STATE BUDGET INFO

March 23, 2006 Appellate Court Decision: What Does It Mean?

As has been reported, the Appellate Division, 1st Department directed the State to provide New York City schools $4.7 billion to $5.63 billion in operating aid and $9.2 billion in capital funding by April 1, 2006. The court's directive is unambiguous, contrary to reports and commentary in the press. What follows are excerpts of major points in the March 23, 2006 decision with "translations".

The March 23, 2006  Appellate Court Decision

• Contrary to the dissent's repeated characterization, 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.

Translation: The governor and the legislature are "directed" to provide funds to the NYC school district by April first, the beginning date of the state fiscal year 2006-07 budget.  In its order the court sets the funding range between the low cost estimate of the Zarb Commission ($4.7 billion) and the higher cost estimate of the Referees appointed by Judge DeGrasse ($5.6 billion).

• Although the State's proposal originally projected a five-year phase-in, the passage of time since the plan was presented indicates that a four-year period would now be in accord.

Translation: The phase-in period for operating funds is four years. The implication here is that there is a time penalty for not having complied with the earlier lower court's order for a funding remedy.The phase-in period for capital funding is five years.

• Defendants are directed to act as expeditiously as possible to implement a budget that allows the City students the education to which they are entitled. Accordingly, the order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered on or about March 16, 2005, …  should be modified, on the law and the facts, to vacate the confirmation of the Referees' report; to direct that, in enacting a budget for the fiscal year commencing April 1, 2006, the Governor and the Legislature consider, as within the range of constitutionally required funding for the New York City School District, …, the proposed funding plan of at least $4.7 billion in additional annual operating funds, and the Referees' recommended annual expenditure of $5.63 billion, or an amount in between, phased in over four years, and that they appropriate such amount, in order to remedy the constitutional deprivations found in CFE II, and that, in enacting such budget, the Governor and the Legislature implement a capital improvement plan that expends $9.179 billion over the next five years or otherwise satisfies the City schools' constitutionally recognized capital needs, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Translation: The governor and the legislature are "directed" to provide funds to the NYC school district by April first, the beginning date of the state fiscal year 2006-07 budget. The court does order a specific dollar amount for capital funding, $9.179 billion, because the plaintiffs plan was endorsed by the city and because the state (i.e. the Governor) did not offer any alternative cost estimate.
 
EPP NOTE: Advocates who were seeking to have the court ensure greater accountability will be disappointed. The Appellate decision does not rule out having an Office of Accountability, but leaves these measures up to the Governor and the legislature.

It would be shocking for the legislature to ignore this very strong, unambiguous Appellate Court decision, especially considering that this is a good budget year--with upwards of a four billion dollar surplus.

To read the full Appellate Court decision click here.

[ Budget Info | FAQ NYC Students/Schools | State Funding Equity | Smaller Class Sizes | Facilities | Standards | Emergency Campaign Against Vouchers | Historical Facts | Lingo Translations | Best Schools/School Performance ]