Assembly Education Committee Testimony
Dollar$ and Sense began working for a new school funding formula four years ago. At that time, we recognized that there are indeed regional cost of living differences across this state. We knew when the school construction bill said that it cost $135 per square foot to build a school that it was not talking about where I live.
Since that time, every time I saw Commissioner Librera or Commissioner Davy I asked if a new formula would account for regional cost differences. The need was an easy point to make. The state of New Jersey has the same struggle with Federal funding. The cost of living and doing business here is different from costs in Mississippi. Federal reimbursement for our transportation hubs is calculated at the same rate as states where costs are substantially less. Assessing poverty levels has the same issue. Poor in the cities of Alabama is not the same as poor in Paterson.
Within the Report on the Cost of Education, on page 17, specific reference is made to the fact that there are factors beyond a districts control that make certain assumptions impossible. They refer to a Geographic Cost of Education Index (GCEI) developed by Dr, Jay Chambers. I have read the work of Dr. Chambers, and of Fowler, and Monk, and Chang. It is very complicated and very difficult to determine the most appropriate method to measure the differences we all know to exist. The result of this indecision is that proper adjustments aren't made.
While I have to be pleased that regional cost differences are acknowledged, I am not certain that the report says what it must. On a national scale, the average of the index equals one and adjustments are based on that average. Yet, per the report, "the GCEI was rescaled such that the average for all New Jersey school districts equals one." Reviewing the tables provided in the report, there is no district weight provided for this critical factor.
In the fall of 2003, at the insistence of an ambitious member of the New Jersey School Boards Association (NJSBA) Legislative Committee, the NJSBA Finance Committee prepared a report called "Geographic Cost of Living Adjustment for CEIFA Funding Formula". Other states currently using some form of a GCEI were looked at. New Jersey's data was reviewed. The conclusion of this report was that the subject was too detailed for the limited means and manpower within NJSBA and that we would wait for the "new CEIFA formula" anticipated for the 2004-2005 school year.
However, the disparities found within New Jersey are startling. From the US Census Bureau, the median value of owner occupied housing ranged from $91,200 to $257,000. Median household income ranged from $39,150 to near $80,000. The new Jersey Department of Education, the Department of Labor, and the Department of the Treasury and Taxation had similar disparities.
Also in the fall of 2003, Dollar$ and Sense conducted a forum in Bergen County to address this issue as it applied to the distribution of education aide. Recognizing the tendency to over cerebralize the issue, we sought to make it simple. We compared median household income and we compared median housing costs. At the time, housing represented more than 30% of the cost of living index. No other single factor came close.
It gave us a representation of life in every county. Our suggestion to the Department of Education is that they do the same.
Finally, we recognize that the distribution of aide has not been addressed. We ask the Legislature and the Department of Education to recognize that because people earn more doesn't mean that they don't have to spend more to accomplish the same goals and standards. The wealth of a county must be determined by many factors, not just the value of real estate or the bottom line of an income tax form. We ask for weighted averages to be used so that the few very wealthy don't skew the results.
Should it come to pass that the new formula does not recognize the great variances within our state, many of us will be no better off than with the CEIFA formula. This is not the time to do it wrong. Yes, adjustments can be made, but to do so after the fact should not be acceptable to any of us. We have invested the time and the energy. We have told all citizens of New Jersey that there will be real money and real solutions for every child regardless of zip code. It's worth doing right the first time.
Since that time, every time I saw Commissioner Librera or Commissioner Davy I asked if a new formula would account for regional cost differences. The need was an easy point to make. The state of New Jersey has the same struggle with Federal funding. The cost of living and doing business here is different from costs in Mississippi. Federal reimbursement for our transportation hubs is calculated at the same rate as states where costs are substantially less. Assessing poverty levels has the same issue. Poor in the cities of Alabama is not the same as poor in Paterson.
Within the Report on the Cost of Education, on page 17, specific reference is made to the fact that there are factors beyond a districts control that make certain assumptions impossible. They refer to a Geographic Cost of Education Index (GCEI) developed by Dr, Jay Chambers. I have read the work of Dr. Chambers, and of Fowler, and Monk, and Chang. It is very complicated and very difficult to determine the most appropriate method to measure the differences we all know to exist. The result of this indecision is that proper adjustments aren't made.
While I have to be pleased that regional cost differences are acknowledged, I am not certain that the report says what it must. On a national scale, the average of the index equals one and adjustments are based on that average. Yet, per the report, "the GCEI was rescaled such that the average for all New Jersey school districts equals one." Reviewing the tables provided in the report, there is no district weight provided for this critical factor.
In the fall of 2003, at the insistence of an ambitious member of the New Jersey School Boards Association (NJSBA) Legislative Committee, the NJSBA Finance Committee prepared a report called "Geographic Cost of Living Adjustment for CEIFA Funding Formula". Other states currently using some form of a GCEI were looked at. New Jersey's data was reviewed. The conclusion of this report was that the subject was too detailed for the limited means and manpower within NJSBA and that we would wait for the "new CEIFA formula" anticipated for the 2004-2005 school year.
However, the disparities found within New Jersey are startling. From the US Census Bureau, the median value of owner occupied housing ranged from $91,200 to $257,000. Median household income ranged from $39,150 to near $80,000. The new Jersey Department of Education, the Department of Labor, and the Department of the Treasury and Taxation had similar disparities.
Also in the fall of 2003, Dollar$ and Sense conducted a forum in Bergen County to address this issue as it applied to the distribution of education aide. Recognizing the tendency to over cerebralize the issue, we sought to make it simple. We compared median household income and we compared median housing costs. At the time, housing represented more than 30% of the cost of living index. No other single factor came close.
It gave us a representation of life in every county. Our suggestion to the Department of Education is that they do the same.
Finally, we recognize that the distribution of aide has not been addressed. We ask the Legislature and the Department of Education to recognize that because people earn more doesn't mean that they don't have to spend more to accomplish the same goals and standards. The wealth of a county must be determined by many factors, not just the value of real estate or the bottom line of an income tax form. We ask for weighted averages to be used so that the few very wealthy don't skew the results.
Should it come to pass that the new formula does not recognize the great variances within our state, many of us will be no better off than with the CEIFA formula. This is not the time to do it wrong. Yes, adjustments can be made, but to do so after the fact should not be acceptable to any of us. We have invested the time and the energy. We have told all citizens of New Jersey that there will be real money and real solutions for every child regardless of zip code. It's worth doing right the first time.
Comment
© 2010 Created by Dollar$ and Sense.
Powered by 
.
You need to be a member of Dollar$ & Sense Education Advocacy to add comments!
Join Dollar$ & Sense Education Advocacy