Governor’s Funding Plan Faces Resistance
Governor Chris Christie’s proposal to overhaul New Jersey’s school funding system has set off a firestorm of controversy among lawmakers, educators, and others, both locally and across the state. In a speech at Hillsborough High School two weeks ago, Mr. Christie presented his “Fairness Formula” education plan, which would give every school district the same amount of state aid per student.
That plan would see some districts, including Princeton, receiving significantly more state funding and a lowering of property taxes, while aid to many urban districts with the highest percentage of low-income residents would be significantly reduced.
Proposing an amendment to the state constitution to implement his funding plan, Mr. Christie criticized the failure of urban education, with low graduation rates despite high spending per pupil.
Princeton School Board President Andrea Spalla, speaking only for herself, stated that the school board “has not yet had a chance to review the proposal and collectively decide whether to develop a board position on it,” but noted that it struck her as “cynical and hollow that a governor who has failed to follow the existing state law regarding school funding, thus de-funding schools in the state by hundreds of millions of dollars during his time in office, as well as underfunding our public school employee’s pension fund, is now complaining about the ‘unfairness’ of school funding.”
Ms. Spalla continued to warn that even though this proposal might look like a windfall for suburban communities, “if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.”
School board member Dafna Kendal, also responding as an individual, shared Ms. Spalla’s skepticism about the proposal. “While I am in favor of property tax relief,” she said, “I don’t think taking funding away from students in urban districts is the way to do it.”
She characterized Mr. Christie’s proposal as “extremely unfair,” and questioned, “If the Governor’s reasoning for changing the funding formula is that money isn’t achieving the desired results in the Abbott districts, what will taking away most of their funding achieve? The lack of school funding is not because state aid is distributed unevenly, but because Governor Christie has strategically starved public education by diverting public funds away from public schools.”
Princeton University’s director of the program in teacher preparation, Christopher J. Campisano, termed Mr. Christie’s “fair funding” plan as “unconstitutional” and “anything but fair.” Quoting from the state constitution, Mr. Campisano discussed some of the historical background to the current school funding formula. “Actions taken by the New Jersey State Supreme Court,” he added “represent this country’s longest running effort to address inequities in educational opportunity and the Court’s decisions have made clear, time and time again, that the starting line and the race are not the same for all students.”
Citing the constitutional requirement to provide a “thorough and efficient” education for all, Mr. Campisano stated that “the State is legally required to provide funding at a level that will enable each district to deliver this constitutional mandate.”
Mr. Campisano went on to characterize the governor’s proposal as “shortsighted,” claiming that it “establishes an adversarial relationship between school districts, and does not represent our true values or best intentions in terms of equal opportunity.”
Mr. Christie, in support of his proposal, has cited relatively low graduation rates in Asbury Park, Camden, Newark, and 28 other School Development Authority districts that have received far more state funding than other more successful New Jersey districts. (About $5.1 billion of direct state support goes to the 31 SDA districts while about $4 billion goes to the remaining 546 districts).
State lawmakers in the assembly and senate seem to be mostly divided on partisan lines, with many Republicans in support of Mr. Christie’s “fair funding” proposals, and many Democrats decrying the plan and its potential consequences for urban districts and their students.