Steve Sweeney Advocates for State Aid Reform
Thank you JBennett for keeping us informed on this issue. It will be interesting to see if they do the right thing and restore some fairness, as well as some transparency to this process.
jimmurphy said:
Thank you JBennett for keeping us informed on this issue. It will be interesting to see if they do the right thing and restore some fairness, as well as some transparency to this process.
+1
The only way this gets through is part of a "grand bargain" deal including aid reform, raising the gasoline tax to fund the transportation fund and eliminating or substantially increasing the threshold of the the estate and inheritance taxes.
bramzzoinks said:
The only way this gets through is part of a "grand bargain" deal including aid reform, raising the gasoline tax to fund the transportation fund and eliminating or substantially increasing the threshold of the the estate and inheritance taxes.
How is that a "grand bargain"? Aren't those all left-leaning desires?
Edited to add: Misread the estate and inheritance tax point.
What we need is a Governor who is willing to put their job on the line and push for serious reform rather than worry about reelection or a future job.
Unfortunately, there aren't many politicians that are like this.
Which is why a grand bargain is the only way forward. Many, maybe most, Democrats in the legislature know that the current estate and inheritance levels in NJ are harmful but few will say so publicly or vote for reform. Many, maybe most, Republicans in the legislature and the Governor know that the current state aid system in NJ is harmful and that transportation needs to be funding and raising the gas tax is really the only practical way to do so but few will say so publicly or vote for (or sign) them alone. But put them all in a package and you may be able to get them all through.
I can't believe this!! bramzzoinks and I agree again! What is happening here? Did I wander into an alternate universe?
There is an article in today's News-Record reporting that Jasey and McKeon have proposed a bill that would provide provide the SOMA School District with an additional $2,179,393 in state aid for the 2016-17 fiscal year to make up for the revenue to which it is entitled but not receiving through the state's underfunded School Funding Reform Act formula.
The bill calls for $122,200,000 to be taken from the Property Tax Relief Fund and appropriated to the Department of Education, which will use it to supplement the funding for those school districts whose equalized school tax rate in the 2015-16 school year is at least 35% greater than the statewide average equalized school tax rate. This would include 143 school districts across 16 counties.
I don't have a link to the article.
I know it's too early to get excited about this, but I'm cautiously VERY optimistic and pleased it's at least being discussed.
TarheelsInNj said:
I know it's too early to get excited about this, but I'm cautiously VERY optimistic and pleased it's at least being discussed.
+1
cramer said:
There is an article in today's News-Record reporting that Jasey and McKeon have proposed a bill that would provide provide the SOMA School District with an additional $2,179,393 in state aid for the 2016-17 fiscal year to make up for the revenue to which it is entitled but not receiving through the state's underfunded School Funding Reform Act formula.
The bill calls for $122,200,000 to be taken from the Property Tax Relief Fund and appropriated to the Department of Education, which will use it to supplement the funding for those school districts whose equalized school tax rate in the 2015-16 school year is at least 35% greater than the statewide average equalized school tax rate. This would include 143 school districts across 16 counties.
I don't have a link to the article.
The Jasey/McKeon bill is A3420.
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2016/Bills/A3500/3420_I1.PDF
The bill is not going anywhere in the legislature because it would not give any additional aid to numerous severely underaided districts who happen to be below 135% of the state's average Equalized Tax rate.
Excluded districts include Fairview, East Newark, Haledon, Prospect Park, Red Bank Boro, Freehold Boro, Atlantic City, Bloomfield, Belleville, Bayonne, Clifton, Dover, Lakewood, and Rahway. I do not think there is a single Abbott that would get any money and even though I'd be fine with that, Newark and Paterson at least have a lot of political power.
In fact, there is no Hudson County district that would get aid under this proposal, which I'm sure Vincent Prieto will love, but what might be even more fatal is excluding so many districts that have been activists for fair aid. Red Bank Boro and Freehold Boro have been at every legislative hearing this year, with the parents wearing shirts and demanding fairness. Since, objectively, Freehold Boro is the worst-off district in New Jersey excluding it is just not moral.
Using Equalized Tax Rate is not as fair as using Local Fair Share would be since Local Fair Share also incorporates a district's income and LFS is already part of SFRA.
Even if the bill got out of the legislature Christie would veto it because there is no offset. I don't even like that the Jasey/McKeon bill leaves all the aid intact that overaided districts like Asbury Park, Hoboken, Pemberton, Jersey City etc get.
The legislation that Steve Sweeney and Jennifer Beck is working on is more viable and fairer. The Sweeney/Beck bill has an offset (Adjustment Aid that goes to overaided districts). We don't know who all the beneficiaries will be of the Sweeney/Beck bill, but I'm sure that at least Freehold Boro will get money since Sweeney and Beck have visited Freehold Boro.
The Sweeney/Beck bill also has bipartisan support, multiregional support, and support of the Senate President (Sweeney himself.)
bramzzoinks said:
Which is why a grand bargain is the only way forward. Many, maybe most, Democrats in the legislature know that the current estate and inheritance levels in NJ are harmful but few will say so publicly or vote for reform. Many, maybe most, Republicans in the legislature and the Governor know that the current state aid system in NJ is harmful and that transportation needs to be funding and raising the gas tax is really the only practical way to do so but few will say so publicly or vote for (or sign) them alone. But put them all in a package and you may be able to get them all through.
I worry you might be right. Christie doesn't care about aid, which means he might accept redistribution, but he might demand some concession that the Democrats don't want.
Specifically, Christie has tried twice to lower the weights for at-risk students in SFRA (even though SFRA is non-operative anyway). The Democratic legislature has rejected these changes, but Christie might insist on the weights being lowered in order to agree to redistribution.
HOWEVER, a bigger worry I have is that Sweeney and Beck may compromise with themselves and only take Adjustment Aid from districts that are also above Adequacy. If this happens, then the amount of aid to be redistributed is not $550 million, but more like 00 million, since most Adjustment Aid districts undertax and are below or barely above Adequacy. Jersey City, for instance, gets 30 million more than SFRA says it needs, but it is actually below Adequacy because JC's taxes are kept so low.
Unfortunately, taking aid away from districts also requires amending the tax cap so these districts (who are almost always below Local Fair Share) can make up the lost aid through local taxes. Reforming state aid AND amending the tax cap might be too heavy a legislative lift.
For Hoboken to raise taxes by $5 million is nothing, but under the tax cap the most Hoboken can raise taxes is about $800k.
We don't know yet what Sweeney and Beck are planning. Sweeney has said repeatedly that Adjustment Aid should be eliminated (he's also said that the Abbotts need to be updated), but Beck talks about Adequacy.
We should know next month what aid reform might look like.
Actually I do not see us knowing anything until about June 25 or later when everything is pushed through in a last minute deal along with the budget.
FYI, the Education Law Center (the firm behind the Abbott lawsuit) is opposing redistribution.
They are a bunch of reactionaries.
They specifically name Jersey City as a district that shouldn't lose aid, even though it only pays a third of its local fair share.
https://twitter.com/EdLawCenter/status/723166296267845632
https://twitter.com/EdLawCenter/status/723163765693288450
JBennett said:
FYI, the Education Law Center (the firm behind the Abbott lawsuit) is opposing redistribution.
They are a bunch of reactionaries.
They specifically name Jersey City as a district that shouldn't lose aid, even though it only pays a third of its local fair share.
https://twitter.com/EdLawCenter/status/723166296267845632
https://twitter.com/EdLawCenter/status/723163765693288450
Do the local fair shares differ based upon DFG?
jimmurphy said:
JBennett said:
FYI, the Education Law Center (the firm behind the Abbott lawsuit) is opposing redistribution.
They are a bunch of reactionaries.
They specifically name Jersey City as a district that shouldn't lose aid, even though it only pays a third of its local fair share.
https://twitter.com/EdLawCenter/status/723166296267845632
https://twitter.com/EdLawCenter/status/723163765693288450
Do the local fair shares differ based upon DFG?
On average yes, Local Fair Shares would correlate with Local Fair Share, but the correlation wouldn't be a strong one. The DFGs are (out of date) socioeconomic classifications, not measures of tax base, which is what Local Fair Share is.
There are many examples of low DFG districts having very high tax bases at the Jersey Shore. There are districts at the Jersey Shore with hardly any public school kids, but the few kids they have are poor and the permanent residents are poor too.
However, these districts have lots of vacation homes and high, even astronomical tax bases. For instance, Sea Isle City is in DFG B, but Sea Isle City has $388,000 in Local Fair Share per student. Wildwood Crst and Wildwood City even have higher tax bases per student than Hoboken.
Notably, Jersey City is in DFG B, but it has an average tax base that is superior to what Bloomfield and many working class districts have. Jersey City's Local Fair Share is $330 million, but their tax levy is only $112 million.
There are some rural districts with stable populations, low poverty and consequently medium or high DFGS, and yet very low tax bases too.
JBennett said:
Jersey City's Local Fair Share is $330 million, but their tax levy is only $112 million.
JC is receiving $116mil in adjustment aid yet is $114mil below adequacy. If we take away even half of the adjustment aid, they will be $172mil under adequacy. And under the 2% cap, they can only raise additional $2.3mil. So how can they make up the difference as long as the 2% cap remains?
xavier67 said:
JBennett said:
Jersey City's Local Fair Share is $330 million, but their tax levy is only $112 million.
JC is receiving $116mil in adjustment aid yet is $114mil below adequacy. If we take away even half of the adjustment aid, they will be $172mil under adequacy. And under the 2% cap, they can only raise additional $2.3mil. So how can they make up the difference as long as the 2% cap remains?
Yes. I made the same point in an earlier post, but used Hoboken as an example of a district that could economically make up for lost aid, but due to the tax cap, can't do it legally.
I'm discouraged/worried that no one is talking about amending the tax cap law in case of lost aid. This makes me think that the redistribution will be very limited.
...NJ would have to amend the tax cap anyway even if there were no redistribution being considered. Under SFRA, about 200 districts aren't due for any increases because they are already overaided.
If a district funds a, say, 90% of its school budget locally it'll be ok since 2% of 90% is a pretty substantial number.
However, if a district is like Jersey City and funds 19% of its budget locally, well, 2% of 19% is pretty minute.
There is, however a solution under the existing tax cap to problems like this. A BOE can go to its electorate in November and ask for whatever tax increase it wants.
Most BOEs are afraid to do this and most that have tried to get bigger increases have failed.
xavier67 said:
JBennett said:
Jersey City's Local Fair Share is $330 million, but their tax levy is only $112 million.
JC is receiving $116mil in adjustment aid yet is $114mil below adequacy. If we take away even half of the adjustment aid, they will be $172mil under adequacy. And under the 2% cap, they can only raise additional $2.3mil. So how can they make up the difference as long as the 2% cap remains?
PS The amount of Adjustment Aid that districts are listed as getting is inaccurate because the formula hasn't been run in a few years.
Atlantic City and Newark are listed as getting Adjustment Aid, but they are both underaided and that Adjustment Aid should be converted to Equalization Aid.
JC, on the other hand, has become more overaided and more of its Equalization Aid should be converted to Adjustment Aid.
Also, the formula for LFS changes every year and even subtle changes can change what a district is supposed to be capable of paying.
Not the best quality video, but in it Sen. Jennifer Beck talks about underaiding, population change, and Adjustment Aid. Beck says that some (not all) Adjustment Aid will be redistributed to districts that have had enrollment growth. She says "there will be winners and losers."
Beck says that the bill she is working on with Steve Sweeney will be out in May.
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1760895044196706&id=1740102096276001&fref=nf
"DO SOMETHING"
"We, as residents, parents, and taxpayers of New Jersey, ask Governor Christie, Commissioner Hespe, and all the Legislators of New Jersey to fund the School Funding Reform Act (SFRA) as written into law.
"We demand that $575 million in “adjustment aid” be reallocated. This was support that was originally intended to "hold harmless" districts that saw aid reductions as a result of the new formula signed into law in 2008. This process has been recommended to take place over five years, however no money has been reallocated in the past 8 years. We believe 8 years is enough advance notice for districts to realize they should not be receiving any more adjustment aid.
"We ask that until SFRA can be fully funded, all districts be funded fairly, and share the sacrifice that so many districts have been making since 2008. If the formula can only be funded at 85%, then fund ALL school districts throughout the state with the formula at 85%. Students, taxpayers, and school districts from all over the state have been the innocent victims of the State's inefficient and unlawful distribution of school funds.
"Funding the formula at 85% and reallocating state aid according to the formula will go a long way in easing the burden of taxpayers throughout the state.
The time is now to fix this problem.
"We demand #OurFairShare."
We're getting closer.
Steve Sweeney was in Bayonne yesterday. When one of Bayonne's assemblymen asked Sweeney about what he would do to help Bayonne's chronic and severe budgetary problems, Steve Sweeney said that he and Sen. Jennifer Beck were closer than ever to releasing their aid reform bill.
We haven't seen the bill yet, but the outline is a full redistribution of Adjustment Aid. The biggest beneficiaries would be working class and poor non-Abbotts, but the SOMSD could/should also see a gain too.
http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2016/05/sweeney_says_lawmakers_very_close_to_unveiling_pla.html#incart_river_home
Assemblyman Jack Ciattarelli (R, Somerset) has also become a great voice for aid reform and PILOT reform.
Although Ciattarelli's idea to have all districts pay at least 25% of their budgets is very conservative and probably not politically viable, his proposal to cut off aid for districts whose spending exceeds 150% of Adequacy is extraordinarily progressive and would have smaller, secondary benefits for pension sustainability.
http://www.mycentraljersey.com/story/news/politics/new-jersey/2016/06/03/ciattarelli-school-funding-formula-must-changed/85343328/
Big news from Steve Sweeney.
SWEENEY, RUIZ, DOWNEY & HOUGHTALING UNVEIL INITIATIVE TO FULLY FUND NJ SCHOOLS
Commission Will Develop Five-Year Reform Plan To Close
Gap That Now Leaves 80 Percent of Districts Underfunded
TRENTON – Citing the state's continued underfunding of 80 percent of New Jersey's school districts, Senate President Steve Sweeney, Assemblywoman Joann Downey and Assemblyman Eric Houghtaling today unveiled legislation to create a special commission to develop a school funding reform plan to bring all districts to full funding within five years. Senator M. Teresa Ruiz, chairwoman of the Senate Education Committee, is a cosponsor of the bill.
"The School Funding Reform Act was a major accomplishment that promised to provide full funding for all schoolchildren by ensuring that money would follow the child," said Senator Sweeney. "State aid was to be distributed fairly and equitably based on a formula that took into account each town's property tax base, its ability to pay, increases and decreases in enrollment and the special needs of the children. The goals and objectives of the formula are on target, but the promise has not been kept."
"The state has failed to fund the formula and keep up with the needs of the school districts," said Senator Sweeney. "As a result, the school funding formula has grown less fair and less adequate, with the fastest-growing districts being shortchanged, compromising the quality of education and putting upward pressure on property taxes. It is time to restore equity to the system and to fully fund our schools."
The commission will put the plan into legislation that will have to be approved or rejected in its existing form with up-or-down votes by the Legislature.
"We will closely examine the proposal to ensure it meets our goals to provide sufficient aid to districts that are underfunded but also to allow others the ability to adjust to the formula funding as it is intended under the law," said Senator Ruiz. "We know the transition must be done in a deliberative manner, but that by fully funding the formula we will ensure that the resources necessary for the education of each student are preserved. We believe this is the first responsible approach to meeting the mission of the school funding formula that aid follows the child, and to bringing districts to full funding in a fair and meaningful way."
Senator Sweeney said he expected the plan to include increased state funding over the five-year timeframe.
Under the proposed legislation, a four-member "State School Funding Fairness Commission" would be established and given one year to develop a plan that would bring every school district in the state to "adequacy funding" within five years. The Governor would appoint two commissioners and the Senate President and Assembly Speaker would choose one each, according to the bill.
Assemblywoman Downey and Assemblyman Houghtaling said the state needs to address the growing disparities in school funding throughout the state.
"Our school funding formula is nowhere near being fully-funded, nor has it been updated to keep up with the day-to-day realities our educators and administrators face," said Assemblywoman Downey. "It has caused a massive disconnect between how schools are functioning and how they are funded. "This is an issue that affects all children, and all taxpayers, throughout our state and something we need to take seriously. We can no longer cherry-pick solutions."
"School districts like Freehold Borough and Red Bank, with rapidly growing school populations, have essentially seen their aid frozen, putting students and taxpayers at a tremendous disadvantage," said Assemblyman Houghtaling. "Many more are being failed by a funding system that overlooks the day-to-day realities of their classrooms. Our communities and schools need to finally have the fairness and certainty that our school funding law promised them."
Senator Sweeney said meetings he and other legislators have had with city and school officials in different communities have underscored the problems with the school funding formula.
"This is not an urban-suburban issue," Senator Sweeney said. "There are disparities all over the state, including within my own legislative district where some school districts are overfunded and some are underfunded. We can no longer allow some districts to be subsidizing others under this formula. We need to be responsible in making the reforms to ensure that no students are negatively impacted. It is a matter of fairness for all students."
----
Usually a commission is a way of killing a reform idea, but if the commission will be empowered to send legislation directly to the floor for a vote I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea. I think what Sweeney is conceding by promoting a commission is is that the legislative process would not work for redistributing state aid (like Congress concedes that the legislative process does not work for base closings). I don't have any insight into what really happened here, but maybe Sweeney tested other Senators and found out that he didn't have 21 votes for the reform he was originally hoping to pass. Sen. Beck is conspicuous by her absence. She and Sweeney may have disagreed on some key component of the bill they were working on.
Rather than an attempt to bury reform, I think this is an attempt to get a very serious reform. Unfortunately this delays reform by at least another year.
It looks like Sen. Jennifer Beck dropped out of state aid reform. My guess is that she didn't want to redistribute as much aid as Sweeney did and she may have opposed increasing school aid by $500 million.
More information
http://www.nj.com/education/2016/06/sweeney_wants_five-year_plan_to_fix_nj_school_fund.html
I thought this was very good reporting on Sweeney's bill.
http://www.njtvonline.org/news/video/senate-president-proposes-changes-school-funding-formula/
FYI, Sweeney has been touring underaided districts through NJ in support of his proposal for real aid equity. (which is nothing like Christie's proposal)
Sweeney's proposal would bring its biggest benefits to poor and working class non-Abbotts like Clifton, Belleville, and Bayonne, but some of the Abbotts would also benefit. Among the Abbotts who would benefit are Newark, Paterson, New Brunswick, Plainfield, Trenton, and Elizabeth. Since Paterson and Newark are so large and politically powerful, Sweeney is working hard to get their leaderships on board.
Sweeney's proposal would also benefit the SOMSD and most suburbs. I hope he starts to visit suburban locations too.
http://www.nj.com/education/2016/06/nj_school_funding_fair_urban_suburban.html
For Sale
Garage Sales
-
Huge Garage Sale Sale Date: May 4, 2024
More info
Free Items
Featured Events
-
Stephen Whitty Presents - Hometown Movie Stars: The Celebrated Actors Of CHS
May 6, 2024 at 7:00pm
Advertisement
FINALLY, after years of ignoring the issue, the legislature is talking about reforming state aid!
I haven't read any good reporting from today's Assembly Budget hearing, but the Delran Superintendent took some very good notes and photos.
Some of the comments Assemblymembers made are spot on. Assemblyman Troy Singleton said "I still believe that 'Hold Harmless Aid' is a misnomer," which is the kind of thing I've been waiting years to hear.
https://twitter.com/Delran_Super?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
https://storify.com/Delran_Super/school-funding-discussed-at-state-assembly-hearing
https://bbrotschul.wordpress.com/2016/04/20/delran-attends-the-state-assembly-budget-committee-meeting/
The Senate Budget committee met last week and also extensively discussed state aid. Senators Sweeney and Beck are working on legislation that would reduce or eliminate Adjustment Aid and redistribute that money to needier districts.
http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/16/04/12/reformers-question-if-school-aid-formula-is-out-of-touch-with-reality/