The “False Premise” of Education Law Center’s Latest School Funding Lawsuit

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on pinterest
Share on facebook
Share on twitter

Last week I wrote about New Jersey’s “Bacon” lawsuit, an Abbott school funding case writ small. Sixteen rural districts in South Jersey, now represented by Education Law Center (which famously won the Abbott litigation twenty-five years ago) are suing the State for inadequate school funding. In the press release issued by ELC, Executive Director David Sciarra claims that “[s]tudents and families in these impoverished districts have no alternative but to return to court to secure the thorough and efficient education to which they are entitled. The State’s continuing refusal to remedy the constitutional violation in these districts is unconscionable and can no longer be tolerated.”

The sixteen Bacon districts are Buena Regional, Clayton, Commercial, Egg Harbor City, Fairfield, Hammonton Township, Lakehurst, Lakewood, Lawrence, Little Egg Harbor, Maurice River, Ocean Township, Quinton, Upper Deerfield, Wallington, and Woodbine.

In the comment section of that post last week, Jeffrey Bennett, a school board member in Essex County who has closely studied what he calls “New Jersey’s (mal)distribution of state aid,”  responded with a wealth of information.

Read his comments (his moniker is “State Aid Guy”) yourself. What follows are some highlights, which include excerpts from some correspondence between fellow board members.

  • The most important thing about the Bacon case, says Bennett, is that  “they are nowhere near the most under-aided in NJ.  According to what the DOE shows, there are 150 districts in NJ that are more under aided than any of the Bacons. “ 
  • All of the Bacons already get significantly more aid than their suburban economic peers do. “It’s misguided of the ELC to support this case when there are so many districts in NJ whose needs are objectively so much higher.” 
  • “This case operates on a false premise of severe under-aiding. This is another instance of irresponsibility from the Education Law Center.”
  • “Some of the Bacons should get more, but several of the Bacon districts already get about as much as Abbotts like Elizabeth and Trenton. Since Long Branch and Neptune (both Abbotts) get in the $7,000-8,000 range, half of the Bacons are already funded at Abbott levels.”
  • “Basically I see this as another deeply problematic lawsuit, like the Abbott lawsuit. These districts aren’t the neediest in NJ. Several already get large amounts of aid, several have high resources, and while several could probably benefit from more state aid and spending, so could a lot of districts that aren’t part of this lawsuit.
Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on pinterest
Pinterest

5 Comments

  • StateAidGuy, September 30, 2014 @ 3:54 pm Reply

    I did some additional analysis of the Bacon districts using the Education Law Center's own research.

    Nine of the Bacon districts, by the ELC's own standard, are not “High Need.”

    Clayton, Hammonton, Lakehurst, Lakewood, Lawrence, Little Egg Harbor, Maurice River, Ocean Township, and Wallington are ABOVE High Need.

    I cannot fathom why the ELC would support these districts when other districts are so much needier.

    http://www.edlawcenter.org/research/school-funding-data.html

  • NJ Left Behind, October 1, 2014 @ 1:35 pm Reply

    Thanks, Jeff. Great research. I'd love to see ELC respond to your data.

  • StateAidGuy, October 1, 2014 @ 2:46 pm Reply

    Another unexplainable thing about the ELC's participation in the Bacon case is that only ONE of the Bacon districts (Clayton) appears on the ELC's list of the 25 most underfunded districts in NJ.

    http://www.edlawcenter.org/news/archives/school-funding/top-25-most-underfunded-nj-school-districts.html

    The above districts certainly should have more state aid, but I'll emphasize that none is remotely among NJ's most underaided. The most underaided districts in NJ get 10% of their uncapped aid and 50% of their capped aid.

  • StateAidGuy, October 1, 2014 @ 2:55 pm Reply

    This comment has been removed by the author.

  • StateAidGuy, October 1, 2014 @ 3:01 pm Reply

    (Just wanted to emphasize, the ELC's list is for underaiding with capped aid, not uncapped aid. Capped aid is SFRA's incremental funding rampup, uncapped aid is real, full, rational SFRA funding.

    The ELC also makes its list by the raw amount per student that is missing, not the percentage of aid owed. For instance, Glen Ridge gets 45% of its (capped) SFRA aid, which is a lower percentage than in any of the ELC's most underfunded districts; however, that underaiding works out to $466 per student, an amount that is not among NJ's highest.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *