Court upholds aid freeze to 31 districts
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 05/10/06
BY GREGORY J. VOLPE
GANNETT STATE BUREAU
TRENTON — The state Supreme Court has given Gov. Corzine permission to "flat fund" the state's most economically disadvantaged districts in the upcoming school year.
In an order released Tuesday, the court unanimously upheld Corzine's budget proposal that freezes state aid for 2006-07 at this year's figure — $4.25 billion — to the 31 districts covered by the Abbott v. Burke school-funding-equity case. The court also sided with Corzine's call to raise local levies in eight Abbott districts with property tax rates less than half the state average.
In the Abbotts' favor, the court gave them the right to appeal for more money and ordered the state to conduct audits and program evaluations.
Richard Shapiro, a lawyer who represented several districts, said it was important that the court preserved districts' rights.
"I see it as still afford-ing the opportunity . . . to get needed funding if they can make that showing," Shapiro said. "I think it's important to preserve the districts' right to do that."
Long Branch Schools Superintendent Joseph M. Ferraina said the decision doesn't really affect his district because it hadn't asked for additional aid.
"One of the most important impacts the Abbott funding has had on districts is it has drastically improved the performance of children," Ferraina said. "I think the Supreme Court was looking to give the state a little breather. I think things work out the best possible way through the district and the state Department of Education without involving the courts."
Asbury Park court case
Asbury Park Board of Education President Robert DiSanto said the district is continuing its court fight to get the funding it needs in a case with other districts filed after the state asked the board to raise the tax levy. The board did not.
DiSanto said Shapiro will speak to the board and the public at Thursday's regular 7 p.m. meeting.
In Keansburg, Robert S. Finger, business administrator and board secretary, described the state Supreme Court decision in one word: Shameful.
Finger said his district — whose total budget was slated to grow to $44.32 million in the 2006-07 school year — may consider cutting programs or dropping its emergency surplus from $650,000 to about $100,000 to operate under the proposed "flat-funding" cuts.
"We may have to bring it (the surplus) down to under $100,000 and that's dangerous," Finger said. "We're using our money, that we in theory are required to keep for emergencies."
Finger also took exception to the phrase "flat funding."
He said the term doesn't apply because Abbott districts won't be getting their 2005-06 levels of state funding in the 2006-07 year. They could be receiving the 2005-06 funding, minus money the state removed midyear for early childhood education costs and other items.
In Keansburg, that money adds up, Finger said.
"We lost a little over a million dollars (through the midyear adjustments)," he said. "We're not flat funded. And that point was raised to the Supreme Court. They chose to overlook that."
New funding formula
Corzine, who attended last week's Supreme Court hearing, has pledged more accountability and a new funding system for public education.
"Our focus will be to get resources to the children," Corzine said in a prepared statement. "We must meet their needs and prepare them for the challenges they face after graduation. Only when that goal is met, and not a moment sooner, will we have achieved a victory."
The Supreme Court ordered the state to complete audits of the Newark, Jersey City, Paterson and Camden districts by November and the remaining Abbott districts in time for 2007-08 budget proposals. The court also ordered programmatic evaluations — a sign that Abbott reform is not limited to money, said David Sciarra, executive director of the Education Law Center.
"The court has made a very strong statement about state accountability for performance to these children," Sciarra said.
The order was released the day Abbott funding dominated an Assembly Budget Committee hearing.
Corzine's stance with the Abbott districts has brought praise from political opponents.
"This is a positive initial first step . . . toward an inevitable, but necessary, Abbott reform and change of the school funding formula," said Sen. Joseph M. Kyrillos Jr., R-Monmouth.
Senate Education Committee chairwoman Shirley Turner, D-Mercer, said districts, rich and poor, need to adjust spending, given the state's fiscal problems.
Other school district officials around the state painted dire pictures.
"I'm shocked and disappointed," said Philip Freeman, the Camden school board president, who indicated layoffs will have to be considered. "I think it's going to cause extreme hardship for Camden and other Abbott school districts."
Mary Stansky, Gloucester City superintendent of schools and president of Urban Superintendents of New Jersey, issued a statement saying flat funding is really a $1 million cut for her district.
"Unfortunately, after measurable progress, the rug has been pulled out from under us and we will not be able to meet (state) mandates," Stansky said. "Subsequent years will prove to be quite dismal for our schools and our students."
Education Commissioner Lucille Davy said districts can make cuts without affecting education.
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 05/10/06
BY GREGORY J. VOLPE
GANNETT STATE BUREAU
TRENTON — The state Supreme Court has given Gov. Corzine permission to "flat fund" the state's most economically disadvantaged districts in the upcoming school year.
In an order released Tuesday, the court unanimously upheld Corzine's budget proposal that freezes state aid for 2006-07 at this year's figure — $4.25 billion — to the 31 districts covered by the Abbott v. Burke school-funding-equity case. The court also sided with Corzine's call to raise local levies in eight Abbott districts with property tax rates less than half the state average.
In the Abbotts' favor, the court gave them the right to appeal for more money and ordered the state to conduct audits and program evaluations.
Richard Shapiro, a lawyer who represented several districts, said it was important that the court preserved districts' rights.
"I see it as still afford-ing the opportunity . . . to get needed funding if they can make that showing," Shapiro said. "I think it's important to preserve the districts' right to do that."
Long Branch Schools Superintendent Joseph M. Ferraina said the decision doesn't really affect his district because it hadn't asked for additional aid.
"One of the most important impacts the Abbott funding has had on districts is it has drastically improved the performance of children," Ferraina said. "I think the Supreme Court was looking to give the state a little breather. I think things work out the best possible way through the district and the state Department of Education without involving the courts."
Asbury Park court case
Asbury Park Board of Education President Robert DiSanto said the district is continuing its court fight to get the funding it needs in a case with other districts filed after the state asked the board to raise the tax levy. The board did not.
DiSanto said Shapiro will speak to the board and the public at Thursday's regular 7 p.m. meeting.
In Keansburg, Robert S. Finger, business administrator and board secretary, described the state Supreme Court decision in one word: Shameful.
Finger said his district — whose total budget was slated to grow to $44.32 million in the 2006-07 school year — may consider cutting programs or dropping its emergency surplus from $650,000 to about $100,000 to operate under the proposed "flat-funding" cuts.
"We may have to bring it (the surplus) down to under $100,000 and that's dangerous," Finger said. "We're using our money, that we in theory are required to keep for emergencies."
Finger also took exception to the phrase "flat funding."
He said the term doesn't apply because Abbott districts won't be getting their 2005-06 levels of state funding in the 2006-07 year. They could be receiving the 2005-06 funding, minus money the state removed midyear for early childhood education costs and other items.
In Keansburg, that money adds up, Finger said.
"We lost a little over a million dollars (through the midyear adjustments)," he said. "We're not flat funded. And that point was raised to the Supreme Court. They chose to overlook that."
New funding formula
Corzine, who attended last week's Supreme Court hearing, has pledged more accountability and a new funding system for public education.
"Our focus will be to get resources to the children," Corzine said in a prepared statement. "We must meet their needs and prepare them for the challenges they face after graduation. Only when that goal is met, and not a moment sooner, will we have achieved a victory."
The Supreme Court ordered the state to complete audits of the Newark, Jersey City, Paterson and Camden districts by November and the remaining Abbott districts in time for 2007-08 budget proposals. The court also ordered programmatic evaluations — a sign that Abbott reform is not limited to money, said David Sciarra, executive director of the Education Law Center.
"The court has made a very strong statement about state accountability for performance to these children," Sciarra said.
The order was released the day Abbott funding dominated an Assembly Budget Committee hearing.
Corzine's stance with the Abbott districts has brought praise from political opponents.
"This is a positive initial first step . . . toward an inevitable, but necessary, Abbott reform and change of the school funding formula," said Sen. Joseph M. Kyrillos Jr., R-Monmouth.
Senate Education Committee chairwoman Shirley Turner, D-Mercer, said districts, rich and poor, need to adjust spending, given the state's fiscal problems.
Other school district officials around the state painted dire pictures.
"I'm shocked and disappointed," said Philip Freeman, the Camden school board president, who indicated layoffs will have to be considered. "I think it's going to cause extreme hardship for Camden and other Abbott school districts."
Mary Stansky, Gloucester City superintendent of schools and president of Urban Superintendents of New Jersey, issued a statement saying flat funding is really a $1 million cut for her district.
"Unfortunately, after measurable progress, the rug has been pulled out from under us and we will not be able to meet (state) mandates," Stansky said. "Subsequent years will prove to be quite dismal for our schools and our students."
Education Commissioner Lucille Davy said districts can make cuts without affecting education.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home