EDITORIALS
The
Abbott districts: Pare with care
Sunday, May 29, 2005 •
Star-Ledger
It's time to think about revising the
list of so-called Abbott school districts. That would be a
provocative and politically painful discussion, but it's
necessary to start asking some tough questions about the 31
districts officially designated as so needy they receive a
total of $1.5 billion annually in extra state
aid.
Are some districts now wealthy enough to
support themselves? Are there districts that are not on the
list but should be? In answering these questions, two
equally important factors should be considered: the economic
condition of the district and the academic performance of
its students.
A recent analysis done by the nonpartisan
Office of Legislative Services looked strictly at the
economic end of the equation and concluded that 13 of the 31
districts classified as "special-needs districts" could be
declared ineligible for special state aid because their
economic health improved between the 1990 census and the
2000 census. To do so would save $514 million in the next
state budget.
The 13 districts are Burlington City,
Elizabeth, Garfield, Gloucester, Harrison, Hoboken, Jersey
City, Long Branch, Millville, Neptune, Pemberton,
Phillipsburg and Vineland.
Indeed, some of these communities have
made remarkable economic progress.
In Jersey City, for example, the value of
taxable real estate rose from $7.8 billion in 1990 to $12.1
billion last year. Still, the children attending Jersey
City's public schools are among the poorest in the state. In
2004, 70.9 percent were eligible for federally subsidized
lunches.
In Hoboken, 78.9 percent of children
enrolled in public schools were eligible for free lunches,
while the value of taxable real estate went from $1.6
billion in 1990 to $5.6 billion in 2004.
In both cases, the municipalities'
ability to pay for public education has improved while
student performance has lagged.
In Jersey City, where academic progress
has been steady and there has been talk of returning the
state-run district to local control, only 64 percent of the
students passed the language portion of the High School
Proficiency Assessment test last year on first try. The
statewide average is 82 percent.
On the language portion of the test, 64.5
percent of Hoboken students passed the first time they took
it. In Jersey City, only 42.7 percent of students passed the
math portion. Hoboken students did better, with 60.6 percent
passing. Statewide, 70 percent of students passed the math
exam.
This is why the Legislature should not be
tempted to embrace a strict economic test in deciding which
districts need help the most. A plan for decertification of
districts must require these districts to first reach
clearly defined and rigorous academic standards. Once that's
done, the state can more effectively pursue the question of
whether Abbott funding is well-spent. Only then can
districts be weaned from the huge sums of money they get
from Trenton.
Why is this an issue now? Back in 2003,
the Legislature directed Education Commissioner William
Librera to define an Abbott school district, in part because
some lawmakers questioned the fairness of the designation.
Moreover, school districts that once dreaded the Abbott
label sought it because they wanted the infusion of cash
that comes with the title.
Since Abbott II, the second ruling on
school funding in three decades of court decisions, the
designation simply included the schools listed in the court
case by the education commissioner as the "poorer urban
districts." Plainfield and Neptune were added later by
legislation. To date, no districts have been dropped from
the list.
Now Librera has been asked to discuss the
ideas in his two- year-old report before the Legislature
next month. They include a call for a four-year phase-out
that would likely involve only three to six
districts.
His plan is based on a two- prong test:
academic and economic. On the academic side, Librera cited
such things as the courses offered, the qualifications of
the teachers, the teacher-pupil ratios, dropout rates and
performance on standardized tests.
On the economic side, he said 40 percent
of the children in Abbott districts must be eligible for the
federal free-lunch program, and there has to be a showing
that the town does not have the wealth or tax base needed to
support the education system along with other municipal
services.
At a time when property owners are
clamoring for relief, it's tempting simply to slash Abbott
districts. But to go after Abbott districts with a meat-
cleaver approach would be a mistake.
From the very first Abbott court
decision, the justices have insisted that the Legislature
meet its constitutional obligation to provide a "thorough
and efficient" education by putting the needs of children
first. Those needs are best met by the state holding
districts accountable for educating students while
guaranteeing that the districts have the resources, through
local taxation and extra state aid if need be, to accomplish
that task.
© 2005 The Star-Ledger. Used by NJ.com with
permission.
|