| Property Taxes, School Funding issues | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
1-19-07 DOE hearings on school funding formula study next week
Dear GSCS members – Parents, Board of Education members and School Administrators: The Garden State Coalition of Schools is committed to providing you with information regarding the myriad proposals presently being considered by our legislators that may have a serious impact on education for our member districts across the state. Included here is a news advisory just recently released by the Department of Education, announcing three additional public hearings – on January 24 and 25 - to discuss the Report on the Cost of Education released by the DOE in December. This is an opportunity for you to provide input to the NJDOE, either through “live” testimony at any of the hearings or through the submission of written testimony. You also are able to view all three public hearings via a webcast. Please review GSCS testimony on this important issue, given at the December 18, 2006 hearings, on the GSCS website www.gscschools.org. GSCS has been advocating for a new school funding formula that is fair and equitable for all children, no matter where they live. The legislature and the Governor have consistently stated that they plan to institute a new formula for next year, Fiscal Year 2007-2008. We continue to need to press them to do just that. In order to see that a new formula will work well for students and taxpaying communities alike, we ask the state to get the proposed formula, and its distribution impact, in the public debate as soon as possible. This needs to happen with due speed, so we can discuss the particulars of their proposal in a productive way. Working collaboratively with the state, we can help get the job done right. We urge you to stay informed on this very important matter. Thank you! News Advisory From the NJ Department of Education __________________________________________________________________________ Dept of Education Press Notice re Hearings Jan 24 & 25: DOE to Hold Three Additional Hearings on School Costs Report The New Jersey Department of Education has scheduled three additional public hearings to discuss the Report on the Cost of Education released by DOE in December, Commissioner Lucille E. Davy announced today. “This is a continuation of our effort to seek as much public input as possible as we continue our work on the development of a responsible, rational and equitable school funding formula,” Commissioner Davy said. “We want to make sure that people understand how the process works and have an opportunity to take part in it.” The hearings will be chaired by the Commissioner. The dates, times and locations are: • Wednesday, January 24, 1:30 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Gloucester County College, 1400 Tanyard Road, Sewell. The hearing will be held in room 430 of the Instructional Center. Visit http://www.gccnj.edu/general_information/directions.cfm for directions. Hearing attendees should park in Lot D or Lot E. • Wednesday, January 24, 6:30 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. Mercer County Community College, 1200 Old Trenton Road, West Windsor. The hearing will be held in the Conference Center. Visit http://www.mccc.edu/welcome_directions_wwcampus.shtml for directions and parking information. • Thursday, January 25, 4:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m. New Jersey City University, Jersey City. The hearing will be held in the Gothic Lounge, Hepburn Hall, room 202. For directions, visit http://www.njcu.edu/i2e/visit/directions.asp Parking is extremely limited on the campus near Hepburn Hall or on the streets around the campus. Parking spaces may be available in Remote Lots 3A (on West side Avenue, with an additional entrance/exit on Carbon Place off Rt. 440 North) and 3B (located on Carbon Place off Rt. 440 North). A shuttle bus provides service to the campus from both lots. The parking rate for all lots is $6.00 per entry/exit, Monday thru Friday. All three hearings will be web cast live. People who wish to testify must register in advance and sign a release that will permit their voices to be recorded and broadcast on line. A registration form will be available on-line starting at 9:00 a.m. on Thursday, January 18, at https://education.state.nj.us/sff/sff.php. People may also register by phone by calling 609-292-6038. Each organization will be limited to one speaker per site and all speakers will be limited to five minutes each. Those who would prefer to submit written testimony rather than attend the hearings in person may send that testimony electronically to legislative@doe.state.nj.us or fax it to 609-777-2077. The web cast stream can be viewed using Windows Media Player (download the player from http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/download/AllDownloads.aspx?displang=en&qstechnology) at www.njedge.net/doelive Archives of the stream will be available from the NJEDge.Net website (www.njedge.net) or the Department of Education Web-site (www.state.nj.us/education) approximately two days after each hearing. The Report of the Cost of Education was designed to calculate the costs that New Jersey school districts face in meeting state performance and accountability standards. Commissioner Davy announced recently that the report is also under review by three nationally-recognized experts. DOE has also established a page of the department’s web site entitled “Planning for a New School Funding Formula” -- http://www.state.nj.us/njded/sff/ -- which includes a copy of the report, archived web casts of the December 18 public hearings and other background information. The web cast is being coordinated by NJEDge.Net, New Jersey’s Higher Education Network. NJEDge.Net is a non-profit consortium of the Presidents’ Council that was created to enhance instruction, research and public service at the state’s colleges and universities through a broadband statewide network. _____________________________________________________________________________ GARDEN STATE COALITION OF SCHOOLS/GSCS 12-18-06 Department of Education Hearings GIVEN: A NEW SCHOOL FUNDING FORMULA MUST BE PUT IN PACE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007-2008. INITIAL CONCERNS: Department of Education School Funding Formula Cost Study AN OVERALL CONCERN: Inadequate timelines have not been allowed for the full in-depth analyses, open discussion and understanding of the district-by-district impact that a new school funding formula requires. In addition, any funding formula viable conversation needs to be rooted in reality –to do that, the entire package needs to be revealed at the same time. A conversation about theory, when not backed up by knowledge of practical application, will likely result in confused expectations, mixed messages, and ‘having to do whole thing’ over again to get it right. Concern: Leveling down of quality education. Does the per pupil *cost measure (an average of $8500) demonstrate the state’s goal/expectations for quality education in New Jersey in the future?...Literal district data was not used to derive costs, thus the reality of variances such as teacher stability and enrollment growth which affect per pupil costs directly, are not a factor in the costing out process. However, these variables are a factor in local budgets and school costs. Concern: Wealth equalizing of special education aid – Keep as a categorical aid Since special education programs are mandated for individual children no matter where they live, it is reasonable for the funding support & programs for those individual children to be the same no matter where they live. Special education support for students should not be reduced due a wealth-based calculation distributed according to district wealth, as opposed to individual student needs. Concern: Minimum Aid is proposed for all districts GSCS supports the concept, but points out that this can be better achieve both in terms of equity and effectiveness, by increasing the state share of special education categorical aid to all districts. No district is favored in this method, and special education student support is appropriately increased via state share. Concern: Ability-to-Pay This formula needs to be disclosed, and the data run and published as soon as possible so that it can be reviewed, with an eye on significant change possibilities, and the real probability of unintended consequences. Attendant Concern: “Hard Caps” Reasonable caps differ from hard caps. In the proposed funding plan, hard caps apply cross the board with no exception allowed other than enrollment growth…. The data speaks loudly – these two factors alone (increase in health benefits and special education costs) made up 61.5% of local levy growth from FY02 to FY06- and makes clear that hard caps will have a negative impact on quality education. There is further stress on local districts now due to uncertainty concerning health benefits since the Governor’s recent removal of health benefits reform from the special session legislative proposal package. ADDENDA FY02 to FY06 SPECIAL EDUCATION & HEALTH BENEFITS EXPENDITURES IN REGULAR OPERATING DISTRICTS (RODs) v. GROWTH IN LOCAL LEVIES ROD Levy Growth 0206 2,378,240,758 ROD Sp Ed Growth 0206 678,570,214 .2853% of ROD levy growth ROD Health Bens Growth 0206 783,979,869 .3296% of ROD levy growth ROD Sp Ed+ Health Ben Growth = 1,462,550,083 .61497% of ROD levy growth GARDEN STATE COALITION OF SCHOOLS/GSCS 11-06 CHART (based on above data) Garden State Coalition of Schools/GSCS School Funding Principles 9-06 All districts must have a reasonable financial stake in their children’s education. • Promotes community and parental involvement via budget planning process 15%-85%solution:No district should fund its schools less than 15% nor more than 85% (It is understood that there could likely be a few anomalies to this rule.) • Ability-to-Pay considerations can apply within this framework. • State funding of categorical aids outside an adequacy foundation can achieve 85%. • State & federal funding of adequacy foundation amounts, plus categorical aids, can fund the highest concentrations of special-needs children. Wealth Formula • Adjustment of the current 50% property + 50% income/aggregates per community over enrollment should not occur unless they results in a significant benefit to a significant supermajority of districts across the state; nor should it occur if there is significant negative impact to one type/segment of communities within the state. For example, removing income or lessening income part of the wealth formula by a certain factor, e.g., will benefit cities more where citizens have lower income on average. • There is a need to compare overall impacts: i.e., evaluate how the local fair share determinations are balanced against state and federal aid that localities are currently receiving to support their education and municipal needs. Ability toPay: sensitive not only to community local fair share, but also to individual residents’ income capacity as well • Circuit Breakers: offset property taxes/individuals who meet certain criteria/wealth ranges Defining ‘regular education’ is critical; determine first what is not to be considered as regular education. • Regular education is first organized and delivered to all students attending public schools (i.e., applying today’s core curriculum standards). Categorical/Special Needs program for certain students only No equalization re mandated programs – current big 3; any new mandates – e.g., preschool; full-day Kindergarten; if at certain wealth measure/concentration ‘at risk’ students is required, must fund that mandate at state level. • Individual students with special needs will determine these ‘categorical’ aids: special-needs services for these students will be determined by the individual student’s needs within a district. These services will not be available for the entire student body compared to regular education programs that would be provided for all the students in a given district. • Special Education programs and related services: specifically, child study teams and related service/special education staff must realistically be included under the special education aid umbrella. The functional time that child study teams must devote to special education students is approximated to be well over 90%. • Transportation • Bi-Lingual • At-Risk students • Adult Education • Debt Service • Per-Pupil aids must be kept current by enrollment fluctuations. • Supplemental programs can be justified via special grant programs, with annual review and justification. • Constitutionality can be checked formulaically by built-in ‘floor’ or ‘benchmarking.’ ADDITIONAL AREAS OF CONCERN REQUIRE DEFINITION/CONSIDERATION. Accountability process Caps v. mandates v. cost drivers – type and impact – what districts can and cannot control No restricted aid categories Cost containment – Effective and Efficient / justify, define, quantify and qualify uses.
Dear GSCS members – Parents, Board of Education members and School Administrators: The Garden State Coalition of Schools is committed to providing you with information regarding the myriad proposals presently being considered by our legislators that may have a serious impact on education for our member districts across the state. Included here is a news advisory just recently released by the Department of Education, announcing three additional public hearings – on January 24 and 25 - to discuss the Report on the Cost of Education released by the DOE in December. This is an opportunity for you to provide input to the NJDOE, either through “live” testimony at any of the hearings or through the submission of written testimony. You also are able to view all three public hearings via a webcast. Please review GSCS testimony on this important issue, given at the December 18, 2006 hearings, on the GSCS website www.gscschools.org. GSCS has been advocating for a new school funding formula that is fair and equitable for all children, no matter where they live. The legislature and the Governor have consistently stated that they plan to institute a new formula for next year, Fiscal Year 2007-2008. We continue to need to press them to do just that. In order to see that a new formula will work well for students and taxpaying communities alike, we ask the state to get the proposed formula, and its distribution impact, in the public debate as soon as possible. This needs to happen with due speed, so we can discuss the particulars of their proposal in a productive way. Working collaboratively with the state, we can help get the job done right. We urge you to stay informed on this very important matter. Thank you! News Advisory From the NJ Department of Education __________________________________________________________________________ Dept of Education Press Notice re Hearings Jan 24 & 25: DOE to Hold Three Additional Hearings on School Costs Report The New Jersey Department of Education has scheduled three additional public hearings to discuss the Report on the Cost of Education released by DOE in December, Commissioner Lucille E. Davy announced today. “This is a continuation of our effort to seek as much public input as possible as we continue our work on the development of a responsible, rational and equitable school funding formula,” Commissioner Davy said. “We want to make sure that people understand how the process works and have an opportunity to take part in it.” The hearings will be chaired by the Commissioner. The dates, times and locations are: • Wednesday, January 24, 1:30 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Gloucester County College, 1400 Tanyard Road, Sewell. The hearing will be held in room 430 of the Instructional Center. Visit http://www.gccnj.edu/general_information/directions.cfm for directions. Hearing attendees should park in Lot D or Lot E. • Wednesday, January 24, 6:30 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. Mercer County Community College, 1200 Old Trenton Road, West Windsor. The hearing will be held in the Conference Center. Visit http://www.mccc.edu/welcome_directions_wwcampus.shtml for directions and parking information. • Thursday, January 25, 4:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m. New Jersey City University, Jersey City. The hearing will be held in the Gothic Lounge, Hepburn Hall, room 202. For directions, visit http://www.njcu.edu/i2e/visit/directions.asp Parking is extremely limited on the campus near Hepburn Hall or on the streets around the campus. Parking spaces may be available in Remote Lots 3A (on West side Avenue, with an additional entrance/exit on Carbon Place off Rt. 440 North) and 3B (located on Carbon Place off Rt. 440 North). A shuttle bus provides service to the campus from both lots. The parking rate for all lots is $6.00 per entry/exit, Monday thru Friday. All three hearings will be web cast live. People who wish to testify must register in advance and sign a release that will permit their voices to be recorded and broadcast on line. A registration form will be available on-line starting at 9:00 a.m. on Thursday, January 18, at https://education.state.nj.us/sff/sff.php. People may also register by phone by calling 609-292-6038. Each organization will be limited to one speaker per site and all speakers will be limited to five minutes each. Those who would prefer to submit written testimony rather than attend the hearings in person may send that testimony electronically to legislative@doe.state.nj.us or fax it to 609-777-2077. The web cast stream can be viewed using Windows Media Player (download the player from http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/download/AllDownloads.aspx?displang=en&qstechnology) at www.njedge.net/doelive Archives of the stream will be available from the NJEDge.Net website (www.njedge.net) or the Department of Education Web-site (www.state.nj.us/education) approximately two days after each hearing. The Report of the Cost of Education was designed to calculate the costs that New Jersey school districts face in meeting state performance and accountability standards. Commissioner Davy announced recently that the report is also under review by three nationally-recognized experts. DOE has also established a page of the department’s web site entitled “Planning for a New School Funding Formula” -- http://www.state.nj.us/njded/sff/ -- which includes a copy of the report, archived web casts of the December 18 public hearings and other background information. The web cast is being coordinated by NJEDge.Net, New Jersey’s Higher Education Network. NJEDge.Net is a non-profit consortium of the Presidents’ Council that was created to enhance instruction, research and public service at the state’s colleges and universities through a broadband statewide network. _____________________________________________________________________________ GARDEN STATE COALITION OF SCHOOLS/GSCS 12-18-06 Department of Education Hearings GIVEN: A NEW SCHOOL FUNDING FORMULA MUST BE PUT IN PACE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007-2008. INITIAL CONCERNS: Department of Education School Funding Formula Cost Study AN OVERALL CONCERN: Inadequate timelines have not been allowed for the full in-depth analyses, open discussion and understanding of the district-by-district impact that a new school funding formula requires. In addition, any funding formula viable conversation needs to be rooted in reality –to do that, the entire package needs to be revealed at the same time. A conversation about theory, when not backed up by knowledge of practical application, will likely result in confused expectations, mixed messages, and ‘having to do whole thing’ over again to get it right. Concern: Leveling down of quality education. Does the per pupil *cost measure (an average of $8500) demonstrate the state’s goal/expectations for quality education in New Jersey in the future?...Literal district data was not used to derive costs, thus the reality of variances such as teacher stability and enrollment growth which affect per pupil costs directly, are not a factor in the costing out process. However, these variables are a factor in local budgets and school costs. Concern: Wealth equalizing of special education aid – Keep as a categorical aid Since special education programs are mandated for individual children no matter where they live, it is reasonable for the funding support & programs for those individual children to be the same no matter where they live. Special education support for students should not be reduced due a wealth-based calculation distributed according to district wealth, as opposed to individual student needs. Concern: Minimum Aid is proposed for all districts GSCS supports the concept, but points out that this can be better achieve both in terms of equity and effectiveness, by increasing the state share of special education categorical aid to all districts. No district is favored in this method, and special education student support is appropriately increased via state share. Concern: Ability-to-Pay This formula needs to be disclosed, and the data run and published as soon as possible so that it can be reviewed, with an eye on significant change possibilities, and the real probability of unintended consequences. Attendant Concern: “Hard Caps” Reasonable caps differ from hard caps. In the proposed funding plan, hard caps apply cross the board with no exception allowed other than enrollment growth…. The data speaks loudly – these two factors alone (increase in health benefits and special education costs) made up 61.5% of local levy growth from FY02 to FY06- and makes clear that hard caps will have a negative impact on quality education. There is further stress on local districts now due to uncertainty concerning health benefits since the Governor’s recent removal of health benefits reform from the special session legislative proposal package. ADDENDA FY02 to FY06 SPECIAL EDUCATION & HEALTH BENEFITS EXPENDITURES IN REGULAR OPERATING DISTRICTS (RODs) v. GROWTH IN LOCAL LEVIES ROD Levy Growth 0206 2,378,240,758 ROD Sp Ed Growth 0206 678,570,214 .2853% of ROD levy growth ROD Health Bens Growth 0206 783,979,869 .3296% of ROD levy growth ROD Sp Ed+ Health Ben Growth = 1,462,550,083 .61497% of ROD levy growth GARDEN STATE COALITION OF SCHOOLS/GSCS 11-06 CHART (based on above data) Garden State Coalition of Schools/GSCS School Funding Principles 9-06 All districts must have a reasonable financial stake in their children’s education. • Promotes community and parental involvement via budget planning process 15%-85%solution:No district should fund its schools less than 15% nor more than 85% (It is understood that there could likely be a few anomalies to this rule.) • Ability-to-Pay considerations can apply within this framework. • State funding of categorical aids outside an adequacy foundation can achieve 85%. • State & federal funding of adequacy foundation amounts, plus categorical aids, can fund the highest concentrations of special-needs children. Wealth Formula • Adjustment of the current 50% property + 50% income/aggregates per community over enrollment should not occur unless they results in a significant benefit to a significant supermajority of districts across the state; nor should it occur if there is significant negative impact to one type/segment of communities within the state. For example, removing income or lessening income part of the wealth formula by a certain factor, e.g., will benefit cities more where citizens have lower income on average. • There is a need to compare overall impacts: i.e., evaluate how the local fair share determinations are balanced against state and federal aid that localities are currently receiving to support their education and municipal needs. Ability toPay: sensitive not only to community local fair share, but also to individual residents’ income capacity as well • Circuit Breakers: offset property taxes/individuals who meet certain criteria/wealth ranges Defining ‘regular education’ is critical; determine first what is not to be considered as regular education. • Regular education is first organized and delivered to all students attending public schools (i.e., applying today’s core curriculum standards). Categorical/Special Needs program for certain students only No equalization re mandated programs – current big 3; any new mandates – e.g., preschool; full-day Kindergarten; if at certain wealth measure/concentration ‘at risk’ students is required, must fund that mandate at state level. • Individual students with special needs will determine these ‘categorical’ aids: special-needs services for these students will be determined by the individual student’s needs within a district. These services will not be available for the entire student body compared to regular education programs that would be provided for all the students in a given district. • Special Education programs and related services: specifically, child study teams and related service/special education staff must realistically be included under the special education aid umbrella. The functional time that child study teams must devote to special education students is approximated to be well over 90%. • Transportation • Bi-Lingual • At-Risk students • Adult Education • Debt Service • Per-Pupil aids must be kept current by enrollment fluctuations. • Supplemental programs can be justified via special grant programs, with annual review and justification. • Constitutionality can be checked formulaically by built-in ‘floor’ or ‘benchmarking.’ ADDITIONAL AREAS OF CONCERN REQUIRE DEFINITION/CONSIDERATION. Accountability process Caps v. mandates v. cost drivers – type and impact – what districts can and cannot control No restricted aid categories Cost containment – Effective and Efficient / justify, define, quantify and qualify uses.
