No help on its way
If Board of Education President Judith McKay was correct back in May that the taxpayers should blame Trenton rather than their tireless advocates at 1 Merrison Street for the ever increasing burden of supporting the District's high spending, then it's time for Teaneck residents to turn up the heat on state officials. Back in May, McKay remarked to the Record that school budget problems are a funding issue rather than spending issue. "If the state had given us the aid they should be giving us, we would not be in this situation," she said. Whether or not you think those comments betray an insensitivity to taxpayers, they are not just hollow finger pointing. As pretty much every non-Abbott district in New Jersey has consistently argued, the state school funding formula is terribly unfair. Among the many as yet unfulfilled promises emanating from the Governor and state lawmakers is a revamping of the formula by which districts receive financial assistance from Trenton. The latest news from the capitol is that those plans remain stalled. As such, the prospect of a drastic improvement in the budgetary situation of the Teaneck schools anytime soon is remote.
Will the Board of Ed seek to cushion the blow by sharpening the pencils and finding other ways to avoid slapping the taxpayers of Teaneck with another hefty increase or will be sent to the voting booths forced to make another choice between voting down the budget or acceding to another greater-than-inflation rise in our school tax obligation?
posted by Teaneck Blog @ 10:49 AM
12 Comments:
The NJ Senate did pass legislation providing property tax cuts and capping annual property tax increases at 4 percent annually. See the Bergen Record article "N.J. Senate approves property tax cut"
The Board of Ed budget cap was already in place and does not appear to have changed significantly. However the cap on the municipal budget is new. With the preliminary budget starting at 8.5% the town has a long way to go.
Where will the cuts that bring the budget down to 4% come from if the council has taken everything off the table?
Wake up people!! State aid is just a redirection of your hard earned tax dollars. Cut the spending on all levels- local, county & state. This is not only a Teaneck problem- it is a COUNTRY wide problem. Public education is failing in America- instead of attempting to fix it and make hard decisions, our elected officials on all levels continue to throw money at the problem. It is like putting a band aid on a gaping wound.
It is time for action. Show up and vote down the budget. Last years cut of $500,000.00 was a joke!!
It is time to stop wasting money on extra curricular activites. I am sick and tired of hearing that these activities keep kids out of trouble. What ever happened to parental responsibility? What ever happened to teaching our kids right from wrong? Has anyone seen the thugs and animals attending Teaneck schools? Watch some of the middle school kids as they trek about our streets when school lets out. These kids need military school- not football and rock climbing walls.
Public education has become a waste of money. there is no accountability, millions of dollars of waste, an out of control beauracracy, and no plan of action to fix it.
The Abbot District funding has to go. It is not fair and suburbanites are suffering. But there is plenty more that has to go from Teaneck as well.
The NJ Senate did pass legislation providing property tax cuts and capping annual property tax increases at 4 percent annually.
This effort at relieving the burden for the majority of taxpayers gives no cover to the Board of Ed or Township to increase their funding demands commensurately. Though they may be deluding themselves and their constituents, it was not the intent of the state legislators to see taxes rearranged, but reduced. Residents are not likely to sit idly by while whatever tax credit they are to receive gets eaten up by maximum permitted increases in the school and municipal budgets.
Anonymous, I resent your blanket attitude about the kids that attend our public schools. Calling them names and characterizing them in such a nasty manner is hardly a way to add to civil discourse about how to improve their educational performance. I do agree that there are some who could definitely use more hands-on parental guidance, and schools are being asked to do more than just teach them for 6 hours a day. Suggesting that we just write them off (what you imply) does not absolve the district of the legal and moral responsibility to continue trying to motivate more kids and get them on the right track, and the school system is focused on improving achievement at all levels. Bottom line -- the majority of the kids attending our public schools are doing their work, volunteering in the community and getting into 2 & 4-year colleges.
MSKJ
You are on the mark.
We live in a complex society where parents are often struggling to make ends meet. It is all too easy to smugly advise when you have no comprehension of people's problems.
The school system may not be the beall and endall of the process of bringing youngsters into civil society, but it is the American system to provide the best possible public education.
Let's all agree to seek that end without any harsh words and with a decent respect for the needs of taxpayers.
mskj and henry frisch - Thank you. I've become so accustomed to hearing people making false blanket assessments of public school kids that I've started to ignore them.
The growth in private school attendance in Teaneck is largely to blame for a decline in social cohesion - we're no longer on the same team working toward common goals.
I too thank the 3 posters above. I have two children in the public schols, and I resent it when people who do not know them categorize them (and me) in such a nasty manner.
swurgle, I agree that the criticism of Teaneck students is both false and inflammatory. It only serves to discredit the poster.
However, only slightly lest inflammatory is your next post:
"The growth in private school attendance in Teaneck is largely to blame for a decline in social cohesion - we're no longer on the same team working toward common goals."
One can be a strong supporter of public education even if one does not send one's kids to that school. I think that 8 straight years of approving near highest-in-State-budgets clearly demonstrates that most Teaneck residents of all stripes share that belief.
Did it occur to you that it might be the BoE's unqiue ability to blame everyone but themselves for the spending rate that erodes cohesive public support for the public school system in Teaneck.
Anonymous at 11:26--
Maybe "most Teaneck residents of all stripes" do share a strong belief/support for public education, but I wouldn't use the budget elections over the past 8 years to bolster that argument. The district-by-district returns just don't back you up.
I'd like to see a little more detail on your third paragaph.
Swrugle's posting blamed the population that does not use the public schools (read Orthodox Jews) for the "lack of social cohesion" (which I think means agreeing with Swrugle's point of view, but maybe he can tell us in greater detail what this "cohesion" consisted of). While it is true that voting has not been favorable to the budget in Orthodox districts, until this past year the majority tacitly supported the budget by their political silence. The rejection of the budget this past year was the first time this community (and the majority of other districts in town) affirmatively said enough.
As to my 3rd paragraph (assume you mean 4th), raise the question of spending and the BoE is likely to trot out one or more of the following over which they "have not control":
(1) Unfunded state mandates;
(2) Increases in healthcare costs, energy costs and/or insurance costs;
(3) Pre-existing contract obligations to employees (as if they had no role in putting those contracts in place);
(4) Busing;
(5) Special Education;
(6) The Charter School;
(7) Cuts in state funding (as if they have any impact on spending, as opposed to taxes).
Never answered is the question of why, by most measures, at least 90% of other peer districts in the state (by size) confront most, if not all, of the same challenges, but seem to be able to educate their students at a lower cost.
Look at budget return patterns from 15, 20, 25, 30 years ago.
Is this pattern about religion or maybe just about paying high taxes?
Post a Comment
<< Home