Showing posts with label Asbury Park. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Asbury Park. Show all posts

Friday, March 13, 2020

2020-21 State Aid: Closer to Equality?

Note, this was written before Coronavirus. It was accurate back in February, but the parts about aid gains are inaccurate now because the $336 million in new revenue was cancelled.

Updated state aid disparities are here.  The 2020-21 deficit for underaided districts will be $1.9 billion.

2020-21's state aid distribution is the fourth year of New Jersey's attempt to bring equality to NJ's K-12 state aid through the combination of increasing the overall state aid package and redistributing Adjustment Aid from overaided districts to underaided districts, with Phil Murphy's proposed $491 million increase the largest increase NJ's schools have gotten since the 2011-12 Great Recession rebound year, but with the new aid focused on NJ's most severely underaided districts.

I admit that back in the 2016-2017 gubernatorial campaign, I had doubts about Phil Murphy's commitment to state aid equality, but the 2020-21 budget, which cuts Adjustment Aid by $155 million, puts those doubts to rest.

Starting with Chris Christie's final budget in 2017-18 and including 2020-21, New Jersey has now redistributed $307 million in Adjustment Aid.  The combination of that $307 million plus $1.3 billion in new state aid has dramatically reduced the number of districts who are severely underaided, from 50 districts with deficits over $4,000 a student in 2016-17, to only fifteen in 2020-21.

To put it in terms of what percentage of their state aid districts are receiving, we went from a recent peak of 141 districts getting less than 50% of their state aid in 2016-17, to only three getting less than 50% in 2020-21: Atlantic City, South Hackensack, and Cumberland County Vo-tech.

Looking at all districts, if New Jersey can provide the money promised in Phil Murphy's February 25th budget speech, the median district is only underaided by $331 per student, a recent low.  Back in 2016-17 and 2017-18, the median deficit was over $500 per student.  The median district now gets 88% of its SFRA aid target too, a recent record, compared to the median district getting less than 85% four years ago.

Despite the $491 million proposed infusion of aid into the underaided districts, their deficit only shrank by $220 million, from $1.78 billion in 2019-20 to $1.56 billion for 2020-21, due to the dynamic nature of district needs and the constant increase of Adequacy Budgets.




The Overaided:

There are 216 overaided students, with a total of 324,154 students, down from 342,275 in 2019.  The overaided districts have a surplus of $552 million. ($1612 per student, weighted average)




  • There are twelve districts with surpluses over $4,000 per pupil, with Asbury Park at the most overaided, at $8,138 per pupil.
  • There are ten districts with a surplus of $3,000 to $3,999 per pupil.
  • There are 34 districts with a surplus $2,000 to $2,999 per pupil.
  • There are 61 districts with a surplus of $1,000 to $1,999 per pupil.
Weymouth Township in Atlantic County will get 527% of its recommended state aid, or $1,319,479 when SFRA says it only needs $309,300, making it the most overaided in percentage terms of operating districts.

Cape May Point is non-operating (it has only three students), but it gets 927% ($16,339 versus
$1,975). Cape May Point, has a $3,837,923 Local Fair Share and is among the districts that should get $0 aid at all and undergo involuntary consolidation. 

I exclude Interdistrict Choice money from my comparisons because Interdistrict Choice money is outside of SFRA, but if I included Choice money, Deal would be NJ's most overaided, receiving over 1,000% of its recommended state aid.

I will now profile specific state aid information for three overaided districts, Asbury Park, Pemberton, and Jersey City.

Asbury Park Starts to Meet Reality

Asbury Park has long been ridiculously overfunded and overaided.  The fact that Asbury Park was literally America's highest-spending district among K-12s with more than 500 students and was academically in NJ's bottom 5%, is one of several pieces of evidence that the premise of Abbottism where exceptionally high-spending can be transformative is wrong.

Some Democrats acknowledge that excessive spending has failed in Asbury Park, but Asbury Park became the Republican poster child for Abbott waste, and the favorite Republican talking point to argue that NJ needed to change state aid.

S2 has already lowered Asbury Park's state aid from $55.4 million to $44.6 million, from 2016-17 to 2020-21. In dollars per student, Asbury Park's state aid has fallen from $24,258 to $20,965 per student.


Yet, since S2 is lowering Asbury Park's state aid, it's disappointing to see Republicans condemn all of the $155 million in Adjustment Aid redistribution, without any attempt to have a nuanced view.

EG, Assemblyman Brian Bergen provides an example of this anti-conservativism.  Although most districts in Bergen's District 25 are gaining state aid, Bergen condemns all redistribution
MORRIS PLAINS, N.J. – Gov. Phil Murphy’s proposed spending plan has nearly 200 school districts across the state losing $155 million in aid. Assemblyman Brian Bergen, who represents parts of Morris and Somerset counties as part of the 25th legislative district, which is losing more than $3.7 million, wants the governor to fully fund schools. 
“Only 64 percent of schools are getting increases, the rest will remain flat or continue to lose millions as part of a failed school funding formula that is hurting districts across the state,” said Bergen (R-Morris). “Among the towns I represent, there are five school districts facing a cut of more than $3.7 million and this is on top of what they lost last year.”
If Republicans are supposed to be the defenders of state taxpayers, why are they implicitly condemning redistribution which saves state taxpayers tens of millions a year, including normalizing education spending in NJ's most inefficient district?

The Pemberton State Aid Issue

Pemberton is not a high-profile district, it has consistently been one of New Jersey's most overaided districts, with a surplus of $36 million ($7900 per student) in SFRA's first year of 2008-09 and still possessing a $18.2 million surplus, the sixth most, ($4,248 per student), in 2019-20.

Pemberton made state headlines this March because it was the subject of an error by the Department of Education where the DOE used 2018 data on a district's total tax rate and therefore missed that Pemberton now had an above-average tax rate and had therefore reached S2's exemption from Adjustment Aid cuts for Abbott SDA districts.

Although much was made of the DOE's error and it made New Jersey give an an additional $2.2 million to Pemberton (so Pemberton's state aid surplus is $4,152 per student), the real mistakes are:


  • The New Jersey Supreme Court's rigid & artificial division of low-income districts into Abbotts and non-Abbotts, where the only difference is that Abbotts were ranked as DFG A or B according to the 1980 Census and also had the Department of Community Affairs's "urban status."  (See the "The Abbott List Has Always Been Unfair")
    • Pemberton's continuing inclusion on the Abbott list, despite the fact that it was placed in DFG CD after the 1990 Census
      • SFRA and S2's continuation of various privileges for Abbotts.


Regarding the last point, S2 created difference standards to protect Adjustment Aid for Abbotts and non-Abbotts.

This is the Abbott threshold for Adjustment Aid preservation that applies to Pemberton, even though Pemberton doesn't meet the NJ Supreme Court's Abbott standard anyway.
(2) An SDA district that is located in a municipality in which the equalized total tax rate is greater than the Statewide average equalized total tax rate for the most recent available calendar year and is spending above adequacy as calculated pursuant to section 1 of P.L.2018, c.67 (C.18A:7F-70) shall be subject to a reduction not to exceed the amount by which the district is spending above adequacy multiplied by the corresponding percentage included in subsection b. of this section

And this is the threshold for Adjustment Aid preservation in non-Abbotts.

(3) A school district, other than an SDA district, that is located in a municipality in which the equalized total tax rate is at least 10 percent greater than the Statewide average equalized total tax rate for the most recent available calendar year and is spending at least 10 percent below adequacy.

Moreover, Pemberton's taxes are only trivially above New Jersey's average, so there is no "municipal overburden" issue.

New Jersey's average equalized tax rate is 2.276.

Pemberton Township has a 2.293 tax rate and Pemberton Borough has a 1.909 tax rate, and residents of both towns get "free" PreK for their kids.

So multiple articles and tweets were published after the Department of Education made a mistake with Pemberton's state aid, but Abbottist jurisprudence and S2 are where the substantive mistakes lie.

Jersey City's Economic Boom

Powered by its surging tax base, income, and upward tweaks to the Local Fair Share formula, Jersey
Jersey City's tax base is now equal to suburbs usually
considered to be wealthy.
City's Local Fair Share grew from $474 million to $522 million (+10%) which is $16,960 per student, which is the same as districts often considered "wealthy," such as South Orange-Maplewood, Freehold Township, Glen Rock, Sparta, Parsippany, and Metuchen.

To put it another way, Jersey City has only 2.3% of NJ's K-12 students, it has 2.7% of the tax base.

Jersey City, unlike the suburban districts above, has poorer students, so it does get Equalization Aid ($91.4 million for 2020-21), but its tax base is growing so quickly that in only two years it will be ineligible for Equalization Aid and that Equalization Aid will become Adjustment Aid that is then eliminated.

Note: although Jersey City's state aid has been cut by $86 million in the past four years, its tax base growth has been more rapid than its Adjustment Aid cuts, hence, it has become more overaided, not less.

Adequacy Budget for Equalization AidLocal Fair ShareAmount of Equalization AidTotal K-12 AidAdjustment Aid
2017-18$584,758,085$370,261,455$214,496,630$410,404,292$151,554,542
2020-21$613,543,941$522,089,435$91,454,506$324,393,336$185,321,537


The Overaided Surplus has Shrunk by Less than the Adjustment Aid Reduction

The overaided districts have a total surplus of $551,589,097, which is lower than 2019-20's $640 million surplus, although the reduction is less than $155 million in lost Adjustment Aid.  

The steady rebound of Adjustment Aid despite four years of losses 

Why?  Local Fair Share growth and further enrollment loss.  

This is because S2 bases the cut on Adjustment Aid on the "state aid differential" for the upcoming school year, 2020-21.  When the DOE calculated state aid for 2020-21, they must have originally had overaided districts with a $707 million surplus, and then reduced that by 23%, in accordance with the stipulations of S2.

Again, Jersey City's tax base growth merits special attention.  From 2019-20 to 2020-21, Jersey City'sLocal Fair Share grew from $474,039,468 to $522,089,435 (+$48 million), while its Adequacy Budget fell from $623 million to $614 million. As Jersey City's Equalization Aid fell, it was converted to Adjustment Aid, which then became subject to S2's 23% reduction requirement.

Note, although the surplus is $551.6 million, not all of that is subject to redistribution, due to provisions in S2 that protect vo-techs and Abbotts (like Pemberton) and non-Abbotts with higher-than-average taxes.

The Underaided: 

Phil Murphy's budget was developed in February 2020, before the coronavirus outbreak hit New Jersey and the rest of the USA.  The revenue projections the FY2021 budget proposal were built on are no longer accurate and cuts are a possibility, but I shall discuss how Phil Murphy's budget proposal would have affected underaided districts anyway.

There are 375 underaided districts, up from 370 in 2019-20. The underaided districts have 1,018,824 students.  As mentioned earlier, their total deficit is $1.56 billion.

  • There are 44 districts with deficits between $1,000 and $1,999 per pupil.
  • There are 34 districts with deficits between $2,000 and $2,999 per pupil.
  • There are 23 districts with deficits between $3,000 and $3,999 per pupil.
  • There are fifteen districts with deficits more than $4,000 per pupil.
The districts with the largest deficits in dollars per student in 2020-21 are:

DistrictDeficit Dollars PPDistrictDeficit Dollars PP
EDGEWATER PARK-$3,823PLAINFIELD CITY (A)-$4,609
TRENTON-$3,895ATLANTIC CO VOC.-$4,729
MERCHANTVILLE-$3,907DOVER (VICTORY GARDENS)-$4,752
MANVILLE-$3,948PASSAIC COUNTY VOC.-$5,033
BRIDGETON (A)-$3,951BOUND BROOK-$5,184
RIVERSIDE-$4,057FAIRVIEW BORO-$5,464
MANCHESTER REG-$4,103HI NELLA-$5,658
FREEHOLD BORO-$4,384LINDENWOLD-$5,877
DOVER TOWN-$4,525CUMBERLAND CO VOC.-$8,167
NORTH PLAINFIELD-$4,552ATLANTIC CITY-$9,087

For some of the above districts, the deficits remain large due to some combination of steady (weighted) enrollment growth combined with income loss or tax base erosion.

But to focus on the good news, the districts who were the most severely underaided in 2016-17 have made steady gains, with the important exception of Atlantic City.


DistrictDeficit Per Pupil in 2016-17Gain in Dollars Per Student for 2017-18Gain in Dollars Per Student for 2018-19Gain in Dollars Per Student for 2019-20Gain in Dollars Per Student for 2020-21Deficit Per Pupil in 2020-21
Dover-$6,558$417$776$868$1,453-$4,525
Guttenberg-$6,645$511$1,337$392$916-$2,888
Ridgefield Park-$6,740$491$1,764$290$432-$1,439
Atlantic City-$7,270$816$700$1,718$2,685-$9,087
Hi Nella-$7,302$427$817$981$1,712-$5,658
Atlantic Co Voc-Tech-$7,529$733$2,213$888$1,439-$4,729
Passaic Co Voc-Tech-$7,551$520$1,302$914$1,625-$5,033
Fairview Boro-$7,625$630$1,951$937$1,676-$5,464
Freehold Boro-$8,243$0$1,890$851$1,282-$4,384
Manchester Reg-$8,698$653$1,830$850$1,074-$4,103
East Newark-$8,716$397$514$464$646-$2,203
Bound Brook-$9,836$865$2,289$1,013$1,591-$5,184


--------


Saturday, December 15, 2018

NJ School District Consolidation and Tax Apportionment


A major political saga of 2019 is going to be the fate of Senate President Steve Sweeney "Path to Progress" tax savings recommendations.

Sweeney's task force differs from many previous attempts to address property taxes in New Jersey by making an assumption that NJ has a spending problem, not a revenue problem, and therefore makes 40 recommendations to help rein in state and local spending in New Jersey.

One of "Path to Progress's" recommendation that I'll address here is the recommendation to consolidate all non-K-12 districts into K-12 districts.

This blog post will then identify the complexities that will arise in tax apportionment in newly-consolidated districts and why taxation must be apportioned by Equalized Valuation and not student enrollment.

---- The Consolidation Recommendation ----

As NJ State Senator Vin Gopal writes:

One of the smartest ways to provide property tax savings is to regionalize services where we can save tax dollars while providing equal or better service.

Let’s start with school regionalization. On average, more than 50 percent of every property tax bill goes into funding education from preschool to 12th grade. New Jersey students score second only to Massachusetts on national standardized exams, and the quality of our schools is one of our best selling points as a state.
But we can do better and at a lower cost. Too often, our K-4, K-6 and K-8 school districts do not coordinate curriculum or teaching methods, textbooks or specialized services with the regional high school districts their children will be attending, so 7th and 9th graders arrive with different skill sets. 
Furthermore, a recent analysis showed that the 120 K-4 to K-8 school districts with 480 or fewer students spent 17 percent more on average — about $3,400 per child — than the 360 districts with more than 1,000 students. 
Clearly, it makes sense on both an educational and a cost basis to move forward with K-12 regionalization plans that will create larger districts with the more diverse curriculum that students need heading into high school while saving on duplicative administrative and back-office operations.

----Background on Enrollment and Taxes----

Although K-12 districts educate 71% of NJ's students, they are actually just 22% of NJ's geographically-defined districts.  (NJ non-geographically defined districts are charter schools, special education districts, and vo-techs.)
  • K-6, 56 districts, 12% of the total districts, but only 32,410 students, or 3.1% of enrollment.
  • K-8, 222 districts, 47% of the total, but only 179,473 students, or 17.2% of enrollment. 
  • 7-12 and 9-12, 64 districts, 14% of the total, but only 90,235 students, 8.7% of enrollment. 
  • K-12, 131 districts, 28% of the total, but 740,311 students, 71% of enrollment.
Overall, NJ's K-6s and K-8s have a slightly disproportionate share of NJ's overall tax base relative to K-12s but a much wider variation in wealth than K-12s.  K-6 and K-8 districts range from NJ's fourth poorest district in tax base, Woodlynne, whose Local Fair Share is only $2,343 per student, to all fifteen of NJ's richest districts in tax base, with Avalon as the absolute richest, whose Local Fair Share is $1,935,039 per student.

Of the sixty districts in NJ with the highest tax bases per student, 42 are K-6 or K-8 districts.

District TypeDistrict NameLocal Fair Share Per StudentDistrict TypeDistrict NameLocal Fair Share Per Student
K-8Avalon Boro$1,935,039K-8Colts Neck $36,596
K-8Stone Harbor Boro$1,146,4547-12 / 9-12Southern Regional$36,285
K-8Alloway Twp$1,006,527K-12Millburn $35,462
K-6Long Beach Island$236,582K-8Tewksbury $34,964
K-6Beach Haven Boro$170,436K-8Florham Park $32,272
K-8Spring Lake Boro$166,397K-8Belmar Boro$32,268
K-8Sea Girt Boro$153,326K-8Bradley Beach Boro$32,085
K-8Andover Reg$151,537K-8Spring Lake Heights Boro$31,695
K-8Bay Head Boro$148,283K-12Princeton$31,619
K-8Lavallette Boro$135,130K-6Edgewater Boro$31,576
K-6Saddle River Boro$121,1367-12 / 9-12Shore Regional$30,669
K-8North Wildwood City$105,581K-12Point Pleasant Beach Boro$30,291
K-8Deal Boro$93,959K-12Summit City$29,903
K-6Cape May City$92,527K-8Mendham Boro$29,491
K-8Margate City$90,812K-12Weehawken $29,326
K-12Hoboken City$79,1067-12 / 9-12Warren Hills Regional$29,205
K-8Englewood Cliffs Boro$70,8047-12 / 9-12Carlstadt-East Rutherford$27,958
K-12Ocean City$65,703K-12Mahwah Twp$27,740
K-8Wildwood Crest Boro$62,655K-12Paramus Boro$27,706
K-8Monmouth Beach Boro$57,5167-12 / 9-12Rumson-Fair Haven Reg$27,539
K-8Avon Boro$56,337K-8Watchung Boro$27,460
K-8Franklin Lakes Boro$45,511K-8Cranbury Twp$26,819
K-8Brigantine City$45,091K-8East Hanover Twp$26,682
K-6Essex Fells Boro$44,064K-8Woodcliff Lake Boro$26,594
K-8Bedminster Twp$40,784K-8North Haledon Boro$26,549
K-6West Cape May Boro$39,498K-8Demarest Boro$26,458
K-8Mendham Twp$38,0437-12 / 9-12Hanover Park Regional$26,254
K-8Carlstadt Boro$37,1127-12 / 9-12Watchung Hills Regional$26,190
K-12Somerset Hills Regional$36,9937-12 / 9-12West Essex Regional$25,963
K-8Rumson Boro$36,919K-6North Caldwell $25,908

So, Sen. Vin Gopal's statement about high spending is slightly incomplete about the causation of high average spending in small districts because many K-6s and K-8s are extremely rich in tax base and they skew the spending average higher.  Avalon Boro alone is an outlier and skews the spending of K-8s higher.

NJ Districts with the Highest Spending PP. The Small Districts on This List Have Huge Tax Bases
District TypeName2016-17 Total Spending Per PupilDistrict TypeName2016-17 Total Spending Per Pupil
B. K-8 / 0 - 400Avalon Boro$61,489B. K-8 / 0 - 400Alpine Boro$30,633
F. K-12 / 1801 - 3500Asbury Park City$36,957G. K-12 / 3501 +Lakewood Twp$30,441
B. K-8 / 0 - 400Margate City$34,881C. K-8 / 401 - 750Brigantine City$29,886
B. K-8 / 0 - 400Stone Harbor Boro$34,679H. 7-12 / 9-12Shore Regional$29,864
B. K-8 / 0 - 400North Wildwood City$34,213B. K-8 / 0 - 400Spring Lake Boro$29,642
H. 7-12 / 9-12Henry Hudson Reg.$32,760H. 7-12 / 9-12Monmouth Reg.$29,230
A. K-6Beach Haven Boro$32,305D. K-8 / 751 +Colts Neck Twp$29,007
H. 7-12 / 9-12Carlstadt-East Rutherford$32,230G. K-12 / 3501 +East Orange$28,655
A. K-6Long Beach Island$32,077E. K-12 / 0 - 1800Burlington City$28,460
B. K-8 / 0 - 400Califon Boro$31,485D. K-8 / 751 +Franklin Lakes $28,315
B. K-8 / 0 - 400Milford Boro$31,446G. K-12 / 3501 +Neptune Twp$28,252
C. K-8 / 401 - 750Demarest Boro$31,226C. K-8 / 401 - 750Mendham Twp$28,113
G. K-12 / 3501 +Camden City$31,151B. K-8 / 0 - 400East Amwell $28,109
E. K-12 / 0 - 1800Keansburg Boro$30,950B. K-8 / 0 - 400Frenchtown $28,008
H. 7-12 / 9-12High Point Reg.$30,800H. 7-12 / 9-12Northern Valley Reg.$27,945

---- To Apportion Taxes By Enrollment or Tax Base, That is the Question ----


Because there will be situations where K-6 and K-8 districts will be merged with districts who are much less wealthy or more wealthy than they are, a battle will arise on how taxes are to be apportioned.
  • If taxes are apportioned by enrollment -- so that a town that contributes 15% of the students pays 15% of the costs even if it does not possess 15% of the tax base -- then there will be divergences in tax rate between the towns.  
  • If taxes are apportioned by Equalized Valuation -- so that a town that has 15% of the tax base pays 15% of the costs -- then tax rates between the towns will be equal, although per pupil costs will diverge. 
To illustrate this point about how enrollment and tax base will not line up, let's just consider a hypothetical "Northeastern Monmouth Regional School District," which would consist of the six towns who now send students to Asbury Park High School: Lake Como, Deal, Allenhurst, Belmar, Interlaken, and Asbury Park itself.



Since Asbury Park has 71% of the students at this consolidated district, it would have to pay 71% of the costs, which is triple its share of the tax base.

Deal, which has 35% of the combined tax base, would pay merely 6% of the costs to match its 6% of the total enrollment.

Mathematically, Asbury Park's tax rate would be 18x what Deal's is if taxes are based on enrollment.

If taxes are based on enrollment, then the tax bases of Deal, Allenhurst, Interlaken, and to a lesser extent Belmar and Lake Como would effectively be "walled off" from being tapped and the tax base would appear artificially low in the eyes of SFRA.  The State of New Jersey would then have to deliver unneeded Equalization Aid.  Apportioning taxes by enrollment would thus make a mockery out of SFRA since the Equalized Valuations of towns with high tax base:enrollment ratios would be untouchable by the consolidated school districts.

BY CONTRAST, under tax apportionment by Equalized Valuation, every district would have an equal tax rate, although taxes per student would be very high and Deal, Interlaken, and Allenhurst. They would probably end up paying over $100,000 per student they actually send to the new district.

Many people living in Deal, Interlaken, and Allenhurst would argue that that is "unfair" to make them pay more per student than less-wealthy towns, but is it "unfair" if the taxpayers in a wealthy section of a town pay more per student than the taxpayers in a poor section? Is it unfair if the owners of a $600,000 house pay more per student than the owners of a $400,000 house?

If taxes were apportioned by enrollment, a family living in Asbury Park would pay thousands of dollars more per year in property taxes than a family living in a property of identical value in another town.  Since the tax rates would vary so much, even houses worth $100,000 in Asbury Park would pay more in school taxes than $1+ million houses in Deal, Interlaken, and Allenhurst.

The phenomenon of staggeringly unequal tax rates already happens in Manchester Regional High School in Passaic County, where North Haledon, Prospect Park, and Haledon have a unique hybrid tax apportionment formula that is based 50% on Equalized Valuation and 50% on enrollment.

Although North Haledon has 60% of the three towns' tax base, it only pays  21% of the taxes.  Conversely, Prospect Park has only 14% of the tax base, but it must pay 31% of the taxes.


See "Manchester Regional: NJ's Most Underaided and Divided School District"

If apportionment by student enrollment is duplicated in all consolidated districts, then inequality like will exist through New Jersey.

---- Conclusion ----

The elected officials who are promoting consolidation in the Path to Progress deserve respect for taking on multiple third-rails of NJ politics in school spending and home rule.

However, consolidation isn't something that will save every taxpayer money, even if school district administrative expenses decrease.  If newly consolidated school districts apportion taxes by Equalized Valuation, which I see as the only fair way to have apportionment, then some towns that have walled off their tax bases behind "home home" independence are going to have to pay higher taxes (aka, their fair share).

Although towns who have high ratios of tax base:students will resist fighting their fair share and make this an uphill struggle, it's a battle to make sure that all New Jersey taxpayers have somewhat equal burdens for local education and therefore a battle worth fighting.

-----

See Also





















So