Quality Public Education for All New Jersey Students

 

Property Taxes, School Funding issues
     Pre 2012 Announcement Archives
     2012-13 Announcement Archives
     2013-14 Announcement Archives
     2014-15 Announcement Archives
     Old Announcements prior April 2009
     ARCHIVE inc 2007 Announcements
     2009 Archives
     2008 Archives
     2007 Archives
     2006 Archives
     2010-11 Announcements
     2005 through Jan 30 2006 Announcements
12-8-07 NY Times article re Special Education funding under Governor's school aid proposal

NEW YORK TIMES, Saturday 12-8-07 New Jersey Suburbs Fear a Drop in Special Education Aid By WINNIE HU and DAVID W. CHEN Published: December 8, 2007 New Jersey’s support of special education in the public schools has been so generous that parents from all over the country have moved to the state to take advantage of the programs and services it offers. But a new school financing formula being proposed by Gov. Jon S. Corzine may vastly reshape the way the state divides the nearly $1 billion a year it allocates for special education, directing a larger share of the money to special education students in poor districts. The move to a so-called wealth-equalized formula would have a far-reaching effect on school budgets in the state’s 615 districts at a time when increases in special education enrollments are outpacing total enrollment growth in many districts. Under the current system, the state provides a fixed amount of money per student regardless of where the student lives: an autistic child in Princeton, for example, receives the same aid as a child with autism in Camden. At one time, most states used this sort of financial need-blind approach. But since the early 1970s, a growing number of states, including New York, Connecticut and Maryland, have factored the wealth of a school district into the equation, as part of a larger effort to redistribute resources more equitably among students, according to school financing experts. “We have the highest expenditure of any state in the nation with regard to special education,” Mr. Corzine said on Friday at a news conference. “We had it in the world we live in today, and we will have it in the world we live in tomorrow, when there’s a new formulation, and in fact, there will probably be additional funding going to special education.” The new approach for special education financing has won support among some legislators who represent poor districts, but it is drawing fierce opposition from school officials and parents in wealthier suburban districts who say that they fear receiving a dwindling share of state aid even as their costs are rising. Lynne Strickland, executive director of the Garden State Coalition of Schools, an advocacy group that represents primarily suburban districts, said that as many as 200 districts could be penalized under a wealth-equalized approach. “There’s really a lot of angst about it,” Ms. Strickland said, adding that many of these districts have not seen an increase in state aid since 2001. “This is a very stressful thing to impose on communities that have already been taxed to the nth degree and feel at the end of their rope.” The New Jersey School Boards Association, which represents 601 school boards across the state, and advocacy groups like the Statewide Parent Advocacy Network, have also opposed the move to a wealth-based formula for special education aid. “We feel that learning disabilities do not know economic boundaries,” said Frank Belluscio, a spokesman for the school boards association. “All school districts are already paying far more than they should for special education, and this would only foist more of the cost on some of them.” Mr. Corzine is expected to officially unveil his new school financing formula next week, with district-by-district breakdowns of state aid. Until then, it remains unclear how many of them stand to gain, or lose, with the proposed change. For the first two years at least, no district would receive less state aid than it does now even if it were to fare worse under the new formula, say legislators and advocacy groups who have been briefed on the proposal. Mr. Corzine would increase total state education aid by $400 million to $500 million in next year’s budget, most of which would go to poor students who live outside the 31 so-called Abbott districts in historically poor cities including Newark, Asbury Park and Camden, which critics say have received a disproportionate share of state aid. The new formula would apportion money to schools based on the characteristics of its students, including income and language ability. While special education aid is just one component of the larger financing plan, it has attracted intense scrutiny because it directly affects middle-class and upper-income districts that have too few poor students to benefit from any changes to the Abbott system. In Glen Ridge, where total state aid makes up 4.5 percent of the $23.8 million school budget, the superintendent, Dan Fishbein, pointed out that the district had already had to shift money from regular education programs to cover the increasing cost of special education. He said the new formula could create divisions between parents who have special education students and those who do not. “I am disappointed,” Mr. Fishbein said. “I thought all children would see something in the new funding formula. Every district has its pressures. Our community is unique because we’re mostly residential and our taxpayers bear the vast majority of the cost of educating those students.” Within the broader move to a wealth-based formula for special education aid, Mr. Corzine’s plan calls for using what is known as a census-based approach to determine special education costs in a district. Under the current system, state aid is based on a four-tiered cost structure, in which special education students receive varying levels of fixed aid depending on their disabilities. Some critics have said this does not accurately reflect the actual cost of providing services to them. Under Mr. Corzine’s plan, the state would pay a single average cost per student, based on total statewide spending on special education. Mr. Corzine’s plan would also increase overall special education aid for students with the most severe disabilities, or “extraordinary need.” At the same time, districts that send special education students away to receive services would receive partial reimbursement from the state only after they spent $55,000 for out-of-district instruction. Under the current system, districts are reimbursed after spending $40,000. Supporters of this approach contend that it would reduce the cost of special education by discouraging school officials and parents from misusing the system, steering students to special education just to increase numbers and qualify for more state aid. Still, John Myers, a consultant who specializes in school financing issues, said that a potential problem with using a statewide average is that it may shortchange districts with a disproportionately large number of special education students. Many school officials have also disputed the suggestion that special education numbers are inflated to secure more state aid. Jan A. Furman, superintendent of the Northern Valley Regional district in Bergen County, which operates an autism program for 130 elementary students from 22 towns, said that school districts spend far more on special education — as much as $100,000 a year for a single student — than they ever receive in state aid. “There’s no incentive to classify students for money,” she said. In the West Windsor-Plainsboro schools, in Mercer County, the cost of special education has grown to $20 million a year, in a $147 million budget. The district receives just $1.5 million annually in special education aid, and must cover the rest through local property taxes, said Thomas Smith, an assistant superintendent. “No district can afford to lose money with all the increases we’re looking at,” he said. Suzanne Mack, a member of the Jersey City board of education who has a child with special needs, said she thought that the proposal for special education sounded promising, but “it’s too early to tell how it will definitively impact us.” She did, say, however, that she was concerned about the idea of eliminating the current process by which students are classified as disabled. State Senator Stephen M. Sweeney, a Democrat from Gloucester County who was recently selected as majority leader, also said that he was encouraged by the concept underpinning the new formula for special education. “The concept sounds good, but first, we’ve got to see the numbers,” said Senator Sweeney [newly electedd State Seante Majority Leader], who said that he entered politics because of his daughter, Lauren, who has Down syndrome. He said that he thought that wealthy districts would not be affected. “I don’t think they’re going to hurt the wealthy districts at all, because the wealthy districts are basically funding themselves,” he said.