Settlement talks have failed in a court case seeking more money for New York City schools, both sides said yesterday.þþThe plaintiffs, a coalition of advocacy groups called the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, sued the state in 1993, saying its formula for providing school aid shortchanged New York City's 1.1 million schoolchildren.þþA State Supreme Court justice sided with the plaintiffs in January 2001, ruling that the state had not met its obligation under the State Constitution to provide a ÿsound, basic educationÿ to all children. The justice, Leland DeGrasse, ordered Albany to revamp its complicated school aid formula and provide New York City schools with substantially more money.þþGov. George E. Pataki appealed the ruling, and in June, a state appeals court overturned it. That court, a panel of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in Manhattan, ruled that the state was obliged to provide no more than an eighth-grade education, and to prepare students for nothing more than the lowest-level jobs.þþThat ruling became a political liability for Mr. Pataki, who was seeking re-election and whose Democratic opponent, H. Carl McCall, adopted ÿEight is not enoughÿ as a campaign slogan. Mr. Pataki went so far as to criticize the appellate ruling in September, saying, ÿI totally disagree with the concept that an eighth-grade education is adequate.ÿþþThe city teachers' union endorsed Mr. Pataki after that, and upon receiving the endorsement, Mr. Pataki sent state lawyers into settlement talks. Yesterday, both sides said they had reached an impasse, though neither would elaborate.þþMichael Rebell, the lead lawyer for the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, said he would file legal papers with the Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, by Jan. 8. He said he would ask the court to issue a decision before its term ends in June.þþÿWe regret that the settlement talks have failed to produce definitive results,ÿ Mr. Rebell said in a statement. ÿWe have, however, made some progress in these talks in exploring ways to reform the current state education finance system.ÿþþA statement from Mr. Pataki's office was just as positive. ÿWe look forward to continuing to work with C.F.E. to explore new and creative ideas for resolving this litigation, and we remain committed to ensuring that all children have the opportunity to acquire at least a good high school education,ÿ the statement said. þþEducation officials said Mr. Pataki remained eager to settle the case because by publicly criticizing the appellate court ruling, he had damaged the state's case. The officials said the state's worsening fiscal crisis affected the failure to reach a settlement.þþOne education official said a bigger problem was the two sides' inability to agree on a minimum standard for a ÿsound, basic education.ÿþþMayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who has sided with the plaintiffs since announcing his run for office, sounded a note of caution yesterday. He said any Court of Appeals ruling might force the city, not the state, to increase education spending. After the 2001 ruling, some upstate and suburban legislators said the state should respond by requiring New York City to increase its own spending on its schools.þþMr. Bloomberg is trying to close a $1.1 billion budget deficit; he expects the shortfall to grow to $6.4 billion in the next fiscal year.þþÿJust because you win a suit like that doesn't mean the state is obligated to give New York City more money,ÿ the mayor said in a news conference, adding that ÿwe might have to come up with the money ourselves, and that would mean cutting back some other services.ÿþþþ
Source: NY Times
