The New Jersey Supreme Court heard oral argument on November 7, 2005 on Education Law Center’s request to order the State to provide more funding for school construction projects.

ELC’s legal action in the landmark Abbott v. Burke case was prompted by the July 27th decision by the New Jersey School Construction Corporation (SCC) to suspend work on over 200 urban school construction projects. The work stoppage was ordered after revised estimates showed only $1.4 billion remained from an initial $6 billion allocation. SCC announced that those projects already under construction, along with another 59 projects in development, would be completed, leaving over 200 projects without any funding.

In papers filed with the Court, the Attorney General contends that the SCC needs additional time to develop reliable cost estimates for the suspended projects, and complete fiscal reforms at the agency prompted by a critical April 2005 report by the State Inspector General.

ELC Executive Director and Abbott Counsel David Sciarra argued that there is no dispute about three fundamental issues – the state has stopped work on over 200 urgently needed construction projects; the original $6 billion has been allocated; and the State is legally obligated under prior Abbott rulings to fund all facilities improvements in the urban districts. Mr. Sciarra asked the Court to order the Commissioner of Education and State Treasurer to estimate the cost of completing the 200 suspended projects, and work with the Legislature to secure additional construction funds, as required by the Abbott V (1998) ruling.

Assistant Attorney General Nancy Kaplan told the Court that SCC is too busy with its current construction workload, and implementing fiscal reforms, to estimate the cost of the suspended projects. When pressed by the Court, Ms. Kaplan stated that "six months" is necessary for SCC to get its fiscal house in order.

Several Justices expressed skepticism about the Attorney General’s request to delay court action, citing the inflationary impact of a prolonged work stoppage. The Justices also questioned the length of time SCC needs to implement reforms and why cost estimates could not be done while the reforms are underway. Some worried that despite some projects being completed and others under construction, many children in the urban districts will still remain in buildings that are unsatisfactory for years to come.

The Court reserved decision, and will issue a ruling at a later date.

Prepared: November 9, 2005

Copyright © 2005 Education Law Center. All Rights Reserved.