FAIR FUNDING FOR LAKEWOOD: Final Appeal Briefs Filed in Lang Lawsuit

The final set of briefs have been filed before the Appellate Division of the Superior Court in the case of Lakewood teacher, lawyer, and BMG alumnus Aaron Lang, in his quest to have the state’s education funding formula declared unconstitutional and to restore fair funding to Lakewood.

Lang has been at the forefront of the battle for fair education funding for Lakewood for more than seven years through a case he filed asserting that the state’s funding formula unconstitutionally disadvantages Lakewood by not including private-school students in its tally when it calculates state aid to a district. Last year, an Administrative Court Judge ruled that Lakewood’s education was below legal standards, but declined to actually call the funding formula unconstitutional. Later, the state’s Education Commissioner rejected the judge’s ruling, asserting that the district’s education level was sufficient to meet the legal bar of “thorough and efficient” education, or T&E.

Lang subsequently appealed the ruling, filing late last year before the Appellate Division of the Superior Court. At that point, leading education legal expert and retired Rutgers Law professor Paul Tractenberg joined the case on Lang’s side, adding a heavyweight education expert to Lakewood’s argument. Tractenberg argued education cases before the state’s Supreme Court in the past, and is most known for leading the fight in the landmark Abbott v. Burke cases, which New Jersey judges and lawyers voted overwhelmingly to be the most important state court decision of the 20^th century.

The 69-page brief was filed in November outlining that the state’s funding formula is illegal, as its failure to include private-school students when allocating state aid creates a situation in which districts cannot supply the constitutionally mandated “thorough and efficient” level of education. After a number of requests for deadline extensions, the state filed their response last week, which was followed by Lang and Tractenberg’s final submission this week.

“The [judge], who personally heard the testimony and reviewed the documents comprising the elaborate record of this case, concluded that the students are being denied T&E,” write Lang and Tractenberg in the 20-page brief filed this week. “The [Acting Commissioner], having explicitly accepted all the [judge]’s findings of fact, and without explaining either precisely what legal standard for T&E she was using or why the [judge]’s recommended decision was wrong about the denial of T&E, overturned that crucial portion of the [judge]’s recommended decision.”

In 2011, the courts ruled that the legislature was mandated to supply those districts who were represented in the landmark Abbott cases with sufficient funding. Other underfunded districts, however, which were not included in the Abbott cases, failed to get relief, because their plight was not included in the rulings. In this brief, Lang and Tractenberg seek to garner a similar judicial ruling for Lakewood, so that Lakewood would be entitled to some much-needed fiscal relief.

They also sum up, in a succinct way, the crux of the issue Lakewood is facing.

“To a substantial degree, even the [judge] and [Acting Commissioner] have acknowledged what the core problems are; indeed, no one involved in the case has denied that Lakewood is a unique district in New Jersey. The [judge] correctly referred to it as an ‘outlier.’ The fact that Lakewood, a single district with fewer than one-half of 1% of all the State’s students, has more than 25% of the State’s nonpublic school students should tell you all you need to know about Lakewood’s uniqueness. And these unique demographics have caused unique fiscal stresses, as everyone recognizes and accepts. The fact that, according to the [judge], 52% of Lakewood’s entire public school budget is consumed by transportation and special education costs for Lakewood’s tens of thousands of nonpublic school students (it was 31,000 and counting at the time of the hearing in this case, but it has grown to well over 40,000 by now, since the [judge] recognized in her [initial decision] an annual growth of 2,500 to 3,000).

“The consequence, also conceded by everyone associated with this case, is that Lakewood simply does not have enough education funding through [the funding formula] to provide its public school students with even a chance at achieving T&E. The State’s only response has been to extend loans in ever-increasing amounts to try to fill in the massive fiscal gaps caused by the district’s unique costs for nonpublic school students. But, according to the [judge], these loans, now totaling almost $137 million—virtually the size of Lakewood’s annual budget—have created an ‘unsustainable’ fiscal problem for Lakewood and are effectively a state-operated ‘Ponzi scheme,’ according to the [judge].”

With the completion of the Appellate filings, Lang and Tractenberg intend to file for certiorari before the New Jersey Supreme Court, so that the state’s highest court can take the case. This move can be done before the Appellate Division rules on the case in order to jumpstart a High-Court decision that can have ramifications on the public policy of education funding for districts across the state.

[matzav.com]