and universities in preparation for lucrative careers. Some middle ground between these two extremes comports with the Court of Appeals' emphasis on preparation for productive citizenship and its eschewal of a state of the art standard. [187 [187 Misc.2d Misc.2d 16] 16] The Court of Appeals' emphasis on productive citizenship connotes an education that contributes to society's economic needs as well as high school graduates'. An emphasis on the economic needs of society requires that this court look at the current and projected labor needs of the State of New York in general and the needs of New York City in particular. However, the labor needs of the City and State must be balanced with the needs of high school graduates. For example, while the greatest expansion in the local labor market might be composed of low-level service jobs, such jobs frequently do not pay a living wage. A sound basic education would give New York City's high school graduates the opportunity to move beyond such work. This analysis necessarily rests upon a dynamic interpretation of the Education Article. That the definition of sound basic education must evolve is axiomatic. If the meaning of the Education Article were to be frozen as of 1894, when it was added to the State Constitution, the Article would cease to have any relevance. It is undeniable that the level of skills necessary to obtain employment in today's economy exceeds those required in 1894. "The Constitution is to be construed * * * to give its provisions practical effect, so that it receives `a fair and liberal construction, not only according to its letter, but also according to its spirit and the general purposes of its enactment.'" (Ginsberg v Purcell, 51 N.Y.2d 272, 276 [1980], quoting Pfingst v State of New York, 57 A.D.2d 163, 165 [1977].) The remaining portion of this subsection constitutes findings of fact concerning the labor needs of New York City and State. The unrebutted evidence presented at trial demonstrates that New York City has experienced a contraction of its manufacturing sector and a concomitant rise of its service sector. Stated in broad terms, jobs that pay a living wage in the service sector require a more rigorous formal education than jobs that have historically paid a living wage in the City's manufacturing sector. The plaintiffs submitted substantial evidence that there is a consensus among educators, labor experts, and business and government leaders around the Nation that, as stated in the policy statement of the 1996 National Education Summit: Today's economy demands that all high school graduates, whether they are continuing their education or are moving directly into the workforce, have higher levels of skills and knowledge.12 The educational demands of New York City's current economy were recently summarized by the Mayor's Advisory Task Force on the City University of New York (CUNY). The CUNY Task Force was created by Mayor Giuliani to examine issues faced by CUNY, including the extensive need for remedial education for matriculating students—many of whom are graduates of New York City public schools. The Task Force was chaired by Benno Schmidt, formerly president of Yale University and, before that, dean of the Columbia University School of Law. The Task Force retained both Price Waterhouse Coopers and the RAND Corporation to investigate CUNY's current operations. The CUNY Task Force's final report, issued in June 1999, states that the minimum skills necessary to compete successfully for good jobs are "high-level academic skills." Opportunities for less-educated workers are likely to keep declining, while continued increases in the service sector will bring more good jobs to people with computer skills who are literate, can write, and are well-grounded in science and mathematics. Plaintiffs' expert Professor Henry Levin, who has conducted research and published numerous papers concerning the economics of education, testified that between 1969 and 1998 the earnings of high school dropouts and high school graduates have declined relative to those of college graduates. Dr. Levin also found that the earnings of high school graduates, adjusted for inflation, declined during that time. The court finds Dr. Levin's findings to be credible and well-founded. The Governor's most recent executive budgets have stressed the increasing importance to the State of its high technology sector. However, there is a disconnect between the skills of the State's and City's labor forces and the needs of the high technology sector. Indeed, the myriad high technology companies that have sprung up in the last five years in New York City's Silicon Alley must often go outside the City and State for personnel with appropriate skills. In sum, this court finds that a sound basic education consists of the foundational skills that students need to become productive [187 [187 Misc.2d Misc.2d 18] 18] citizens capable of civic engagement and sustaining competitive employment. C . P l a i n t i ffs ' S t a n d i n g Almost as an afterthought, defendants raise the issue of plaintiffs' standing in a one-and-a-half-page section near the end of their memorandum of law. Defendants do not explain why they raise this issue for the first time at this late juncture, after extensive motion practice raising other issues of justiciability and a seven-month trial. Plaintiffs, apparently unaware that defendants would raise this issue, do not mention it in their posttrial submissions. Standing is a core requirement that a party requesting relief from a court have an injury in fact that is redressable by a judicial resolution (see Community Bd. 7 v Schaffer, 84 N.Y.2d 148, 154-155 [1994]). An organization may have standing if one or more of its members would have standing to sue, if the claims it brings are germane to the organization's purposes, and if neither the claim nor the remedy necessarily requires the participation of the individual members of the organization (Society of Plastics Indus. v County of Suffolk, 77 N.Y.2d 761, 775 [1991]). Standing vel non is a threshold determination that, "when challenged, must be considered at the outset of any litigation." (Id., at 769.) However, this court is compelled to reach the issue even though defendants herein raise it only at the eleventh hour. Standing, unlike capacity to sue, concerns this court's jurisdiction and may not be waived (City of New York v State of New York, 86 N.Y.2d 286, 292; cf. Matter of Santoro v Schreiber, 263 A.D.2d 953, lv dismissed 94 N.Y.2d 817 [1999]). Defendants argue that none of the plaintiffs established injury-in-fact at trial. The court disagrees. Lead plaintiff Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE) is an organization comprised, inter alia, of school-parent organizations. As discussed below, the children of these parents who attend public school in New