|
FORMULA TO USE "ADEQUACY" COST WELL BELOW
CURRENT LEVELS
WILL DECLARE $1.4 BILLION IN ED FUNDING UNNECESSARY
SUBURBAN AND URBAN SCHOOLS FACE THREAT
OF "LEVELING DOWN"
Newark, NJ December 6, 2007
Governor Jon Corzines proposed school funding formula
will use a per-pupil "adequacy" cost for the core
curriculum that is $1,220 per pupil or 11% less than the current
foundation funding level in New Jersey school districts.
Although the Governor and Education Commissioner Lucille
Davy have said that final numbers are not available, they
have been known for several days.
The Governor is proposing an average of $10,200 per-pupil
as adequate to educate public school students under the States
K-12 academic standards, known as the NJ Core Curriculum Content
Standards (NJCCS). The proposed adequacy costs are $9,500
for an elementary school student; $9,978 for a middle school
student; and $11,118 for a high school student.
The proposed adequacy costs are $1,220 per pupil below the
funding level for foundational education in all school districts,
including low and middle-income districts. They are also $1,704
per pupil or 14% below the funding level in successful suburban
school districts, known as the "I&J" districts.
These districts serve as the adequacy cost benchmark for the
States urban districts under the landmark Abbott v.
Burke rulings.
Here is the amount of current funding at-risk of loss under
the Governors proposed adequacy cost:
| Comparison
of 2006-07 Per Pupil Regular Education Funding and Governor
Corzine's Proposed Adequacy Cost by District Grouping |
| |
2006-07 Per Pupil Funding |
Difference from Corzine Adequacy Cost* |
| Abbott Districts
|
$11,731
|
-$1,531
|
15%
|
| Other Poor Districts
|
$10,246
|
-$46
|
0%
|
| Middle Districts
|
$11,188
|
-$988
|
10%
|
| I & J Districts
|
$11,904
|
-$1,704
|
17%
|
| State Average |
$11.420
|
-$1,220
|
12%
|
| SOURCE: New Jersey
Department of Education, Office of School Funding, Advertised
Revenues, FY 2007. |
| *Difference from the Governors
adequacy cost of $10,200. |
The sharply lower adequacy cost means that school districts
statewide are currently spending an estimated $1.4 billion
more in funding than the Governor believes is necessary to
provide the education program required under the NJCCS. The
successful suburban districts have $483 million in "excess"
funding under the Governors proposal.
The Governors adequacy costs are based on models developed
by the NJDOE, with help of Augenblick and Palaich and Associates,
a Denver-based consulting firm, over five years ago. Education
stakeholders and experts criticized these costs as flawed
and out-of-date when they were first released in December
2006.
Adoption of the Governors low adequacy cost, along
with tight spending caps, would directly threaten the high
quality educational programs now offered in the most successful
suburban districts by rendering hundreds of millions in current
spending excessive and unnecessary. It would also result in
spending reductions in the Abbott districts, since the State
would no longer be required to maintain "parity"
in foundation funding with the suburban districts, as the
Court currently requires.
The Court also requires the NJDOE to "convincingly demonstrate"
that any foundation cost below parity can achieve a "substantive
thorough and efficient education" in the Abbott districts;
and that the difference between parity and the new cost represents
"genuine inefficiencies or excesses" in the suburban
districts. The NJDOE has, thus far, failed to produce "convincing"
evidence to meet these constitutional tests.
The Governor has announced that his formula would "hold
harmless" all districts for the first year or maybe two,
so that no district would immediately lose funding. Thus,
districts may not experience the full "leveling down"
effect of the Governors low adequacy cost until 2009
or 2010, when the formula is actually implemented by the Legislature.
Urban public school advocates are concerned that the Governors
proposed formula will be rushed through the remaining days
of the lame duck session, without opportunity to examine the
short-term and, more importantly, longer term impact of the
proposal. These advocates, along with many other groups and
some legislators, are calling on Senate President Richard
Codey and Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts to put the Governors
proposal on a slower track, beyond the lame duck session,
to give education stakeholders the opportunity to analyze
the proposal, provide input and propose alternatives.
|
Education
Law Center Press Contact:
David G. Sciarra
Executive Director
email: dsciarra@edlawcenter.org
voice: 973 624-1815 x16
|
|
Copyright © 2007 Education Law Center.
All Rights Reserved.
|