(This syllabus is not part of the opinion of the Court. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the
convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Supreme Court. Please note that, in the
interests of brevity, portions of any opinion may not have been summarized).
In the Matter of the Grant of the Charter School Application of the Greater Brunswick Charter School,
Middlesex County (A-35-99)
Argued February 29, 2000 -- Decided June 28, 2000
PER CURIAM
This appeal is a companion to the appeals of IMO the Grant of the Charter School Application of
Englewood on the Palisades Charter School, IMO the Grant of the Charter School Application of the Classical
Academy Charter School of Clifton, Passaic County, IMO the Grant of the Charter School Application of the
Franklin Charter School, Somerset County, ___ N.J. ___ (2000), decided today. In this appeal, the Highland Park
Board of Education (Highland Park) challenges the grant of a charter school application filed by the Greater
Brunswick Charter School (Brunswick), which proposed to provide an educational program to serve both urban and
suburban students as a regional charter school drawing from several bordering districts, including Highland Park.
Highland Park appealed the approval and grant of the charter to the Appellate Division which, on the issues
relevant to the instant appeal, held that although the Charter School Program Act of 1995 (Act) does not specifically
authorize regional schools, regulations promulgated by the State Board of Education (State Board) legitimately
foster the Act's purpose. The court pointed to N.J.S.A. 18A:36A-8(a), which allows district charter schools to enroll
students from other districts as support for its holding. Budget problems that could result from a regional charter
school were perceived as not an issue for the courts.
Highland Park also raised and the Appellate Division addressed the issue whether the Commissioner of
Education is required to consider the racial and financial impact of a charter school on the local school district,
issues addressed and decided by the Court in the companion appeals decided today. The Supreme Court granted
Highland Park's petition for certification, limited to the issues of whether the Act authorizes the creation of a
regional charter school and whether the Act requires the Commissioner to consider the racial and financial impact of
a charter school on the local school districts.
Held: The judgment of the Appellate Division is AFFIRMED substantially for the reasons expressed in the
opinion below, except to the extent modified by the Court's decision in IMO the Grant of a Charter School
Application of Englewood on the Palisades Charter School, ___ N.J. ___ (2000). Regulations that permit regional
charter schools are a legitimate means of effectuating the purposes of the Charter School Program Act of 1995. The
Commissioner of Education must assess the racial impact of a charter school's approval on the school district where
the charter school is located and must consider the financial impact if a district makes a preliminary showing that its
ability to provide a thorough and efficient education is at risk.
CHIEF JUSTICE PORITZ, JUSTICES STEIN, COLEMAN, LONG and LaVECCHIA, and
JUDGES HAVEY and CARCHMAN join in the Court's opinion. JUSTICES O'HERN and VERNIERO did
not participate.
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY
A-
35 September Term 1999
IN THE MATTER OF THE GRANT
OF THE CHARTER SCHOOL
APPLICATION OF THE GREATER
BRUNSWICK CHARTER SCHOOL,
MIDDLESEX COUNTY.
___________________________
Argued February 29, 2000 -- Decided June 28, 2000
On certification to the Superior Court,
Appellate Division.
James L. Plosia, Jr., argued the cause for
appellant, Highland Park Board of Education
(Apruzzese, McDermott, Mastro & Murphy,
attorneys; Mr. Plosia and Joseph C. DeBlasio,
of counsel and on the briefs).
Lois H. Goodman argued the cause for
respondent, Greater Brunswick Charter School
(Carpenter, Bennett & Morrissey, attorneys;
Ms. Goodman and Stephen F. Payerle, of
counsel, Ms. Goodman, Mr. Payerle and Melissa
B. Popkin, on the briefs).
Michelle Lyn Miller, Deputy Attorney General,
argued the cause for respondent State Board
of Education (John J. Farmer, Jr., Attorney
General of New Jersey, attorney; Nancy
Kaplen, of counsel; John K. Worthington,
Deputy Attorney General, on the briefs).
David G. Sciarra, Executive Director,
Education Law Center argued the cause for
amicus curiae Abbott plaintiffs (Mr. Sciarra
and Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger &
Vecchione, attorneys; Mr. Sciarra, Lawrence
S. Lustberg and Lori Outzs Borgen, on the
brief).
Richard E. Shapiro submitted a brief on
behalf of amicus curiae Asbury Park Board of
Education.
John G. Geppert, Jr., submitted a letter in
lieu of brief on behalf of amicus curiae
Morris School District (Wiley, Malehorn and
Sirota, attorneys).
Christopher J. Christie submitted a brief on
behalf of amicus curiae New Jersey Charter
Public Schools Association (Dughi and Hewit,
attorneys; Mr. Christie and Gary L. Riveles
on the brief).
PER CURIAM
We affirm the judgment below substantially for the reasons
stated in the opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at ___
N.J. Super. ___ ( ), except to the extent that it is modified
by our decision in the companion appeal of In the Matter of the
Grant of the Charter School Application of Englewood on the
Palisades Charter School, In the Matter of the Grant of the
Charter School Application of the Classical Academy Charter
School of Clifton, Passaic County, In the Matter of the Grant of
the Charter School Application of the Franklin Charter School,
Somerset County, ___ N.J. ___ (2000), also decided today.
CHIEF JUSTICE PORITZ and JUSTICES STEIN, COLEMAN, LONG,
LaVECCHIA and JUDGES HAVEY and CARCHMAN join in this opinion.
JUSTICES O'HERN and VERNIERO did not participate.
NO. A-35 SEPTEMBER TERM 1999
ON APPEAL FROM
ON CERTIFICATION TO Appellate Division, Superior Court
IN THE MATTER OF THE GRANT
OF THE CHARTER SCHOOL
APPLICATION OF THE GREATER
BRUNSWICK CHARTER SCHOOL,
MIDDLESEX COUNTY.
DECIDED June 28, 2000
Chief Justice Poritz PRESIDING
OPINION BY PER CURIAM
CONCURRING OPINION BY
DISSENTING OPINION BY