Public must be involved on school funding issues

David C. Abbott

Guest Column

The New Jersey Legislature has taken on the Herculean task of revamping school funding, which is presently supported primarily through property taxes in Marlboro and most other suburban districts. The education community supports and applauds this long overdue effort. We hope that the recommendations will result in a significantly reduced property tax burden for every resident while at the same time, maintain and support the state's high quality of education.

Unfortunately, several proposals under serious consideration indicate that property taxes may not be decreased at all. Instead, property taxes may be increased, creating an even greater burden on our citizens. Two examples being given serious thought in some circles at the state level follow.

It has been determined that the state can save $500 million through the reduction of special education aid to all districts except Abbott districts. If that occurs, school districts would be left with two very difficult choices - ask taxpayers to "replace" those lost dollars through increased property taxes, or significantly reduce services to regular education students.

Since school districts are bound by federal and state laws to provide special education services deemed necessary as indicated on students' Individual Education Programs (IEP), the lost dollars must be taken from somewhere else in the budget. Special education services cannot be reduced. Those dollars must remain untouched. Therefore, the money to continue funding special education would have to come from a transfer of dollars from regular education programs.

Should special education funds be distributed in a manner consistent with the present distribution of Core Curriculum Content Standards (CCCS) aid via the District Factor Group index as proposed, Marlboro would lose a total of $2.3 million in special education aid. That translates into approximately an additional $230 annually in property taxes for a home assessed at $300,000.

If the district does not ask for these funds to be replaced through increased property taxes, we're looking at a loss of approximately 40 regular education teachers, which will result in increasing class sizes way beyond what research time and time again has proven to be instructionally unsound practice.

What else would this $2.3 million cut do? It would pit parent against parent; special education vs. regular education. And, it would create deep divides and resentments within a community that historically has overwhelmingly supported Marlboro schools and all of its children.

Be aware that this $500 million will be redistributed to other school districts and called "property tax relief." For them, but not for us.

And there's even more bad news. Extensive data in an October 2006 release from the New Jersey Department of Education (DOE) compares districts' actual spending in 2004-05 with an education "adequacy" budget developed by DOE staff, with help from John Augenblick, a Denver-based consultant.

According to this document, suburban districts classified by DOE as affluent and educationally successful - called District Factor Groups "I" and "J" - spent $166 million, or 5.3 percent in excess of the DOE adequacy budget. However, Marlboro, an "I" district, actually spent 11.43 percent under the DOE adequacy budget.

Because the state would probably not individualize its reductions but would take them across the board, Marlboro would be penalized. Should there not be consideration for those districts such as Marlboro that are doing an outstanding job in managing public funds and fostering high academic achievement?

It appears that the state would rather lump all of us together and administer even further cuts in state aid to redistribute in other places. Why doesn't the state use Marlboro, and other districts that have proven track records of fiscal responsibility and efficiency, as models for those districts that spend beyond a reasonable norm?

Right now, Marlboro residents pay 84 percent of the total cost of education through property taxes. If the state reduces its aid to our schools, that percentage will increase - and property taxes will rise. The only decrease that we foresee with these cuts is in the decline of educational excellence for all Marlboro children.

Contact your legislators now, before such recommendations are presented by the Legislature, with Gov. Corzine's nod of approval, to the public on Nov. 15, and Marlboro schools, as well as other schools across the state, are irreparably harmed.

Contact Sen. Ellen Karcher, 400 West Main St., 3rd Floor, Freehold 07728, (732) 462-8883, or senkarcher@njleg.org.

Contact Assemblyman Michael J. Panter Jr., Galleria, 2 Bridge Ave., Bldg. 2, 2nd Floor, Red Bank 07701, (732) 741-5599, or asmpanter@njleg.org.

Contact Assemblywoman Jennifer Beck, 256 Route 79, 1st Floor, Morganville 07751, (732) 772-1571, or asmbeck@njleg.org.

Dr. David C. Abbott is the superintendent of schools of the Marlboro K-8 school district.