"Equal Funding for Every Child" Christie plan
Property taxes in Hackettstown would drop $1138 annually. Teacher's union says plan is "despicable". The plan calls for a flat rate of aid in the amount of $6,599 per student enrolled in grades kindergarten through 12 in New Jersey. See http://www.nj.gov/governor/taxrelief/index.shtml
You can see the proposed tax savings for any town under Your Property Tax Savings.
Opinions?
OnTheEdge 
iJay I know I'll surprise a bunch of people, but conceptually it's a solid idea. It makes sense that each child should get the same funding and lord knows throwing state money at the disadvantaged areas has not worked.
I was hopeful that the Charter schools would bring a better education to the poorer districts, but it has turned out to be a money grab by opportunists (I don't know why I'm surprised).
Maybe this is just the shake-up the whole system needs to wake people up and bring more funding from the national level to the disadvantaged districts.
trekster3- It's awful. Schools across the state will not be able to sustain their current programs and projects. He says it will be the same per pupil no matter the circumstances. That will be a detriment to students with special needs who need services in addition to everything else. Not to mention students who are gifted will be slighted as well. His calculation will cut the per pupil cost in half for most schools. You will see an increase in class size, etc. Forget technology, that is not cheap when buying for classes and schools. The state does not fund for mandates as is. The lead testing is expensive, especially if doing it multiple times, money was pledged, but the schools have not been told where to send those bills yet. Not to mention new curriculum mandates. The cost per pupil may work in a state like Nebraska where the cost of living is cheaper, but not in Jersey where everything is inflated. I understand there needs to be an adjustment, but a one size fits all approach is not the answer.
Just sayin2 Keep in mind that most districts spend a lot more than that per student. (Not just Newark but pretty much every blue chip district.) So if a town wants to spend more than the state allotted amount they will simply create new and interesting taxes to pay for fields, buildings, computers, coaches and assorted "perks" that would otherwise disappear.
Mendham and Princeton and West Windsor will always spend more on their schools than Roxbury, Hackettstown or Newton even if they pay the same "student fee".
The abject poverty and rampant crime in places like Newark and Camden will always mean their kids have a harder time getting a decent education. Throwing money has a solid track record of failure, a shake up may work but it will come at a cost to a lot of kids in those places, not the ones in Mendham or Hackettstown.
Agust Trekster- I disagree with the whole charter school notion of sucking up school funding. I work at a charter school in Paterson and it has made a world of difference for these kids. In 2 years, we will be the 3rd largest charter school system in the state. Student scores have gone up drastically and one of the charter schools was even named one of the most rigorous HS's in the country. The funding we receive has allowed us to expand into other urban areas and students are thriving in the classroom. There is always work to do and a lot of my own middle school students still struggle with reading/writing, but they have improved significantly and they do NOT want to go back to public school.
Now don't get me wrong I do feel that a lot of charter schools should close down and are not an asset to the community, so please know that I feel if a school is not producing a great, effective classroom learning environment, it should be looked into to truly see if it is effective and a good use of funding. Even public schools in urban area's have misused funding from the state (I know this happens in suburban or rural areas, I am just focusing on urban areas for this post) . I think it was East Orange focused on a football stadium vs. getting better supplies for the classroom and improving the buildings themselves.
I looked at this proposal and found it interesting. I was surprised on how much per pupil certain district "needed" for an education vs. other's. Some districts were $400 vs. $24,000. I do feel that the numbers between the urban and suburban or wealthy districts are extremely far apart and that gap needs to be closed. We shall see where this ends up, but I am interested in how this will play out and the specific details of how this will work/affect taxes, etc.
sunshinenj Well said Sunshine - I think every school, charter or standard public should be looked at for effective use of funding. Again, we get into the sticky wicket of how to measure effectiveness though.
Maybe it will cut down on wasteful spending at districts that get the high funding now. But if there is a premium to teach in Newark now, and there is no money to pay it, how will they attract teachers?
maja2 
MB There's the rub MB - our governor has spent our money on that web site to show us how much he wants to give our school. But that makes zero guarantee the taxes will change. Worse than that, he hasn't changed one iota of the school mandates. Which is why maja that wasteful spending isn't going anywhere. This really doesn't address the underlying cause of why so much is spent. It's a simplistic solution to a more complex issue. It's a good start on one aspect like trekster said - but federal funding isn't going to make up for it either.
Something more comprehensive is needed.
PS - ianimal, I noticed the web site does point out how your takes are going way up, but just happened to fail to remind you of just how much. Merry Christmas from the governor. ;-)
GC Something more comprehensive is needed, but I have zero confidence that it will ever come to fruition at once. So, I will take this "solution" as an intermediate course adjustment...
Being long retired from NJ Education, I can tell you that the so called poorer districts received much, MUCH more money than middle class school districts. The poorer districts used to be called Abbot Districts. They had computer labs and personal computers years before our local districts. Their computers were totally replaced every few years. Their science labs were always updated as well. Text books were rarely used more than 2-3 years. The money just poured into the districts with the thought that if they didn't use every cent, they would not get the same amount next year. Meanwhile, our local districts had to jump through hoops to get state monies, and local school taxes often had to pay for greater shares. Not sure how the final plan will work, but I do feel it is a terrific start.
USAfirst Shuffling the deck chairs here.
Money is still coming from taxation to pay for school funding, so this proposal just shifts the burden around.
Yet another feel-good proposal that won't solve a thing.
justintime We all know the reason. Children in poor areas not having an opportunity to get ahead. So the NJ Supreme court agrees to throw money at the problem -- typical lawyer response. The money was and is not properly spent. All for in the end if the status quo remains where poor areas stay poor the State cannot be blamed.
This really is a class thing. Rich areas will tax high and manage better since they have to obtain the money from their residents, so they want results which in turn increases property values...
I have seen it all happen as USAfirst posted and more. First Gov Kean, The ED Gov.gave a ton of money to Ed. and it went in Teachers pockets, Then Gov. Corzine got a ton of money for new school structures, and repairs. Never an accounting for any of it. All borrowed Money.
We need the base line to start. and more for proven results. Charter or public inclusive.
Those that don,t care will have to live with the baseline.
Old Gent If it lowers my property taxes I'm all for it!!!! Why keep paying top dollar for nothing!!! I'd rather see my tax dollars used for the benefit of the local kids then wasted in Newark or where ever...
Mr. Tone How about an accounting of monies and expenditures for the last 10 years as well as a full accounting of the lottery monies and where in education , it specifically goes ???
Imagine that .
Steven Only stockholders care about accountability. Politicians don't . They just grease the squeaky wheel.Can you even imagine what we would find if they were to audit the feds
Half would be in Jail.
There is no premium to teach in Newark. I made more in more affluent districts than I ever did in Newark.
Challah What should be more of concern is the NJ state senate just approved a $15/ hour minimum wage
http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/23/pf/new-jersey-minimum-wage/
This is going to be directly attributable to many jobs lost and an expenditure over and above cola - ergo once vetoed by Christie and finally approved - NJ has just voted themselves a 10 - 30 percent wage reduction in terms of consumer goods and services - awesome job folks congrats
https://youtu.be/FdvkamtOv4c
skippy Has anyone seen what the total budget cut is from this plan? Since there seem to be so many areas getting tax reductions, seems that there must be a total budget cut.
strangerdanger http://www.nj.gov/cgi-bin/education/stateaid/16/stateaid.pl?string=districtcode=1870&maxhits=500
This link tells you what Hackettstown is getting now - one would have to multiply the current number of enrolled students which is 961 per this
http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/new-jersey/districts/hackettstown-public-schools/hackettstown-high-school-12565
By 6599 = $6,341,639
So looks like Hackettstown will be getting a windfall of ~ 1.2 mm
First article describes K-12 district funding received. Your calculation only applies to the high school 9-12.
me3So we get more money and we pay less. Sounds like a deal we can't pass up. Almost too good to be true.
Except what happens to the system in total? What is the total budget affect and how does Christie plan to fix the failing schools he's cutting 70% of their budget from in order to throw us a bone.
Why do we care? Because your housing values will be affected by NJ's school rating which currently is a great reason for people to move here and buy your house.
Christie doesn't have a plan for that - however - why is it equitable that towns such as Asbury Park, and Long Branch receive 80 percent of their funding from the state? This will force school districts to regionalize and stop the local fiefdoms that have prevailed in NJ. And as you know, Christie has a special place in his heart for the NJEA - any teacher that is negatively effected by this is a bonus since he is trying to break the union.
Again....NJ schools are the best in the nation. Not sure what you want to break much less in an organizationally violent fashion.
Agree that the money we pour into these failing schools is ridiculous. But so is expecting them to teach students based on their own local taxes in poverty areas. They fail, we all fail. Meanwhile, Christie has had financial control of many of these schools controlling the budget expenditures ---- why did he fail?
"That's because Christie's "solution" isn't a solution. It's a carnival act designed to pump up outrage among suburban voters."
"But New Jerseyans don't need to be sold on the idea that the funding formula is broken – they need a real solution to both the problem of property taxes and the problem of the failure of urban schools."
"if this were anything other than a carnival act, Christie would have invested politically to ensure the plan's success."
http://www.northjersey.com/columnists/christie-s-smoke-and-mirrors-schools-fix-1.1621911
Again, my problem is that while this hands us some tax relief, it does not fix our tax problem ---- it's polishing a turd. Secondly, there is no plan except to get the majority of voters to agree to slash spending at a 70% level to a minority of schools.
And we still don't know the actual total budget effect. That 800-lb gorilla, we'll name him Chris, remains on the table. Why won't Christie reveal the actual budget effect instead of just offering some cash if you approve him doing so? Beyond buying our vote, what's the plan to turn these schools around after they get a 70% budget reduction?
something has to give - its not sustainable and I agree with you on the tax situation - my question is why have NJ schools not taken advantage of economies of scale and regionalized. Some of the best districts have and reaped the benefit.
Bridgewater-Raritan Regional School District
West Windsor-Plainsboro Regional School District
Pascack Valley Regional High School District
West Morris Regional High School District
https://k12.niche.com/rankings/public-school-districts/best-overall/s/new-jersey/
every town cannot afford to have its own administrative staff with 6 figure salaries, and the purchasing power of a regionalized district cant be ignored..
Hey, I wonder the same thing about these townships. Wouldn't we be better off skipping the townships in lieu of county-wide management.
For the schools, I would gather there are a number of ways we could improve our cost profile while increasing the professionalism of the administration and the teachers by regionalizing.
But hey, that would be a plan. Far easier to grab those green eyeshades, look at the bottom line, cut, and see what happens. That's how you make sound bite headlines that people can understand to become Vice President.
Some of the links above show how the Abbott districts are still below the graduation rate, yet take a large percentage of the funding. I'd be curious to see if the graduation rates of those districts have risen since they started seeing more funding. In other words, maybe they are still failing overall, but they are failing less than they were before? Just curious. There are so many factors that influence the performance of urban schools, and unfortunately the children in these distructs have so many hurdles to overcome in life.
Jersey Girl Re : West Morris Regional High School District
The Mendhams and Chesters ( boroughs and townships) are taking the approach of its not broken, break it as they push to create their own district. http://www.newjerseyhills.com/observer-tribune/news/mendham-officials-field-questions-on-school-deregionalization-plan/article_426cd8ad-7103-5a0f-917b-c8dbd0e5b75a.html
“Shuffling the deck chairs here.” More like shuffling the decks chairs on the Titanic. In the end, if people are paying less property taxes, the education budget will be cut; Christie says no but math says yes. That’s the iceberg on the table; the Titanic will be the schools that get the 70% cut. No way they can come back from that.
Obviously something is wrong with the money we are pissing away in some of these school districts. But is the answer amputation by meat cleaver?
A couple of points:
Christie says this will help our property taxes. Bulltwaddy. This is pure political spin tugging at your emotional pocketbook with a small discount. You will recognize a savings and will still have the highest property taxes in the US. Why? Because the NJ tax system relies on property taxes. No other state does that except NJ. Christie is not touching that problem. So even with education non-cut cut, he is not touching the 800lb tax gorilla on the table.
Retirees will still be fleeing the state for lower property taxes. It just makes dollars and sense to do so.
NJ schools, on average, rank in the upper 10% of all US schools, often in the top 5 states sometimes state number 1 or 2 depending on the study and year. Clearly we are the best in the nation. If we do nothing, that does not change. If we cut drastically from the budget, something will change and without a corresponding plan --- doubtful for the better.
Does anyone know the total cut across the state? Can't find it. But Christie is lowering your taxes, talking 70% budget cuts in the poorer districts ------ unless these schools are just shoveling the money into their own pockets, 70% will sink them instantly.
What we pay for schools is too much. Third highest state as Christie said. However, another 10 states pay within 10% of what NJ pays --- that's 20% of the states and the better schools in the US. So 20% of the better systems in the US pay rates similar to ours. The Christie meat cleaver approach whacks 70% off from some of schools and that’s a number the school won’t recover from. Heck, most of these schools are in receivership to the state. That means the state controls their budget and Christie personally has not fixed them even with all this money. He has no plan to fix our failing schools, he has been in charge of those failing schools for years, and the only solution he has is to slash the dollars and let the chips fall where they may. And that does not fix our property tax problem.
The overall school budget has been decreasing, albeit slowly, for years, but we still pay too much. From 2008 to 2013, spending dropped by 2.5% per pupil. So how much more do we need to be at the lower part of the top 20% state spenders and still have the number one school system in the US? Probably about 5 – 10% on a per pupil basis. So how much is he really cutting?
We pay too much for state and local taxes in total. We are the 3rd top paying state and only 8 states are in our neighborhood, plus or minus 10%. So sure, we should be shaving the school budget. But what else? And should we just cut the budget without a plan to make things better?
When you take state and local spending apart, we pay 36% to education, Christie’s favorite punching bag. But 7% of that is for college, 3% undefined, so about 26% to public schools. While it is the biggest budget hit, there are others where we spend way too much money and get not enough in return ---- transportation – 7% and it’s an ugly story of excessive spending, pensions and healthcare 23% and it’s gonna get a lot worse, and “other spending” at 15% where a treasure trove of mismanagement exists. All this time in office and where’s Christie’s plan for this? He can’t even match the prices other states pay for services.
So what really galls me about his plan to gut education in a number of locations while throwing you a small bone on property taxes is that it does not fix the NJ property tax problem. We will still suck pond water, from the muddy bottom of the pond, because he is not touching the tax structure. And he doesn’t touch all the other tax wastes that he has had years to correct. But what it does is gut the failing schools with no plan to recover and provide great press coverage as the bell weather of tax reform where he is not really reforming the tax.
Nice web site though; how much did we taxpayers pay for that and who taught him how to be so slick. Another piss off IMO that he could have used this expertise to set up a State Run Health Insurance Web Site and actually save NJ ACA Insurance users some big bucks. But noooooo to that, instead Mr. Bottom Line just threw you to the incompetent Fed because he couldn’t forecast the business. Every other state that did it passed big savings on to its citizens.
Now we’ll roll out this piece of political fodder where apparently Christie knows all the numbers and forecasts but just can’t fathom an improvement plan beyond slashing budgets even when he is in full receivership control of the failed organizations. Just in time to get Christie the advertising needed for the real goal of this latest slick project ---- the Vice Presidency or maybe Education Czar.
Commenting is no longer available.