| New
Jersey Recent Events | Costing
Out Historical Background
Judicial involvement in education finance reform in
New Jersey began over three decades ago and deepened
more recently because the state was slow to implement
reforms. In 1973, the New Jersey Supreme Court declared,
in Robinson v. Cahill, 303 A.2d 273, that New Jersey's
school funding statute was unconstitutional because
it violated the "thorough and efficient education"
requirement of the state constitution. Since that decision,
the supreme court has issued over a dozen school finance
opinions, the latest in February, 2008. The Education
Law Center (ELC) serves as counsel for plaintiff
students, who comprise over 20 percent of the state's
students and attend school in 30 low-wealth school districts
(now known as the "Abbott districts").
“Parity,” Preschool and Other Entitlements
In its 1994 and 1997 Abbott v. Burke decisions,
the New Jersey Supreme Court ordered “parity”
funding, that is, state aid to bring per-pupil revenues
in the Abbott districts up to the per-pupil
expenditures in the state’s 110 successful, suburban
districts. The court allowed the state a phase-in period,
reaching parity for the first time in the 1997-1998
school year.
The court, in its 1998 decision, 710
A.2d 450, ordered an unprecedented series of entitlements
for disadvantaged children, including full-day kindergarten,
high quality preschool for 3- and 4-year-olds, a comprehensive
facilities effort, after-school programs, and summer
school.
After the State failed to comply with its own 1998
representations to the court regarding preschool, plaintiffs
challenged the remedy. In Abbott v. Burke,
748
A.2d 82 (2000) (Abbott VI), the court spelled
out the preschool requirements in more detail, including
substantive educational standards, certified staff,
and a maximum student/teacher ratio of 15:1. In 2002,
the ELC and Rutgers University launched "Starting
at 3," a preschool project.
In 2002, New Jersey announced a $10 - $12 billion school
construction program, of which $6 billion was designated
to build and renovate school buildings in the Abbott
districts. While the School Construction Corporation
provided financing for projects in suburban districts
in a timely manner, it failed to finance most of the
projects in the Abbott districts and was shut
down when corruption came to light. Overcrowded classrooms
and dilapidated facilities continue to hamper progress
in the school districts educating most of the state’s
most disadvantaged schoolchildren.
Costing
Out
In 1996, the New Jersey Department of Education developed
a "costing out model" described as determining
the cost of a constitutional "thorough and efficient
education," based on a hypothetical school district.
The model concluded that the state's 30 poor "Abbott
districts" had sufficient funding and that high-performing
suburban school districts were spending wastefully.
In response, numerous suburban superintendents testified
before the legislature about the impact funding cuts
would have on their programs and students.
Later that year, the legislature grandfathered the
suburban spending into a new education funding statute
but, effectively, held the Abbott districts
to the lower spending levels in the model. In Abbott
IV, 693 A.2d 417 (1997), the New Jersey Supreme
Court rejected the funding statute as it applied to
the Abbott districts and, instead, ordered
the State to provide funding parity with the average
expenditures of the state's 110 higher wealth districts.
In 2003, the state Department of Education hired an
expert to conduct a cost study but did not release the
results. The Education Law Center filed suit to obtain
this information, and in October 2006 a Superior Court
judge ordered the state to provide it.
Recent Events
A new school funding plan was approved by the legislature
on January 7, 2008. Under the new formula, the state
will allocate approximately $7.8 billion to K-12 education
for fiscal year 2009, a 7% increase from 2008. All districts
will see a boost in school funding ranging from 2 to
20% during the first two years of its implementation.
According to David Sciarra, attorney for the Abbott
districts and executive director of the Education Law
Center, the base funding proposed in the new formula
would mean that Abbott districts would get
funding amounts closer to the state average and not
to the levels of the wealthiest districts, as mandated
by the Supreme Court. Though Abbott districts
will still receive more than half of all state aid under
the new plan, 22 out of these 32 districts will receive
the minimum 2% increase.
According to Education Commissioner Lucille E. Davy,
the new formula “follows the basic principle that
children with greater needs deserve greater resources”
and it will better address the needs of the 49 percent
of low-income students that live outside the Abbott
districts, and have not been covered by the Abbott
litigation. Under the plan, aid will be distributed
through a foundation formula based on a costing-out
study that determines the amount of money each district
needs to spend to allow every student to attain New
Jersey’s educational standards. The base amount
varies with grade level, and additional weights will
be used to account for at-risk, special education, and
limited English proficiency students. The formula also
includes an additional weighting for students in areas
of high poverty concentration.
On March 17, 2008, Attorney General of the state of
New Jersey, filed a motion
claiming that the School Funding Reform Act (SFRA) addresses
the constitutional deficiencies previously identified
by the Court and asking the Court to eliminate the partiy
funding system it had ordered in the Abbott
decisions. David Sciarra, chief counsel for the Abbott
plaintiffs, is seeking to have the motion remanded to
the trial court so that the parties can fully evaluate
the constitutional issues implicated by SFRA.
Related Litigations
In 2006, a class action complaint was filed against
state officials and local boards of education, asking
the court to order vouchers for students attending schools
with low pass rates on state standardized tests. The
suit was dismissed October 4, 2007.
Several rural school districts tried to qualify for
additional state funding as Abbott districts,
in Keaveney v. New Jersey Department of Education,
2000 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 814 (Dec. 26, 2000). One was approved.
Also, the Superior Court, Appellate Division, in Stabaus
v. Whitman, 770 A.2d 1222 (2001), dismissed a suit
by taxpayers alleging unconstitutionally disparate tax
burdens.
Last updated: March, 2008
|
