| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SCHOOL FUNDING - Politickernj.com ‘Christie expects Abbott decision by March’ ….. Statehouse Bureau (Record, Star Ledger, Herald News) ‘Gov. Christie reveals push for changes in N.J. school funding, return of property tax program’
SCHOOL CHOICE: CHARTER SCHOOLS, VOUCHERS - Njspotlight.com ‘Local Boards vs. Charter Schools’…..The Record ‘Some want greater local say in N.J. charter school approval process’…..Star Ledger ‘N.J. advocates, parents and school officials offer ways to improve charter school law’ ….. VOUCHER DEBATE - The Record ‘Doblin: Trenton preaches the gospel of education’
TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS - INFORMATION PRIMER - The Record ‘Teacher appraisal faces own test’…..SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION - Star Ledger ‘Poorest N.J. districts see schools crumble as emergency repairs are delayed’
SCHOOL FUNDING - Politickernj.com ‘Christie expects Abbott decision by March’ ….. Statehouse Bureau (Record, Star Ledger, Herald News) ‘Gov. Christie reveals push for changes in N.J. school funding, return of property tax program’
SCHOOL CHOICE: CHARTER SCHOOLS, VOUCHERS - Njspotlight.com ‘Local Boards vs. Charter Schools’…..The Record ‘Some want greater local say in N.J. charter school approval process’…..Star Ledger ‘N.J. advocates, parents and school officials offer ways to improve charter school law’ ….. VOUCHER DEBATE - The Record ‘Doblin: Trenton preaches the gospel of education’
TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS - INFORMATION PRIMER - The Record ‘Teacher appraisal faces own test’…..SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION - Star Ledger ‘Poorest N.J. districts see schools crumble as emergency repairs are delayed’
Politickernj.com ‘Christie expects Abbott decision by March’
By Timothy J. Carroll | January 24th, 2011 - 5:38pm
CHESILHURST – In Camden County Monday afternoon, Gov. Chris Christie connected the dots between underfunded rural and suburban school districts – as in close-by Swedesboro – and the fight for his state Supreme Court nominee, Anne Patterson.
When a woman in the town hall meeting asked why Swedesboro – which spends less than half the state-average per pupil – isn’t being given any help from the state even though their enrollment is bursting, the governor told her the court did it.
In its well-documented Abbott v. Burke case, the state Supreme Court mandated school funding for failing, mostly urban districts, and the court is now hearing another round on the monumental school funding decision.
This time around, the Abbott advocates are accusing Christie of underfunding schools by $1 billion, an amount he maintains was not provided by the federal government this year as it was last year. And so it is gone.
Christie said he expects a decision on the case by March.
In the original decision, Christie said, the court “rigged” the funding formula, allowing 31 districts to eat up nearly 60 percent of state education funding.
It is one of the main reasons he has pressed so hard to overhaul the court since he took office, but the Patterson nomination has put the new-look court on hold.
Then Christie called out state Sen. President Steve Sweeney (D-West Deptford), who is holding up Patterson’s hearing, and told the men and women in the town hall to call him directly and ask for reforms that will help their schools.
Christie also confirmed that his school funding formula will be changing this year, although he didn’t elaborate and, as with most all of his town halls, he did not take questions from the press.
Statehouse Bureau (Record, Star Ledger, Herald News) ‘Gov. Christie reveals push for changes in N.J. school funding, return of property tax program’
Published: Tuesday, January 25, 2011, 6:00 AM
By By Ginger Gibson and Chris Megerian/Statehouse Bureau Staff
CHESILHURST — Gov. Chris Christie began pulling back the curtain on next month’s budget proposal Monday, saying he will push for changes in the state’s school funding formula.
Christie also revealed he is seeking to boost property tax relief, which he drastically cut last year to close a nearly $11 billion budget gap.
The school funding formula, which controls how state money for public schools is distributed, is at the center of a legal battle between Christie and public school advocates who say it’s needed to help the poorest districts and neediest students. On Monday, Christie said it only throws money at a broken education system.
"We’re working on the state’s school funding formula," Christie told a town hall audience in Chesilhurst. "We’re going to come out with something that is going to be a little different in our budget this year."
The governor is scheduled to unveil his budget proposal on Feb. 22. State aid to local schools is the state’s costliest expenditure, accounting for $10.3 billion of this year’s $29.4 billion budget. Christie’s office would not elaborate on possible changes to the school formula.
"The state’s funding formula has been rigged so nearly 60 percent of all the state aid goes to 31 school districts," Christie said. "It’s crazy."
But the New Jersey Education Association, the state’s largest teacher’s union, said Christie has only made the problem worse by not providing the aid called for under the formula. Facing a budget crunch, Christie cut about $1 billion in school funding.
"To call it a failed experiment is hardly appropriate," said NJEA spokesman Steve Wollmer. "If it’s a failed experiment, he need look no further than the nearest mirror to find who violated it."
By changing the funding formula and simultaneously proposing an $825 million voucher program, Wollmer said Christie is funding private schools by cutting the public ones.
Christie Monday also said he wants to beef up property tax rebates, a year after slicing them by $848 million and replacing rebate checks with property tax credits.
The first credit under the budget passed last June takes effect in the spring, and Christie said he wants to boost this relief in the upcoming budget year.
"We’re looking for a way to increase the amount we give each quarter," Christie said. "When this year’s budget coming up we’re going to see if we can expand the program further to try to give people some relief."
While lawmakers may welcome extra dollars for property tax relief, changing the school funding formula could be difficult.
Democrats Monday expressed concern the new formula would cut funding for urban districts. "Money doesn’t always equate to educational opportunity. But it doesn’t hurt," said Assemblyman John McKeon (D-Essex).
The original Supreme Court decision Abbott vs. Burke in 1985 forced the state to funnel more money to 31 poor districts to ensure children had access to a "thorough and efficient system of free public schools" as required by the state constitution.
Lawmakers have struggled to set formulas that could withstand a legal challenge. The court did sign off on former Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine’s formula in 2009, signaling a big shift that allowed the state to distribute aid based on enrollment, with extra going to communities with more needy children. In the current fight, school advocates are arguing that Christie’s funding cuts are unconstitutional. The court appointed an independent reviewer to hold hearings on the issue before justices make a decision.
Earl Kim, school superintendent in Montgomery Township, said the Corzine administration went through a rigorous process to ensure its funding formula would pass muster. “To put together a formula in such short order would be imprudent,” he said.
SCHOOL CHOICE: CHARTER SCHOOLS, VOUCHERS - Njspotlight.com ‘Local Boards vs. Charter Schools’…..The Record ‘Some want greater local say in N.J. charter school approval process’…..Star Ledger ‘N.J. advocates, parents and school officials offer ways to improve charter school law’ ….. VOUCHER DEBATE - The Record ‘Doblin: Trenton preaches the gospel of education’
Njspotlight.com ‘Local Boards vs. Charter Schools’ Communities -- especially suburban communities -- are looking to have some say over charter schools in their districts
How much say should local school districts and communities have over charter schools within their borders?
Related Links
With tensions reaching a boil over charter schools in New Jersey -- especially ones in the suburbs -- several proposals are being floated from both sides of the political aisle that would provide communities with some additional say over the semi-autonomous schools.
In a nearly four-hour hearing on charter schools before the Assembly education committee, leading Democrats yesterday said they would support putting new charter schools to a vote by local referendum, much like the local school budget or a school construction project.
“I do believe a local referendum should be required,” said state Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan (D-Middlesex), chairman of the committee.
While not going that far, draft legislation last week from Gov. Chris Christie included a provision allowing local school boards to at least approve and oversee -- or authorize -- of charter schools.
At the same time, Christie approved 23 new charters, the biggest class in the state’s history -- albeit only a few of them in suburban communities.
The idea of local authorizers interested several local board members testifying before the Assembly yesterday, including one from a community that was openly weighing the idea of converting its own schools to charters.
Glen Ridge officials last year said they were open to all options in the face of severe cuts in state aid and a community already overly burdened by local property taxes.
But while outright conversion now seems off the table, board president Elisabeth Ginsburg said yesterday that the idea of being an authorizer might be a good middle ground that at least allows the district and charters to work together.
"It may be the best route for sharing best practices," she said.
Fifteen years after the state’s charter school law was enacted, the tensions between local schools and charters are nothing new in New Jersey, with 73 charter schools in place across the state and few, if any, districts putting out the welcome mat for them.
But the soured economy and the dire budget picture in state and local governments have brought tensions to a new level, especially in suburban communities where local educators and advocates maintain that district schools do just fine without the need for the alternatives that the charter schools represent.
Princeton has been the focal point in the latest debate, with district officials saying they must write a check for nearly $5 million for students enrolled in two charter schools serving that community. Rebecca Cox, the Princeton school board president, said charter schools have thrived by offering specialized programs that she contends serve specialized groups.
“It’s one thing to create a charter school when the local schools are failing, but another when it’s because Hebrew, Mandarin or the extensive recycling of plastics is not in the curriculum,” Cox said.
The Record ‘Some want greater local say in N.J. charter school approval process’
Monday, January 24, 2011
Last updated: Monday January 24, 2011, 8:10 PM BY LESLIE BRODY
Some education advocates argued Monday that voters deserve a say in whether charter schools open in their communities.
At an Assembly education committee hearing called to air ideas for improving New Jersey’s charter school rules, several speakers criticized the current law for giving the state education commissioner unilateral power to approve charters.
Two of the speakers calling for local input on charter approvals came from high achieving districts where charters have opened despite opposition from parents who argued they drained traditional schools of resources.
Evelyn Ogden, deputy superintendent of schools in East Brunswick, said the opening last fall of a Hebrew immersion charter – structured much like one recently approved for Englewood – was the “ultimate unfunded mandate.” She said districts that were not failing their students should be “legislatively protected from being mandated by the commissioner to host and fund charters.”
The hearing came a week after Governor Christie approved a record 23 charters, praising them as laboratories for reform and, especially for children in chronically troubled districts, a desperately needed option for advancement. Christie also proposed a raft of charter law changes to speed their expansion and free them from red tape. Christie supports letting local school boards and public colleges seek state contracts that would give them the authority to approve charters.
Supporters praise charters for their caring, safe and energetic environments.
Rebecca Cox, the school board president in Princeton, argued the regulations should require charter applicants to prove there was a true educational need for their new school, rather than just a desire for it among a select group of parents. She cautioned against the spread of “boutique” charters for studying Hebrew, Mandarin and “the extensive recycling of plastics.”
Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan, D-South Plainfield, the committee’s chairman, expressed support for giving local voters a say in charter openings.
“There is a difference between need and want,” he said. He acknowledged that the Hebrew charter in East Brunswick, which falls in his district, “has absolutely divided the community.”
Carlos Perez, chief executive of the New Jersey Charter Schools Association, argued against such referendums. “You can’t put a 700-page application on a ballot,” he said, because it would be hard for voters to give an applicant the thorough screening required.
New Jersey now has 73 charters, which are publicly financed but independently operated.
E-mail: brody@northjersey.com
Star Ledger ‘N.J. advocates, parents and school officials offer ways to improve charter school law’ Published: Monday, January 24, 2011, 8:15 PM Updated: Monday, January 24, 2011, 9:44 PM
TRENTON — A week after Gov. Chris Christie rolled out plans to dramatically increase the number of charter schools in New Jersey, the Assembly Education Committee today heard calls for changing the state’s charter school law — including the possibility of a public vote in districts where a charter school is proposed.
A parade of charter school and "traditional" public school officials, school advocates and parents testified before the committee today, offering ways to improve the state’s 15-year-old charter school law.
Committee Chairman Patrick Diegnan (D-Middlesex), who said about 40 bills relating to charter schools have been proposed, said he plans by early March to introduce legislation that would require a public vote on charter schools; allow for more authorizers — such as Rutgers and another public university, in addition to the Department of Education; and require more transparency and accountability.
"I don’t think anyone disagrees charter schools are a part of the solution," he said. "However, they are not a magic bullet."
While many speakers acknowledged the power of charter schools to transform the education of some students in failing urban districts, much discussion centered on the impact the schools have in suburban communities such as East Brunswick and Princeton.
Although public, charters operate independently of their local districts, and receive public funding equal to up to 90 percent of the per-pupil spending in their home district. Gov. Christie last week announced approval of 23 new charter schools. There are about 73 now. Christie said he plans to push for laws to make it easier to open more.
Rebecca Cox, president of the Princeton Regional School District Board of Education, said her district expects next year to have to send $4.8 million to educate children in two charter schools: the Princeton Charter School, which is open now, and a charter school previously approved to open, that would offer Mandarin Chinese. That is far more than it would cost to educate those children in the Princeton Regional district, she said.
Cox urged the committee to amend the charter law by requiring charter school organizers to prove an educational need for their school, and by giving voters a say.
PREVIOUS COVERAGE:
• Bob Braun: Calculating the difference in charter schools
• Newly approved Newark charter marks N.J.'s first school for students with autism
• Following 23 approvals, N.J. could be home to 97 charter schools by fall
• N.J. approves 23 new charter schools
• Gov. Christie wants every N.J. county to develop a school for children with autism
• Informative seminars held throughout N.J. on autistic children transitioning into adulthood
"I expect our charter school costs to keep climbing unless you revise the law to address educational shortcomings across the state," Cox said, calling some charters "expensive boutique charter schools."
"There is a big difference between establishing a charter because students are failing and establishing one because Hebrew, Mandarin or extensive recycling isn’t part of every grade’s curriculum," she said.
One Princeton Charter School mom, Cynthia Ritter Parker, vouched for the value of the her children’s school, however, saying its small size and strong curriculum benefit children.
The committee also heard debate about the demographics of charter schools, which researchers say educate fewer special education students, English as a second language students, and very poor students, than regular district schools.
Though charter schools cannot discriminate against special needs kids, many families of special education or non-English speaking students do not apply. Typically, the schools have lotteries for open seats.
"The disparity in student enrollments between charter and district-run school .... has significant consequences for district-run schools," said Sharon Krengel, policy and outreach coordinator for the Education Law Center, which recommended such changes as requiring charters to seek a cross-section of their community.
Assemblyman Joseph Malone, (R-Burlington), said he is concerned about the selection process, too. He suggested that instead of parents having to reach out to apply for their children to go to the special schools, that all eligible children in a district be placed in the charter school lottery, and that parents be given the chance to opt out.
THE VOUCHER DEBATE
The Record ‘Doblin: Trenton preaches the gospel of education’
Monday, January 24, 2011
Last updated: Sunday January 23, 2011, 9:33 PM
By ALFRED P. DOBLIN
RECORD EDITORIAL COLUMNIST
IF YOU don’t like what people are saying, change the conversation; any smart politician will tell you as much. Key to doing that is choosing words that spin well. “Choice” is the literary Maytag of spin.
The abortion debate is often won and lost on the word “choice.” Supporters of legalized abortion support a woman’s right to choose. Opponents of abortion are either anti-choice or pro-life. If you have to hyphenate it, you’re in trouble.
So it’s both surprising and unnerving to listen to conservatives and Republicans in New Jersey embrace “choice” along with some Democrats. Choice in this case is not over abortion but over publicly funding faith-based schools.
The bill, the Opportunity Scholarship Act, sponsored by state Sens. Thomas Kean Jr., R-Westfield, and Raymond Lesniak, D-Union, passed a state Senate committee Thursday. It is a five-year pilot program offering parents in 13 school districts the option of using vouchers — $8,000 for elementary and middle schools and $11,000 for high schools – for private schools and faith-based schools.
In a press release, Lesniak said Thursday: “Recently, the Diocese of Trenton announced that its 44 Catholic schools will open their doors for the 2011-12 school year, but their fate beyond that is uncertain. I would add, without the Opportunity Scholarship Act, their fate is just about certain.”
He goes on to say, “I fear for the future of St. Pat’s and Benedictine Academy in Elizabeth as well.”
State legislators are not supposed to find public funding for Catholic schools. This is crossing the line of separation between church and state. And it makes it very clear that the bill is not about school choice at all.
Oddly enough, Lesniak, who has been a loud advocate for same-sex marriage and non-discrimination based on sexual orientation, is looking to hand over tax dollars to institutions that can legally discriminate if a policy is contrary to its beliefs.
How frank a discussion will there be about safe sex in urban Catholic high schools? What are the odds that a gay/lesbian alliance would be permitted as a club in a Catholic school? Why should public funds be used to teach children that Jesus was the Messiah, or if a parent wanted their child in a yeshiva, that the Messiah has not arrived? When did the Messiah become part of a “thorough and efficient education”?
Meanwhile the New Jersey Education Association continues to do itself no favors by not seeing past its nose. No one believes the NJEA’s sole complaint with the bill is that vouchers will undermine public education. Private schools do not have to hire unionized teachers. Vouchers also undermine the NJEA. The NJEA needs to play on a higher plane.
Vouchers do not just undermine public schools; vouchers elevate faith-based schools with public dollars. Forget about teacher contracts. Talk about the Constitution.
Supporters of this “choice” initiative are playing an elaborate shell game. Businesses will contribute to a scholarship fund. The scholarship fund will distribute the vouchers. Parents decide where the vouchers go. But the money moves in strange ways. Think of the Jersey practice of “wheeling,” moving campaign dollars in ways no one imagined possible.
Businesses write a check to a scholarship fund while they receive a dollar-for-dollar state tax credit for contributing to that same fund. That means anywhere from an estimated $800 million to $1 billion of tax revenue will be diverted toward private, not public, education. Is the Legislature proposing to slash public education funding by $1 billion because of this newfound revenue stream?
To make up for that loss, other programs will have to be cut unless Governor Christie has been less than truthful on national television when he repeatedly says the state is broke. If the state does not even have a few million dollars to fund women’s health programs, how can it afford to lose nearly $1 billion in business tax revenue?
Failing public schools need to be fixed, not abandoned. The Paterson school district, one of the 13 included in the pilot program, has been under state control for nearly two decades with little progress to show for it. Now the state’s answer is to just move some children into charter schools and others into private schools. Usually admitting you are incapable of fixing the problem results in termination of services, but in Trenton, it just results in more legislation.
Vouchers will siphon tax dollars into private schools. They will do nothing to fix failing public schools. More egregious, they will pour public money into faith-based institutions, something at odds with the founding documents of this country.
Instead of trying to save the Catholic schools of Trenton and Elizabeth, legislators should be saving the precepts of the U.S. Constitution. I guess in the end, it is a matter of choice.
Alfred P. Doblin is the editorial page editor of The Record. Contact him at doblin@northjersey.com. Follow AlfredPDoblin on Twitter.
TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS - INFORMATION PRIMER - The Record ‘Teacher appraisal faces own test’…..SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION - Star Ledger ‘Poorest N.J. districts see schools crumble as emergency repairs are delayed’
The Record ‘Teacher appraisal faces own test’
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
BY LESLIE BRODY
The Record
STAFF WRITER
President Obama is expected to promote his vision for education reform and accountability as part of his State of the Union address tonight.
Over the past year, he has drummed up broad bipartisan support for his push to reward the best teachers and principals and to make it easier to remove those who don't perform. Governor Christie joins Obama in the desire to link faculty evaluations to student growth.
Christie's "teacher effectiveness" task force is to report back to him by March 1 with recommendations for more rigorous evaluations, based in part on student test scores.
The governor aims to upend the long-held system of seniority and tenure by having districts use such evaluations to guide decisions on teacher pay, promotion and dismissal.
For all the pressure to use test scores for accountability, however, there is an ongoing debate over how to do it fairly. Here is a primer on one of the main methods, known as value-added modeling.
More than 130 educators, union officials and advocates, as well as a member of the governor's task force, attended a Princeton symposium on the subject last week.
What are "value-added" models?
These are various methods of using standardized test data to estimate a teacher's unique contribution to student growth during a school year. The statistical models try to predict how well a set of students would score if they had an average teacher. If those students exceed expectations, their teacher is considered highly effective. If they fall short, the teacher is deemed less effective. Each teacher gets a rating for how much "value" she adds to student progress.
Setting expectations is tricky, however. The models try to take into account students' poverty level and past test scores, but other factors are sometimes included, such as race or English language fluency.
Why do critics protest these models?
Teachers unions and other opponents say this brand of analysis is too flawed technically to be a major part of evaluations. They say it is too difficult to isolate one teacher's contribution because of the vagaries of real school life. An inspiring new principal, an outside math tutor, a change in textbooks, a disruptive classmate or family crises can affect achievement.
Sometimes tests are not aligned well with courses so they do not measure academic growth well anyway — and these tests were never designed to measure teachers, they say. Several studies have found that value-added scores for individual teachers can swing wildly from year to year.
What do boosters say?
Many educators, including acting state Education Commissioner Christopher Cerf, say these student achievement measures should be part of more objective, data-driven evaluations. Supporters readily acknowledge value-added analysis is an imperfect, evolving science, but they say such methods are more illuminating than the widely used, cursory checklists that now give good grades to almost all teachers.
Jonah Rockoff, a Columbia Business School professor who studies value-added models, compared them to baseball statistics. A player's batting average can be affected by such outside forces as the weather, stadium and pitcher, but it's still worth taking into account when assessing his talent.
"An evaluation tool is not just about who gets bonuses and who gets fired," Rockoff noted. "It's also about motivation. If a teacher says, 'I will advance in this career and get a more prestigious position if I perform well, and I know performance is being measured in a fair, valid way,' that will improve the teacher workforce."
How should value-added scores be used?
Some say student achievement data should count for half of a teacher's evaluation. Many educators counter that value-added scores are most useful if simply given to principals and teachers to illuminate their strengths and weaknesses.
This information is "most useful in local context," said Henry Braun, an education professor at Boston College. Administrators and teachers "can interpret those results in ways that are consistent with good professional practice and make professional judgments about the appropriateness of a teacher for a grade, or the need for professional development."
The Brookings Brown Center Task Group on Teacher Quality argued in a 2010 report that value-added analysis can give educators "vast new insight" into their "performance placed in context of other teachers with students just like their own, drawn from a much larger population than a single school. … It is not a perfect system of measurement, but it can complement observational measures, parent feedback and personal reflections on teaching far better than any available alternative."
Should ratings be public?
Controversy has raged over this question. The teachers union in New York City has sued to prevent the public release of value-added scores for city teachers. The case is pending. Some say parents have a right to information about the quality of their children's teachers, but others counter that it is unfair to release rankings that are unreliable and require broad context to interpret.
The Los Angeles Times caused a firestorm in August by publishing its own value-added analysis of thousands of city teachers. Many readers applauded the paper, saying exposure would lead to reforms, while others blasted it as reckless and disrespectful to hard-working teachers. One fifth-grade teacher took his life shortly after the paper listed him as less effective than his colleagues, though it was unclear whether the suicide was triggered in part by the publicity.
Where else are they used?
Tennessee is a national leader. Cities such as New York City, Houston, Dallas and Denver use versions. Michelle Rhee, former schools chancellor in Washington, D.C., started a program called IMPACT there that combined value-added methods with observations. Rhee used these more stringent evaluations to fire hundreds of teachers and principals.
When will the New Jersey education department's computer system be able to link teachers to student data?
Some department officials have said that will take at least another year.
What are some other thorny questions?
Are New Jersey's tests reliable enough to use this way? If not, does it make sense to spend money on developing better tests rather than on instruction? What would it cost to develop standardized assessments for subjects, such as history? Will grading teachers by test scores lead some to encourage cheating?
E-mail: brody@northjersey.com
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION - Star Ledger ‘Poorest N.J. districts see schools crumble as emergency repairs are delayed’
Published: Tuesday, January 25, 2011, 9:30 AM Updated: Tuesday, January 25, 2011, 9:42 AM
By Jessica Calefati/The Star-Ledger
NEWARK — The water-damaged walls and ceilings at the American History High School in Newark are so weak that they blister and flake, causing chunks of white plaster to rain on students’ heads.
It’s happened during lunch, exams, assemblies and even when people walk in the building, forcing Principal Robert Gregory to cordon off the auditorium and main entrance.
Every rain or snowstorm exacerbates structural woes at the 118-year-old building as dilapidated pipes freeze, then crack and leak puddles onto classroom floors. A squall earlier this year left students in the cafeteria suddenly sitting beneath a torrent of toilet water streaming from a cracked pipe.
"It was always my fear that a student would come through the collapsing floor," Gregory said.
But he, like many administrators in the state’s poorest districts, is at the mercy of a cash-strapped state agency whose work they say has slowed to a trickle.
"Our many structural problems required immediate assistance from the Schools Development Authority, but unfortunately the work has not been done," Gregory said.
The development authority is the state agency responsible for construction and repairs in 31 of New Jersey’s largest and poorest school districts, including Newark.
PREVIOUS COVERAGE:
• N.J. school construction using union workers is slower, costlier, report shows
• N.J. debt climbs another $1.4B in last fiscal year
• Franklin Twp. School officials unsure if they have enough money to finish construction
• Contractor files $260K suit against Morris County school board in outstanding balance dispute
• Jersey City parents get no answers as to when School 20 construction begins
But a backlog of dozens of urgent requests has left schools without the masonry, boiler and roof repairs needed to keep students safe, school and authority officials say.
The development authority’s origins trace back to a 1998 Abbott v. Burke decision by the state Supreme Court that ordered New Jersey to provide 100 percent funding for all school renovation and construction projects in special-needs districts, formerly known as "Abbotts." In 2000, the state launched the School Construction Program, which later became the Schools Construction Corp.
A 2005 report by the state inspector general found the agency rife with "waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars," and the state overhauled it once again, creating the School Development Authority in 2007.
The authority most recently had 310 employees and an operating budget of $52 million, not including the funds allocated for school construction. But on Friday, SDA officials began sending layoff notices to nearly two dozen employees, about 10 percent of the staff, said Kristen MacLean, an agency spokeswoman.
Because not all of the affected staff had been notified, the authority did not release the exact numbers. But MacLean said the layoffs are expected to be the only cuts for the time being and the loss of staff will not affect school projects.
Marc Larkins, the authority’s chief economic officer, said emergency projects that must be dealt with immediately are not on hold even though he acknowledges the authority has not begun work on any such requests made in 2010.
Emergency repair requests simply "take time," Larkins said.
"We’ve been afforded a finite pot of money and we need to figure out the best way to allocate it," Larkins said of the $97 million the authority has to fund emergency repairs. "The demand and scope of the work in districts exceeds the available funding we have."
Assembly Education Committee Chairman Patrick Diegnan (D-Middlesex) called Larkins’ argument "absolutely unacceptable, inexcusable and obscene" because the authority could ask its board to bond for additional money.
"We wonder why kids can’t learn. Imagine being in one of these schools with health and safety hazards, with boilers that are broken and bathrooms that don’t work," Diegnan said. "Even if construction of new, desperately needed schools remains on hold, at least the emergent repairs should be complete."
Diegnan questioned whether the delay could be rooted in politics and the governor’s oft-stated intention to cut spending in a state that’s going broke. He said he plans to compel Larkins to testify before his committee and explain the delay.
The authority’s work on emergency projects has not been at a total standstill. Its construction portfolio includes 54 such projects, an authority spokesman said, but those requests were all made before Christie took office last year. Some date back to 2007.
And as the list of requests grows, school officials in Newark, Camden and Jersey City say their concerns for student safety are mounting as well.
Steve Morlino, executive director of facilities management for the Newark Public Schools, said the district has submitted 47 requests for emergent repair work that have not been addressed. He said it would cost $250 million to complete them all — more than double the funding the authority has allotted for repairs statewide.
In the meantime, the district must come up with makeshift solutions. To protect pedestrians from falling bricks, scaffolding has been erected over sidewalks at eight schools. Fences surround other schools to prevent students and staff from venturing into "fall zones."
"At Maple Avenue, the elementary school first lady Michelle Obama visited, a four- to five-foot length of bricks fell from the highest story of the building in the middle of the night and embedded itself into the grass," Morlino said. "This happened just a few days before she arrived."
Morlino believes that a bureaucratic snag is holding up the emergency repair requests between the state Department of Education, which vets them and forwards them, and the authority itself.
"The SDA isn’t responding because they have no funding," he said. "The bottom line is no work on emergent stuff is moving forward and it’s becoming more and more of a problem."
Bernard Piaia, the Department of Education’s school facilities financing director, could not be reached for comment about a possible delay in vetting emergent project requests. A Department of Education spokesman said no such delay exists.
But Wendy Kutz, director of facilities construction for the Camden school district, echoed Morlino’s frustration. She said there has been less work on emergent requests this year than in previous years. There seems to be "paralysis" at the authority, she added.
"We don’t have a tax base to draw from in Camden, and we are not allowed to do our own school construction work according to the Abbott law," Kutz said. "We are only allowed to spend what the DOE and SDA allow us to spend, so we are between a rock and a hard place."
One emergent request made by Camden two and a half years ago took two weeks to complete once construction got under way, Kutz said.
State Sen. Donald Norcross (D-Camden) also criticized the authority’s inaction in light of its hundreds of employees and multimillion-dollar budget. Norcross chairs the Joint Committee on Public Schools’ subcommittee on school facilities and construction.
Common sense dictates that if there’s an emergency, "we have to fix it," Norcross said. He also intends to ask Larkins to testify about the authority’s "unacceptable" delay in addressing emergent requests.
"They have plenty of help over there. It’s time to stop planning and start working," Norcross said. "The children down here in Camden and Gloucester have the same right to safe and secure schools as they do in Voorhees and Cherry Hill."
In the meantime, emergent repairs remain incomplete for many districts. When winter break ended two weeks ago for American History High’s students, they resumed classes at another school across town.
Their former, crumbling building had become too dangerous to use.
