Matter of Roberts v Board of Educ.
2012 NY Slip Op 30972(U)
April 11, 2012
Supreme Court, New York County
Docket Number: 113029/11
Judge: Alexander W. Hunter Jr
Republished from New York State Unified Court
System's E-Courts Service.
Search E-Courts (http://www.nycourts.gov/ecourts) for
any additional information on this case.
This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official
publication.
[* 1]
4NED ON411212012
-
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
NEW YORK COUNTY
Justlce
Index Number - 1130291201 1
ROBERTS, LILLIAN
INDEX NO.
vs.
MOTION DATE
NYC DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
SEQUENCE NUMBER : 001
MOTION SEQ. NO.
ARTICLE 78
The followlng papers, numbered Ito
, were read on thls motlon tolfor
Notlce of MotionlOrder to Show Cause - Affldavits
- Exhlbits
Answering Affldavlta - Exhlblts
Replylng Affldavib
Upon the foregoing papers, It is ordered that this motlon Is
UNFILED JUDGMENT
This k l a m n t has not been entered by Crwa
c*
Dated:
I. CHECK ONE: .....................................................................
2. CHECK AS APPROPRIATE: ...........................
3. CHECK IF APPROPRIATE:
DISPOSE^
EXCASE
MOTION IS: (? GRANTED
................................................
DENIED
0 NON-FINAL DISPOSITION
uGRANTED IN PART 0OTHER
0SUBMIT ORDER
i?SETTLE ORDER
[ DO NOT POST ET]FlDUCl1RY APPOINTMENT
J
uREFERENCE
[* 2]
Petitioners,
-against-
In h i s hyhrid procccdiiig, the application by pctitioiicrs li)r ;iii order pursumt t o C1.1â.1 ..li.
Article 78 and h r 21 declaratory judgiiiciit pursuant to Câ.l).l,.l<. , dcclxing respoiidcntsâ
3001
dctcrniinalioii ko tcr.tiiiiia.te642 employeus i n tlic litles olâschool aidc, health aidc, Ihmily worker,
community associate. nnd parent cooI-dinaior as arhilrary, capricious, and in b:td faith and to
declare respondrnlsâ delcriiiinatioii to implement a 3 2 6 % ) reduction
rill schools :is
violative of Ikliicatioii 1,aw ij 25OO-r(g) is clcnicd.
SSO+ICB
In 3007, the Fair Student 1:uiiding (âFSEââ) program was established to providc New Yorli
Câily scliools will1 1 (XWO
olâlhe $3.2 billioii in additional lunding by 201 1 . To clale. New York
Câity schools have orily rcccived $ I .8 hillion of tlic $3.2 billion. I<cspc~iidciits
assert that the
currcnl liscal year buclgct coiitairis ;I $2 billion increased revenue ci~mmitiiioritl - mNew York
io
City to cover the loss of$853 niillion in Fâcdcrnl stiiiidus liinds and the StatcâC; $81 2 million in
education cuts. Ilndcr t-he l;Sl; program, formulas were deviscd lo clctcrniinc how much iunding
c d i school shoLild rcccivc. I lo\vcver, duc to tlic lack 01â Stale liinding, s o ~ n c
schools d o not
[* 3]
reccivc the money calculated h i * them urider the foriiiLi1:is. At the same tinic, tlicre are ;I number
of schools thal ;ire above formiila. Tlie Indcpcndent Huclget Oftice has dcterminccl that changing
these schoolsâ hiidgets to comport with tlic IiSF progrwi must be clonc gradtially so as to not
clcst Ai I i7,c t Iiem.
1)cspitc [lie acldition of Câity dollars, rcsponclent the Board of Education d.b.a. tlic
1)epartmcnt or E:,ducatiunofthe City olâNcw Yorlc (LâIX)l<ââ) still ueeded to make additional
school budgct rcductions. âIâhe IJnitcd Federation ulâ1âcachers (.â[il;âTâ)
agreed lo ciicl all leaclicr
sabbaticals h r one year and to rehriii tlic Abscnt âlâcachcr Iicservc pool, wliicli would reduce
sukstilutc teachcr costs. These U I T cc~riccssio~isI - C
~ I cspected to s ~ qy-m)xiiiiatcly $57
e
iiiillioti. As a result of the Program to I :liiiiinatc the Gap and increased lax reventie pro.jcclions,
tlic direct cut to schuol hudgcts was rtâdiiccd li-om $370 milliori to $ 1 78 tnillion.
Tâhc I)OE evaluatcs thc needs of cach scliool and calculatcs what its b d g e t sliodd bc
givcii the liiiiilatioiis ofâits ovcrdl hiidgct. Tliesc rccomiiiciidntioris are tlieii p r c s ~ n tto ~ i I:)b;P
~ the
h r iiiodiiication or adoption. âlâhcreaiâtcr,the principals olâcach school delerniine how lo use tlic
liiiids t h y reccivc to best meel the needs of their studcnts.
On .lune 27, 20 I I , tlic Iâaiiel on I<ducational Policy (âPElââ) reviewed and adopted [lie
0 1 an ciiiergcncy basis. âIhe D O H administrators tried to consider and nuke all
1
fâeasiblc and rcasoiiable efhrts to ciisuix tin cqtiititbl~
allocation of liinciing. LJIliiiiatcly, llic PEP
reduced Lhc budget hy .Y; I78 million which amounled to 311 school budgets hcitig rcduced by
3.26%. âfhc Câiiy Council approved the Imdget oil .Itrnc 29, 201 I . On Aiigiis1 17, 201 I , the PliP
adopted the liudgel t h a l have txcii previously approved on all emcrgcncy basis. On October 7.
20 1 I , rcspundcnt 1)OE cflâccled layolâlâs in twcnly-four titles rcprwentud by sevcii dilâlrcnt labor
II ni on s.
pruposcd budgct
Petitioners argue h i t ruspondcntsâ dctci.tiiiniitioii to terminate 642 employccs is in
ducation Law tj XOO-r(g), which they maintain I-equires h e Câli;incellor to adopt
budgcts and iiiiplciiicii~
rcduclions in an equitable maliner that considcrcd the nccds olâcacli
commiinity. Pclilioiicrs asscrt that the 13017 failed lo consider other viable alternatives before
choosing tcriiiination. Local 172 met with the 1)OE and proposed: 1) tlic rccoupiiiciit of thc
l; I6,5 million in Tax I .cvy Funds over Forintila; 2) reducing tlic iiurnber o1 hours that these
i
employees workccl each day; and 3) two furlough da.ys on the days when school aidcs report for
work but whcn iio slutieiits are in attcndl-lncc. Uontrary to 111c IX)Eâs assertion, pctitiuncrs
contciid thnt Districl Câouiicil 37 (âr3Câ 37â) was not the only mion to re.ject tlic Cityâs proposal
io tap into the iinioii 1ie:alth liind. Moreover, peLitioiicrs argue that the DOE tiiisled principals
into helicviiig Ilia1 parenl coordinalors wuuld 17c csccssed, wlicre an individual kccps his or her
joh m d their s;ilary is funded by i1 central budgct instead olâa school-bascd budget, instead 01â
hcii i g t criii i iiat ctl .
lâarcnl coordinator and pctitioncr Reg,ina Diidlcyâs position was eliiiiinaled in Octobcr
201 1 , I n Scptembcr 201 I , Principid I<oclian cliaiiged tlic title of school aiclc Cdwarth Morris to
commuriity ass~)ciate.IâctitioneI-s :isscrt h a t MI-. Moi-ris is pcrlbrming the same riinctioiis as a
pireii t coordinator. lâarcnl coordinator and pctilioncr Eva Câaccrasâ position was elim i na.ted i ii
2
[* 4]
October 20 I I . Iâriiicipal Thcocloro hircd so~iico~ic to pcrforni the saIne fiinctioiis as well as
elsc
[oiir other Iiircs belwcen August and S c p t e m I w 20 1 I . Iâelitioiicrs maintain that Iherc havc been
ovcr 000 litlc changes within tlic Lociil.373 mcmhcrship i n Yeptcmbcr iinci October of201 I
which suggests that principals changed titlcs o f I:,i\/oi~c.clcmployecs to retain them iIi iicw titlcs.
Petitioners argue that tcriniiiating eniployecs and hiring new cmployecs IO pcrlbrni the si11iic
duties is indicativc olâbacl hilli. 1 laving iiinds availablc and iriiplemcnting ovcr 600 layoffs is
;I Iso i nd icnt i vc or had lhi tli.
Respcmdciits opposc the petition i n its cntircty and argue that pctitioners have failed to
esiablish that the 1)OE is in violation of a n y IiIw and Iriils lo establish that its detcrimiliation to
adopt ;I budget which resulted in a reduction of iilrids to .r;choolswas arbitrary. capricious, o r
donc in bad hitli. licspondents maintain that I ducation I iiw ZOO-r(g) is inapplicable in thc
instaiil proceeding bccausc thc tlnal budgct that was adopted by Ilie Cily Câouncil and the Mayor
did n o t reduce o r increase the hiidget previoiisly adopted by the PEP cor DOE. licspondents
assert that thcy considcred I)Câ 37âs proposals. howevcr they felt tlial tliesc proposals wo~dci
do
more 1i;iriii than good to all I)OIâ sliid~111s.
Iâetilioners Ii;1vc also failed lo establish that the
layolâli were cxecutcd i n l m i faith withiii tlie iiarr(ow meaning oiâ the Civil Service I ,aw, because
tlicrc was a bona lidc h a t i c i d rcmoii in clâlâectuaiing the layoffs. Finally, respondents arguc hat
DOE dccisioiis rcgardiiig thc s M i n g . siipcrvision, and the allocation 01â resnurccs are noi
arbitrary and capricious aiid arc not jiisticiablc claims.
In reply, pctitioiiers argue that thcy have demonstratcd that thc layoffs wcrc donc in had
faith to rctaliatc ngaiiist thc iinions. IIâthcre was 110 Imna tidc financial ruasuii for lhc
termiriatiori, 110 savings were rcalizcd, or s c m c o ~ i c
was hircd 10 replace tlic teriiiinatcct cmploycc.
ihen thc tcmiinatioii was doiic in bud faith. Petitioners asscrt that therc was no cconomic
jiisli lication li)r the tciminations especially in lighl olâotlicr availablc options si~ch reducing
as
the number of hours Ihr thc school aidcs. klitioners also argue that the impact of thc schoolbased budget ciils werc not considered and thcrefore was ;I viulation of Educaiion I,aw $ 2590r( g). I,astly7 pctiiioners contcnd that as taxpayers and rcsidcnts of tht: Câity 01- New York. thcy
havc a vestcd intercst i n the allocation of the 1)OEâs liiiids. âIâhey maintain that h c N ) E
terminated the employment of ovcr 600 people withotit rcgard to thc facts.
As B policy matlcr, courls will iiol iiitcrlcrc in arcas that it is ill-eqiiipped l o iindcl-take
and wlicrc another branch ofgovcriimcnt is iiiore suited to tlie [ash. Jnncs v. Reamc, 4S N.Y.2d
402 (1978). âIAlbscnt ;i showiiig o f m ultrii vires act or a Liiliire to perlâorm ;i requircd act, the
dcc i s i oII cjIâ a s choo 1 c i fli c i a I i ii vo 1vi n g a n i ti I1crc n 11y ad ti1i i i i s i rat i v e prows s w ti i c h is 1111i q iic1y
part olât1iaI oIl?cialâs liirictiori i l l i d cxpcrtisc, prescrits :i noii,justiciable conlroversy.â. Matter of
Parent Tcachcr Awn. of P.S. 124M v. Board of Educ. of City School Ilist. of City of N.Y.,
138 A . L 2 d 108, 113 ( I â Dcpt. 1â188).
~
.
âI
.
1)ccisioiis concerniqg the nlloc;atioii of sc:irce scliool resources and school staffing lcvels
arc Id1 io tlic discretion dhd. rin[ipd ,jutlgmcnL o f school aclministralors. &,Matter of Ncw York
- 6
,State Inspcction, Sec. &â Law Enforcenicnt Empls., Ilist. Council 82, AFâSCMli,, API.,-C:IO
v. Cuorno, 64 N.Y.2d 233 (1984); Matter of Hokhair v. Board of Educ. of the Cih o f N . Y . ,
[* 5]
( 1 078). Therclbre, (his coui? l i d s that pctitioncrsâ clainis regarding 11ie 1)OEâs decision to
rcduce all school hiidgets by 3.20% and to teriiiinate 642 cmployccs arc nonjusticiable.
Ilasccl on Ihc li,regoing, this cow1 nced not delcnili ne whether rcspoivkntsâ
dclormiiiation was nrbilrary ancl capricious. I Inwcvcr, it sliould bc notcd that a detcrmiiialion is
arhi t r x y and capricious whcn it is tiiade âwithout sound hasis i n reason and is gcnerally talccn
witho\tl regard L lhc licts.â & Mattcr of Pcll v. Bd. of 1Sduc. of Union Pârce School Dist.
o
No. 1 of Towns 0 1 Scarsdiile & Mamarnneck, Westchcster County, 34 N.Y.2d 222, 231
( 1 974). â I ~ v c n
tlio~igl~ court niight have decided diilâcrently werc it in llie a g c i ~ y â position,
tlic
s
the court may no[ upscl thc agencyâs dcleriiiinatioii in the abscnce olâa fiiidiiig, nut supported by
this rccord, t l i a l the dcieri-niiiation hsd 110rational basis.â In the Matter o f Mid-State Met.
Chrp. v. Ncw York City Conciliation and Appeals Hd., 112 A.D.2d 72, 76 (1ââ 1)cpt. 1985).
r licrcli)rc, h i s courtâs role is liniited IO whcther or not rcspondciitsâ final detcrniination was
~ ~ ~ without 21 rational basis.
a d c
-
1
It niust bc noted that ihc DOE did iiol ordcr thc layoll-k olâtlie niorc than six hundrcd
employces. Instcad, thc DOE rcduccd its budget alâler carcfill consideration and each schoolâs
p r i I i c i pa I 111;id e ac1.i ushi C TI s lo i h c ir rcs pec t i ve schoo Is :is a res u It. A I Ihoug h petitio 11 riia i ti I i i
~
ers
ai
h i t h c y havc [lettcr iclcas on how to savc ti-runey, that is riot cnough to rciider an agciicyâs
dctci.miri~ition arbitrary aid capricious. I n addition, petitioners have fiiilcd to establish thal the
as
layoflâs:wcre clonc in bad fiiililli ancl that rcspoiiclcnts Iiavc IBilcd to comply with I-idtication Law 9
3SOO-r( g).
Accordingly, it is hcreby,
AI)JIJI)C;ED tlial the petition is denicd, with costs and disbursements to respondcnts; and
i t is iiirthcr;
UNFKED JUDGMENT
This judgment has not been entered by the County Clerk
and notice of entry cannot be served based hereon. Tg
obtain entry, caunsei or authonzd rsgremntatiye must
appqq in pereon at the J u m qt c,cO e s4 k ( R m
4 v k
.
1
14w..
â
â
I:N X I < :
-
-
.I, S.( â
