Not exact matches
The hard - left party has been bashing Mr. Cuomo since state lawmakers finalized a budget last weekend, labeling it «Cuomo's Inequality Budget»
because it slashed some taxes, protected charter
schools and did not create an expansive public
financing system for statewide elections.
Because of some states» sloppy
finance systems, the
schools can keep the money if the families change their minds and head back to traditional
schools.
New Jersey's
school -
finance system should be discarded
because it shortchanges property - poor urban districts and the disadvantaged students they serve, a state administrative - law judge has ruled.
A New Jersey judge last week declared the legislature's most recent revision of the state
school -
finance system unconstitutional
because it fails to close the funding gap between poorer and wealthier districts.
The candidate is Ray Corns, who as a circuit - court judge in 1988 ruled that the state's
system of
school finance was unconstitutional
because it allowed vast differences between...
The case was under appeal after Judge John Dietz's lower court ruling that the Texas
school finance system is unconstitutional
because it «fails to provide an adequate, suitable education.»
The case, called Lobato v. Colorado, challenges the current
school finance system as unconstitutional
because it does not provide adequate funding for public
schools.
You'd want to look into that if you were a reporter covering
schools because compensation makes up 80 percent of
school budgets in America, so budget squeezes are almost ALWAYS about salary and benefits (Last year, according to the Census» survey of public
school finances,
school systems in American spent $ 523 billion, $ 419 billion of which was salaries and benefits).
North Carolina has been engaged in litigation defending its
system of
school finance for nearly twenty years, which was partially instigated
because of spending inequities between low wealth and wealthy counties.
Because most
school finance systems are predicated on attendance and these programs may shift attendance patterns, they can be at odds with the manner in which
school districts generate funds.
The Maine Education Association opposes to the law, according to its deputy executive director Rob Walker,
because more charter
schools could strain the
system's
finances.
«First and foremost, I think that this study is long overdue,
because the current
school funding
finance system in the state of Michigan is outdated; it's broken, and this is the first comprehensive study ever conducted in the state,» she said.
; (4) taxpayers would not have to pay for a justice
system that provides lawyers a good place to earn a living but doesn't provide affordable legal services for those taxpayers; (5) the problem wouldn't be causing more damage in one day than all of the incompetent and unethical lawyers have caused in the whole of Canada's history (6) the legal profession would be expanding instead of contracting;
because, (7) if legal services were affordable, lawyers would have more work than they could handle
because people have never needed lawyers more; (8) law
schools would be expanding their enrolments instead of being urged to contract them; (9) the problem would not be causing serious & increasing damage to the population, the courts, the legal profession, and to legal aid organizations
because their funding varies inversely with the cost of legal services for taxpayers who
finance legal aid's free legal services; (10) there would be a published LSUC text that declares the problem to be its problem and duty to solve it, and accurately defines the problem; (11) Canada would not have a seriously «legally crippled» population and constitution - the Canadian Charter of Rights an Freedoms is a «paper tiger» without the help of a lawyer; (12) Canada's justice
system might again be «the envy of the world»; (13) the public statements of benchers would not show that they don't understand the cause of the problem and haven't tried to understand it; (14) LSUC's webpage, «Your Legal Bill - To High?»