New Jersey: NJ Supreme Court orders state to give schools more; Ruling falls under decades-long school funding lawsuit

By Geoff Mulvihill Associated Press TRENTON, N.J. (AP) -- The New Jersey Supreme Court rebuked Gov. Chris Christie on Tuesday and ordered the state to increase spending on poor schools by an estimated $500 million. But in its split ruling, the court stopped short of the scenario Christie frequently and publicly said he feared: An order to hike spending on all schools to the tune of $1.7 billion. The $500 million would fully fund the state's formula for distributing money to schools only for the 31 low-income districts known as the "Abbotts," referring to the long-running school funding lawsuit Abbott v. Burke. It is about the same amount the state treasurer says the state has in a windfall due to higher than expected tax revenues. "The harm being visited is not some minor infringement of the constitutional right but a real, substantial, and consequential blow to the achievement of a thorough and efficient system of education to the plaintiff pupils of the Abbott districts," Justice Jaynee LaVecchia wrote in the majority opinion. She was joined by Judge Edwin Stern, a lower-court judge temporarily assigned to the court and Justice Barry Albin, who also filed a concurring opinion. Justices Roberto Rivera-Soto and Helen Hoens each dissented in separate opinions. Rivera-Soto said one factor was that there were not four members of the court joining in such an important matter. Chief Justice Stuart Rabner and Justice Virginia Long both recused themselves. The ruling Tuesday was the 21st decision in the decades-long court battle known as Abbott v. Burke, the legal part of New Jersey's definitive political conundrum. Over more than two decades, the state's Supreme Court has ordered the state to pay more to subsidize 31 school districts in low-income communities to satisfy the requirement in the state constitution that New Jersey provide children with a "thorough and efficient education." In many respects, the state's public schools are regarded as among the best in the nation, with top graduation rates and high scores on the SAT and other standardized tests that are given across the country. But the schools in the state's cities, which include places that rank among the nation's poorest, have lagged behind. The court orders have led to free preschools for 3- and 4-year-olds in the cities, new and improved school buildings and extra literacy tutors, among other items. And now, most of the so-called "Abbott districts" have among the highest-spending districts, on a per-pupil basis, in the state. While the gap in test scores has narrowed between the city schools and others at lower grades, it is still wide. Meanwhile, the majority of the state's direct aid to schools is now funneled to those low-income districts. That's a perpetual sore spot for taxpayers in the suburbs, where there's not as much educational assistance from the state. The state's average property tax bill is around $7,500 -- by far the nation's highest. And the bulk of it goes toward schools. Christie, a Republican, and others argue that the way to improve the city schools is not by giving them more state money. Instead, he wants to give parents in those cities more choice on where to send their children to school. He's backing a proposal to use tax-exempt corporate donations to pay for scholarships that could be used for tuition at other public or private schools, and he's a proponent of adding more publicly funded charter schools. Like other conservatives, Christie also believes that the court has overstepped its bounds in the case by telling the Legislature how the state's money must be spent. But his administration's main argument before the court this time was more about money than education policy. The state, the administration said, has seen its tax revenue down during a rough economic stretch, and can't afford to subsidize schools more than it is right now. The current round of litigation over the matter was set off last year when Christie and the state's Democratic-controlled Legislature reduced aid to schools by $1 billion to under $8 billion, meaning every district in the state got less. Teachers were laid off across the state, and activities and programs were cut. Christie's administration says that it found a way to cut the spending that didn't harm the urban schools more than others. Advocates for children in those districts disagree with that notion. For the budget year that begins July 1, Christie is proposing increasing education aid by $250 million. A judge appointed by the state Supreme Court to study the issue found that to fund schools at the level the court previously found acceptable, it would take a $1.7 billion infusion. For months, Christie has been warning about dire consequences of increasing the aid that much at once. It could mean pulling state money from hospitals, he said. He also said that one option, if the court demanded too much, would be to ignore its order. Published: Wed, May 25, 2011