School Funding Proposal Will Cost NJ Taxpayers
Posted December 10, 2007

Last week, Governor Corzine began to unveil his long-awaited plan to overhaul the state’s school funding formula.  In the days and weeks leading up to his presentation, he had intimated that the plan would impact property taxes and focus on funding education according to student need rather than community demographics.

This demographic allocation refers to the state’s 31 “Abbott,” or poorest, districts, so designated following a 1997 State Supreme Court decision.  Under the Court’s ruling, Abbott districts must be provided enough aid so they can spend as much on education as wealthy district are able to spend. 

Currently, approximately one-third of the state’s annual budget – or $11 billion – provides partial funding for New Jersey’s approximately 600 school districts.  The rest of the funding comes from local property taxes, which, as we all know, are the highest in the country.  Since property taxes are higher in wealthier areas than in poorer areas, much of the state’s education funding goes to Abbott districts in order to make up the difference. 

According to New Jersey Education Commissioner Lucille Davy, however, funding based on demographic need rather than student need is “not the most equitable way of doing this.”  She indicated that it results in non-Abbott lower-income students getting less assistance simply because of where they live.  In Governor Corzine’s words, the current system “leaves too many children out of luck because they live in the wrong zip code.”  Corzine stated, “I’d like to see the concept of Abbott gone…I want money to follow children.”  (Although, according to Gregg Edwards, President of the Center for Policy Research of New Jersey, Corzine later said that his “dollars follow the child” phrase was a mischaracterization of his plan, or, as Edwards writes, “[H]e didn’t mean what he said.”)

What does the brief glimpse of the governor’s plan tell us?  In the words of Star Ledger columnist Paul Mulshine, the proposal calls for “the single most costly expansion of public education in New Jersey history.”  In a nutshell, Corzine’s plan would add almost $500 million next year to the $8 billion that the state now gives to schools. In his usual “we don’t have the specifics yet” way, the governor did not provide any details of exactly how the money would be distributed among districts or how his plan would affect property taxes. (According to state officials, these numbers will be announced within the next few days…we’re not holding our breaths.)  The Philadelphia Inquirer reports, however, that Corzine’s staff have indicated that the new funding formula would provide more money to working-class areas that are not considered Abbott. This means, of course, that many of the districts where property taxes are the highest are least likely to see additional education funding and, therefore, least likely to see any property tax relief. 

And the spending doesn’t stop with the $500 million.  The State Education Department also wants to provide preschool education programs for lower-income children.  Mulshine writes that this proposal would “expand state-funded preschool to about 100 more school districts” at a cost of “at least $320 million a year.”  He notes that this is in addition to the 31 Abbott districts which already receive state funding for pre-school. 

With such a radical increase in state spending proposed, who will be left to foot the bill?   If you said New Jersey’s taxpayers, you guessed correctly. 

Yet, while the administration seems dead set on spending money that the state can’t afford, it is far less eager to agree to school choice opportunities that would provide real educational improvements for the children who need them most.  Quality schools are continuing to shut down – with the Roman Catholic Dioceses of Camden recently announcing the closure of 6 schools – because of lack of enrollment.  If parents in the Abbott district – and in all districts for that matter – could utilize the money already being spent on education to send their children to a public or private school of their choice, then children would be able to get a quality education without the state continuing to drastically increase education spending on the backs of hardworking taxpayers. 

It’s time our governor faces reality: our state already stands over $30 billion in debt.  We simply cannot afford to go on spending sprees and expect that taxpayers will gladly cover the costs.  The governor’s proposed funding plan, far from offering true reform that will serve education needs and provide real property tax relief, does little more than implement a greatly-expanded state-run pre-school program and throw more money into the rest of the education system, albeit in a slightly different way.

Paul Mulshine put it best.  Corzine is not “reinventing the wheel….[I]t’s more appropriate to say he’s reinventing a flat tire.” 

   

 

Archive