newjerseynewsroom.com

Share this Twitter Myspace Digg Del.icio.us Reddit Slashdot Furl Yahoo Technorati Newsvine Facebook Export PDF Print E-mail Tags parity funding state definition court education remedy originally abbotts spend level replace constitution mater alma obligations wealthy districts meet standard

Let's try to take it a notch above your alma mater, guys, and dig a little deeper. Don't just proofread and post news releases by organizations. This is nothing more than a publicity effort by the ELC to support its case before the Supreme Court. The issue is not whether the "parity" remedy is being achieved, but rather whether the system established by SFRA is meeting the state's education obligations under the constitution and, therefore, could replace parity. The court originally came up with parity (i.e., the Abbotts must spend at the same level as the most wealthy districts) because of an absence of a definition of a "thorough and efficient education." The state is now saying that the new funding law provides that definition, along with adequate funding to meet the standard. Consequently, according to the state, the parity remedy is no longer needed.