasing jurisdiction of the case, we reserved the right to exercise our power at any time to assure that a constitutional system of education would be attained:
The resolve of this court is clear. We will not waver in our commitment to the goal of an adequate and substantially equal education for all Arkansas students; nor will we waver from the constitutional requirement that our State is to "ever maintain a general, suitable, and efficient system of free public schools [.]" Make no mistake, this court will exercise the power and authority of the judiciary at any time to assure that the students of our State will not fall short of the goal set forth by this court. We will assure its attainment.
Lake View Sch. Dist. No. 25 v. Huckabee, 358 Ark. 137, 161, 189 S.W.3d 1, 17 (2004) (emphasis added).
The allegations made by the movants in this case are of the most serious kind. The core assertions are that the General Assembly reneged on its legislative commitments and failed to comply with the landmark legislation passed during the Second Extraordinary Session in 2004. We are quick to add that we do not have adequate facts before this court to determine whether this is so. We merely underscore the seriousness of the allegations, but we further emphasize that they are only allegations.
The response of the State of Arkansas, both in its briefs and at oral argument, is first to deny any backtracking on the part of the General Assembly, but, secondly, to urge that even if there has been backtracking, a new case must be filed in circuit court, and litigation must begin anew. We are disinclined to agree with the State. This court's determination that Arkansas' public school funding system does not pass constitutional muster dates back twenty-two years. See DuPree v. Alma Sch. Dist. No. 30, 279 Ark. 340, 651 S.W.2d 90 (1983). Resolution of the issue has moved at glacier speed. There is no question in our minds that our failure to address the issues raised in the current motions with dispatch by using experienced Masters will only occasion additional delay. This we cannot sanction.
In our opinion handed down on June 18, 2004, we wrote about the laudable steps taken by the General Assembly to chart a constitutional course. This court is committed to assuring that that course remains fixed and true.
We, therefore, recall our mandate in this case forthwith and reappoint Bradley D. Jesson, former Chief Justice of the Arkansas Supreme Court, and David Newbern, a former Justice of the Arkansas Supreme Court. The Masters shall have the same powers and authority as set forth in Lake View Sch. Dist. No. 25 v. Huckabee, 356 Ark. 1, 144 S.W.3d 741 (2004) (per curiam). The Masters are authorized to examine and evaluate the issues listed in this opinion, but also any other issue they deem relevant to constitutional compliance.
We direct that the Masters furnish this court with their report on or before September 1, 2005, unless the Masters request additional time.
Glaze, Corbin, and Dickey, JJ., concur.
Hannah, C.J., Gunter, J., and Special Justice Carol Dalby, dissent.
Imber, J., not participating.