A tumultuous week at the Lang Lawsuit Alcantara v. Hespe. a suit brought by Lakewood math teacher and lawyer Mr. Arthur Lang against the state NJDOE for not providing a fair Thorough and Efficient Education with the funding formula to Lakewood schools.
Yated Ne'eman reports last week the state focused on mismanagement by BOE officials found by audits from 2011-2013. Mr Lang argued those audits are no longer relevant, as the mismanagement has been corrected, yet pale in comparison to funding deficiency.
At one point BOE attorney Michael Inzelbuch requested that Judge Susan Scarola presiding over the case recuse herself because statements she made can serve as a basis for appeal. In helping Mr. Lang formulate a question the Judge suggested a comparison between the state funding formula and a ponzi scheme. (interestingly the boe attorney used the very same quote from the judge to hi-lite the very situation Lakewood school district finds itself with receiving loans from the state).
Mr. Lang responded by asking the judge to remain on the case and that the judge has not taken the opinion that the state was comparable to a ponzi scheme, rather she was helping him articulate the claim he was trying to make.
The Lakewood BOE submitted a motion and asked the judge to consider current financial situation of 2019.
NJ attorney General Grubir Grewal responded in a letter the Lakewood Board of Education is a Participant in this matter; it is not a party and repeatedly attempts to revisit its status, by attempting to improperly submit evidence to the Court outside of the hearing and file meritless motions that ultimately detract from the Court's ability to consider the actual case before it.
The judge ruled that As previously noted, the Lakewood Board of Education is a Participant in this matter; it is not a party. As such, it is not entitled to file motions, or submit evidence or testimony to this forum. the case has concluded. Administrative Law Judge Susan M. Scarola, is expected to issue an initial decision before the end of the year. It will be up to the state education commissioner, Lamont O. Repollet, do decide if to accept or reject it.
Many of the paragraphs in the BOE attorney's pleadings such as dealing with land use and attorney fees were not alleged by the state (yet!?!); what happened after he left and when he returned, besides moving four times to intervene and interfering with discovery, is irrelevant.
ReplyDelete