| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GARDEN STATE COALITION OF SCHOOLS/GSCS
1-4-08 GSCS FYI
One: GSCS FYI Statement on S4000-Buono and A500-Roberts
‘The new school funding formula proposal bills’
and
Two: New information of the GSCS website today…
One: GSCS is negative on the school funding bill as currently proposed
GSCS FYI 1-4-08 Negative position on the new school funding formula bills S4000-Senator Barbara Buono and A500-Assembly Speaker Joe Roberts, here’s why...While we would prefer not to throw out the baby with the bathwater (a number of districts do receive healthy boosts in needed aid, e.g, and there a some good concepts within the bill such as a ‘unified’ formula approach, as well), MAJOR CONCERNS on the fast-track lame duck school funding proposal continue to remain…More questions than answers set an uncertain, negative table. Without amendments and without clarity as to how the formula will play out in the future, it is ‘too risky to cast a yes vote’ to make the bill become law. The backed-into-a-corner process is somewhat reminiscent of how QEA was sprung on the public in the early 90’s. Risky business. Let’s hurry up and wait just a bit to do it better.
There’s still time, at least through Monday afternoon. GSCS suggests you call your local legislator, the bill sponsors now… Relay the following concerns. Ask them the questions below. (Legislators phones ring over the weekend/leave messages if need be; Find your legislators’ phone numbers at http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/members/legsearch.asp . Answers to these questions provide information legislators need to know and consider before casting a yes vote on A500-Roberts in the Assembly and S4000-Buono in the Senate this coming Monday, January 3, 2008.
SOME MAJOR GSCS CONCERNS ARE:
Local fair share applications in the bill & implications for the future are not clear; this variable should also require out-year projections to see how they will play out when/if the hold harmless provision is removed/reduced.
Lack of statewide consensus on the bills.
State-defined enrollment projections determine local adequacy budget. The rationale behind the projections, as well as the projections themselves, require more review and justification. (e.g., a district currently growing at rapid rates over past 5 years is projected to lose enrollment next year by the state, which makes that district one that is forecast to be spending over adequacy and it will get minimum amount of aid and be subject to giveback provision.)
Special education aid overhaul is opposed by virtually all types of organizations that are involved in public education...nonetheless, the bill persists in wealth-equalizing this aid as well as basing it on averages, rather than the individual student's needs - this conflicts with the administration's stated philosophy of plan, in which the 'money follows the student'. this sea-change should not be imposed in a one-year, untested dramatic switch-over.
In the absence of provisions that clearly indicate the state’s support budgets’ abilities to grow, two outcomes can be deduced: 1) the bill is more about cost-containment than school funding, and 2) the bill seeks a driving down of schools spending to the new adequacy budget level. A relevant statistic: right now 380 districts are already spending over the state’s adequacy budget figures, just about 2/3 of all the regular operating districts in this state.
Questions to ask your legislator: does your legislator know? …
What specific districts the state considers to be over and which ones are under their state-determined adequacy budget?
What is your district adequacy budget 'overage & underage' amounts for FY0809? What do those figures imply for your district?
What state foundation/adequacy aid per cent is your district entitled to receive under the proposal, compared to under CEIFA?
What does it appear your district's over and under figures might be as the formula takes over from the hold harmless provisions in the out years?
How does your local tax effort impact your district’s state aid? (Many districts have had to raise taxes in lieu of the state flat funding of formula aid since fy02 which has raised their local tax effort to a stress level; middle income districts can be hit hard by this in the out years.)
Given that 2/3 of the state’s regular operating districts are already spending above the adequacy budget level as proposed in the bill, will my district’s education be leveled down?
Have you ever been asked to vote on such a comprehensive piece of legislation is such a short period of time?
Do the majority of school communities in your district support this legislation?
Two:
On the GSCS homepage today @ www.gscschools.org
GSCS is negative on the school funding bill as currently proposed
GSCS FYI 1-4-08 on the new school funding formula bills S4000-Senator Barbara Buono and A500-Assembly Speaker Joe Roberts...IMPORTANT: Click on More here to read GSCS' rationale and what you can do to help support your schools public education programs...
More...
1-4-08 SCHOOL FUNDING PLAN - NEW DISTRICT DATA AVAILABLE ON DOE WEBSITE
Go to the website link - by clicking on More below - to obtain 1) the “underlying” calculations for your Local Fair Share and Adequacy Budget. Local Fair Share is a very important number, because if this number is in excess of your adequacy budget, you must reduce the local tax levy by any amount in excess of the CPI, and 2)district by district detailed calculations under the proposed formula are now available on the NJDOE website below.
More...
1-4-08 UPDATED from 1-2-08: Link to State Aid data that includes Local Fair Share
Look to the far columns on the right side of the pages to find your districts 'local fair share' as calculated by the state. Local Fair Share is important as it will be a variable in the formula that will have consequences for local districts. For example, if your district is spending over it's 'adequacy budget' and yet still is deemed to be able to tax more at the local level, your district is likely to lose aid. The converse is also likely to be true. NOTE: The local fair share calculation publsihed by the DOE does not include a percentage breakdown by district of how much state adequacy (foundation) aid your district is entitled to as a result of their revised & updaed calculation per the new proposal. In addition, it does not show the percent entitlement districts were receiving under CEIFA, so there is no good way to determine how the revisions really affect your district at this time. If your district is now slated to receive foundation aid for the first time in recent history, is it slated to get a 1% or 10% or 20% entitlement? If your district was entitled to receive foundation aid in the past, is it now entitled to receive more or less of a percentage of the entitlement under the proposed formula? Important questions that need to be answered before legislators take a vote on the proposal.
Click on More here to get the link where you can find the DOE's Local Fair Share information(from DOE homepage under New Formula for Schools........)
More...
1-3-08 School Funding bill passed in Assembly Budget Committee late Thursday
This sets the stage for the fast-track lame duck bill floor vote in both houses this Monday, January 3, the last session day of the 'old' legislature. Click on More here to read related articles.
More...
1-3-08 Senate committee approves Corzine's school-funding plan
Senate committee approves Corzine's school-funding plan by Dunstan McNichol/The Star-Ledger STAR LEDGER - Thursday January 03, 2008, 1:33 PM The Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee today approved Gov. Jon Corzine's plan to change the way the state distributes $7.8 billion in aid to schools...
More...