TRENTON — Thousands of struggling students in New Jersey are being deprived of an adequate education because of state aid cuts initiated by Gov. Chris Christie and approved by the Legislature, a lawyer for the children told the state Supreme Court today. Lawyer David Sciarra, who represents the Education Law Center in Newark, an advocacy group for children in...
TRENTON — Thousands of struggling students in New Jersey are being deprived of an adequate education because of state aid cuts initiated by Gov. Chris Christie and approved by the Legislature, a lawyer for the children told the state Supreme Court today.
Lawyer David Sciarra, who represents the Education Law Center in Newark, an advocacy group for children in low-income cities, told the state's highest court that New Jersey should be required to fully fund the public school aid formula the court accepted in 2009.
Former state Supreme Court justice Peter Verniero, who represented the state, said the cuts to public education were necessary because of the state's dire fiscal condition. Districts with the most at-risk children received the smallest reduction in state aid, he said.
"I would just ask that you consider the implications of awarding a $1.6 billion restoration or some subset of that," Verniero said during oral arguments in the ongoing battle over school funding. "Stay your hand. Give the elected branches (executive and legislative) some breathing room to work their way out of this crisis."
The current state budget shortchanges the school funding formula by hundreds of millions of dollars, prompting the legal challenge. It's the latest chapter in a long-running battle over how to fund public education for the poorest children living in one of the richest states.
There's no word on when there will be a ruling.
The proposed state budget would have to be reworked if the court orders more education funding in the next school year. Gov. Chris Christie already has said that he would not raise taxes, so the money would come from property tax rebates, hospital charity care, higher education or other sources.
A ruling requiring additional aid would also be a significant blow to Christie's education agenda. The governor maintains that aid hasn't equaled achievement and has proposed changes that include an end to automatic tenure, basing teacher evaluations partially on student achievement, adding charter schools and using state tax dollars to fund a pilot school voucher program.
Several close Christie advisers attended the hearing, underscoring the decision's importance to the administration.
Five justices will decide the case. Chief Justice Stuart Rabner, who worked under Christie and former Gov. Jon Corzine, and Associate Justice Virginia Long recused themselves.
Some of the toughest questions for the state came from Associate Justice Barry Albin, a nominee of former Gov. Jim McGreevey, who reminded the state that a prior attorney general argued vigorously on behalf of the current school funding formula. Attorney General Anne Milgram said the formula had to be fully funded — even during a recession — when she made a plea for the court to adopt the new plan.
A lower-court judge, asked to delve into school funding, calculated the difference between a formula the court found constitutional and the amount given to local schools this year was $1.6 billion.
Sciarra argued that the 2011-12 state budget should restore that amount to schools, and that the state should be required to fully fund its school aid formula for the two years after that.
The advocacy group said achieving educational equity is so important that a tough economy shouldn't be a major consideration.
Verniero argued that times are different now, with the recession dragging on longer than predicted. He said that the cuts have not caused the state to abandon its responsibility to provide all students with a "thorough and efficient" education, but that the burden must be measured against the constitutional obligation to keep the state budget in balance.
Albin said the state had $1 billion in revenue from a surcharge on the wealthiest residents but allowed the additional tax to lapse. Christie has refused to consider renewing the surcharge, despite Democrats' urging him to do so.
Sciarra said the cuts resulted in larger class sizes, layoffs of teachers in language arts, math, science and physical education, and a host of other program and service cuts. He said the number of schools now rated below adequate grew from 181 to 205 after the latest round of cuts.
Christie's budget for the upcoming year proposes restoring $250 million of the $820 million in K-12 aid sliced from the 2010-11 state budget.
Over the long history of the case, the state Supreme Court has consistently ruled that New Jersey should provide more money to the state's poorest school districts.
The rulings have led to free pre-schools for 3- and 4-year-olds in those cities, replacements and repairs for decrepit school buildings, and extra help for teaching key areas such as reading.
But they've rankled opponents. They're a scourge to people like Christie, who say judges shouldn't make laws. Schools in the suburbs complain their districts get shortchanged because so much aid goes to poorer schools. And, the rulings have a direct effect on the state budget.
As Christie points out frequently, the changes ordered by the court have not brought closed the achievement gap between wealthy and poor districts — even though low-income districts now spend as much on education as the state's wealthiest districts — and in several cases, more.
Previous coverage:
• Supreme Court hears Abbott arguments - live coverage
• Poll: What should the Supreme Court decide in the Abbott case?