| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GSCS Key Message Points re Special Session & School Funding
New Jersey schools, communities, parents, educators, and state leaders face an enormous challenge today. As part of his property tax reform initiative, Governor Corzine has given legislators the task of creating a new school funding formula and making changes to the state’s school governance apparatus. Two of the four special legislative committees appointed by the Governor are charged with formulating recommendations for change in these areas. The time frame for this ambitious effort is tight – the committees have stated they intend to finish their work by November - and changes are targeted to be enacted into law by the end of 2006. GSCS urges you to be proactive and let legislators, the Governor, and newspapers – both local and statewide – hear your concerns. Now is the time. Your voices are the critical key to maintaining quality public education in our state.
New Jersey schools, communities, parents, educators, and state leaders face an enormous challenge today. As part of his property tax reform initiative, Governor Corzine has given legislators the task of creating a new school funding formula and making changes to the state’s school governance apparatus. Two of the four special legislative committees appointed by the Governor are charged with formulating recommendations for change in these areas. The time frame for this ambitious effort is tight – the committees have stated they intend to finish their work by November - and changes are targeted to be enacted into law by the end of 2006. GSCS urges you to be proactive and let legislators, the Governor, and newspapers – both local and statewide – hear your concerns. Now is the time. Your voices are the critical key to maintaining quality public education in our state.
GSCS KEY MESSAGE POINTS
ANY NEW SCHOOL FUNDING AND GOVERNANCE LAWS SHOULD REFLECT GSCS’ OVERRIDING CONCERNS THAT:
- QUALITY EDUCATION SHOULD NOT BE LEFT OUT OF THE DEBATE - EFFICIENCY IS ONLY ONE SIDE OF THE EQUATION. To date, legislative discussion has overwhelmingly focused on cost efficiencies. Effectiveness – performance and quality education – must be an integral part of the debate.
- OUR SCHOOLS ARE NOT LEVELED DOWN. Vigilance is needed to see that the need to contain costs does not result in legislation that lowers the standard of education for all of our children.
- CITIZENS OF A DISTRICT HAVE A REASONABLE FINANCIAL STAKE IN THEIR CHILDREN’S EDUCATION. No district should fund schools less than 15% or more than 85% through property tax
- A TOWN’S ABILITY TO SUPPORT ITS LOCAL SCHOOL BUDGET IS BASED ON A FORMULA FAIR TO ALL DISTRICTS. The formula used to determine state aid should be reworked to reflect the fiscal realities within various districts. At present 45% (a national extreme) of the districts in
- STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS AND DISABILITIES RECEIVE STATE SUPPORT AID NO MATTER WHERE THEY LIVE. For example, special education and transportation must not be equalized. Many districts would receive no aid if those categorical programs were funded based on district wealth, rather than on the individual student’s needs (e.g.45% of the regular operating districts would not receive categorical aid for special education).
- A CITIZEN’S ABILITY TO SUPPORT HIS/HER LOCAL SCHOOL BUDGET IS CONSIDERED. Any legislation should be sensitive to not only the community’s ‘local fair share’ but also to individual residents’ ability to pay.
- THE RESEARCH IS FULLY DONE PRIOR DESIGNING LAW. Analyze impacts as related to
What happens in
