$11.2 Billion for New York City Facilities after Court Ruling

Court Orders State to Fund Education at Constitutional Level

With education advocates unified in a statewide effort and strong pressure from the city’s Mayor Bloomberg, the state legislature is poised to enact new facilities funding that would comply with a recent court order. As reported in The New York Times, the agreement – if passed by both houses and signed into law by the governor – would require the state to issue school construction bonds and send $1.8 billion to New York City and $800 million to other districts across the state in the first year. The funding commitment for New York City alone is $11.2 billion.

In the long-running “adequacy” lawsuit, Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE) v. State, New York’s intermediate appeals court, the Appellate Division, ordered the state to increase annual school funding for New York City by at least $4.7 billion, to be phased in over four years or less. In its March 23rd ruling, the court also ordered the state to spend at least $9.2 billion on school facilities in the city over the next five years. The court set an April 1, 2006 deadline for compliance, giving the state only nine days.

Geri Palast, the executive director of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, was pleased by the progress, but added that “it is still only a half-step toward full compliance.”

The Court Order

The court decision was unexpectedly positive for plaintiffs, coming from a court that had been hostile to the CFE case in two previous decisions, suggesting that this order is a rebuke to the governor and legislature for failing to fund the city’s schools at levels ordered by the state’s courts.

The majority and dissent cited decisions from courts in several states as they sparred over the separation of powers. Although the majority limited its order based on its separation of powers views, the three justices responded to the dissent’s criticism in stating that

…this directive does not merely urge the Governor and the Legislature to consider taking action. They are directed to take action. The matter for them to consider is whether $4.7 billion or $5.63 billion, or some amount in between, is the minimum additional annual funding to be appropriated for the City schools.

In fact, the majority in this 3-2 decision vacated the lower court’s confirmation of the recommendations and report from three court-appointed special masters (“referees”). The dissent agreed with plaintiffs and would have upheld the lower court and the referees’ recommendations. Nonetheless, the strong support for adequate funding in this ruling adds to favorable trends in school funding suits and advocacy, especially in a year when some state legislatures are challenged to comply with state court rulings.

Prepared by Molly A. Hunter, March 31, 2006