Board of Ed. of City of Elizabeth in Union County v. Board of School Estimate of Elizabeth School Dist.

Decision Date08 June 1967
Docket NumberNo. A--587,A--587
PartiesThe BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF ELIZABETH IN the COUNTY OF UNION, a body corporate of the State of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Appellant and Cross-Respondent, v. The BOARD OF SCHOOL ESTIMATE OF the ELIZABETH SCHOOL DISTRICT, The City of Elizabeth, a municipal corporation of the State of New Jersey, and City Council of the City of Elizabeth, Union County, New Jersey, Defendants-Respondents and Cross-Appellants.
CourtNew Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division

Joseph G. Barbieri, Elizabeth, for plaintiff, Board of education.

William J. McCloud, Kearney, for defendants City of Elizabeth and Board of School Estimate (Edward W. McGrath, City Atty., attorney).

Before Judges GAULKIN, LEWIS and LABRECQUE.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

GAULKIN, S.J.A.D.

Elizabeth is a chapter 6 school district, governed by R.S. 18:6--1 et seq., N.J.S.A. Plaintiff board of education (hereafter Education) asked defendant board of school estimate (hereafter Estimate for a budget of $8,652,304.13 for the school year 1966--1967. Estimate reduced it by $400,000 and asked the city council (hereafter Council) for $8,252,304.13. Council approved only $7,952,304.13.

R.S. 18:6--53, N.J.S.A., provides that in a chapter 6 school district, upon receipt of the request from Estimate:

'The governing body of a municipality shall * * * appropriate the amount certified * * * by including it in the tax ordinance, and such amount shall be assessed, levied and collected in the same manner as money appropriated for other purposes in such municipality is assessed, levied and collected. No amount in excess of one and one-helf per cent of the valuation of the assessable ratables of any municipality as determined by the county board of taxation shall be appropriated except with the concurrence and consent of the governing body expressed by its resolution duly passed.'

One and one-half percent of the valuation of the assessable ratables of Elizabeth amounted to $4,460,654.10, so the amount approved by Council was nearly 3 1/2 million beyond the mandatory minimum.

Education filed a complaint in lieu of prerogative writs against Estimate and Council in the Law Division, in which it challenged the action of Council and demanded judgment '(a) directing the defendant City to appropriate the * * * $8,252,304.13 * * * certified to it by the Board of School Estimate * * *, or, (b) directing further consideration by the defendants herein in order to properly arrive at a proper * * * appropriation.'

We understand plaintiff's argument to be as follows: Council must appropriate all that is requested by Estimate over and above the mandatory 1 1/2%, or reject it In toto; if Council rejects it In toto, Estimate may reconsider its request and reduce the figure, which then must be approved or disapproved by Council In toto; if Estimate stands by its figure and Council by its rejection, the Commissioner of Education must decide how much Council must approve; in any event, Council must confer with Estimate and attempt to arrive at a mutually satisfactory figure before Council may refuse to concur and consent. Plaintiff contends that here there was no effort at all by Council to come to an agreement with Estimate.

Judge Feller rejected plaintiff's arguments, and plaintiff appeals from so much of the resulting judgment as reflects such...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT