Transcripts of meetings...

... in progress...

Assemblyman proposes closing five institutions for developmental disabled
by Susan K. Livio/The Star-Ledger
Thursday January 08, 2009, 6:00 AM


Five of the seven state institutions for people with developmental disabilities would close within five years and the money now spent on them would be used for community housing under a bill a prominent lawmaker is expected to announce today.

Assembly Budget Chairman Louis Greenwald (D-Camden) expects a fight from state labor leaders, which represent nearly 8,000 workers, and families who prefer the around-the clock care provided by the developmental centers.

But he says there are compelling moral and economic reasons to "radically restructure" the way the state spends money on people with developmental disabilities.

"We are warehousing human life," Greenwald said Wednesday. "We pride ourselves on being a progressive state in health care and science, but New Jersey is so far behind other states in this area. Every other state has closed 140 institutions, and New Jersey has not closed one in 10 years."

Greenwald said the state can no longer afford to support seven institutions, where it costs about $227,000 to house each of their 2,900 residents. He estimated community care would cost less than half of that amount.

"In the economic crisis, we face an opportunity to change failed public policy," Greenwald said.

The facilities, funded by the state and federal governments, cost $384 million in a year to operate, according to the state Department of Human Services.

Under Greenwald's bill, two centers -- one in north Jersey, the other in south Jersey -- would remain open to accommodate the people who want to stay.

The state Division of Developmental Disabilities has moved 176 developmental center residents to community homes over the past two years, division spokeswoman Pam Ronan said. State officials support the bill's concept, "but we are currently reviewing each provision."

State Human Services officials say there are roughly 2,400 people living at institutions who are willing and able to move to community housing.

Reaction to the bill was mixed. Families, advocacy groups and labor leaders said they were stunned by its ambitious scope.

Robin Sims, whose 25-year-old daughter with autism is living happily at Hunterdon Developmental Center, said the bill "shows no respect" to families like hers.

"Why don't they ever talk to the people it affects?" Sims said. She said she has seen some people leave Hunterdon, only to have their medical and psychological conditions regress because community-based care is lacking.

Joseph Young, executive director for Disability Rights New Jersey, which sued the state on behalf of people who want to leave institutions and 8,000 others living with families who are on a waiting list for state-funded housing, called the bill "an incredibly ambitious program.

"Whether they can logistically do it I have no idea, but clearly they are headed in the right direction," Young said.

Don Klein, executive vice president for Local 1040 Communications Workers of America, said the bill appears to be a stunt to save money at the expense of fragile disabled people.

"In our facilities, the residents get occupational therapy, physicians, dentists -- the whole array." The bill is "an assault on these folks," he added.

Norman Reim, spokesperson for the state Council on Developmental Disabilities, praised Greenwald "for taking this on and looking for a long-term strategy."

Reim, however, said the savings may not come right away, noting that when the state closed the North Princeton Developmental Center in Montgomery 11 years ago, a lot of the money was plowed back into creating community services. "You won't reap the savings until a centers is closed, until the last person leaves," he said.

The bill would create a 17-member Community Services Planning Council for Persons with Disabilities responsible for drafting the plan within six months to phase out the five centers and move willing and able people into community housing. The council would be comprised of state officials, advocacy group members, housing provider agencies, families, union leaders and professional experts.

Within five years of the law's enactment, 80 percent of the developmental center population would be placed in the community.

Housing

Section 8
New Jersey Department of Community Affairs (DCA)
Division of Housing & Community Resources
101 South Broad StreetPO Box 051
Trenton, NJ 08625-0051
Telephone: 609-292-4080
Website: www.nj.gov/dca/dh/section8/index.shtml

The objective of Section 8 is to provide housing that is affordable to very low-income households in the private rental market. Households must meet eligibility requirements. Through Section 8, renters pay no more than 30 percent of their adjusted monthly income towards their monthly rent and utilities. The balance of the rent is paid directly to the owner of the rental property. A helpful publication, Guide to the Section 8 Housing Program, is available through the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs. For more information on Section 8, you can contact both the state and county offices.

Atlantic County
609-441-3334

Bergen County
201-996-8990

Burlington County
856-614-3300

Camden County
856-614-3300

Cape May County
609-463-0036

Cumberland County
856-453-3820

Essex County
973-266-2822

Gloucester County
856-935-4700

Hudson County
201-217-7256

Hunterdon County
908-707-9010

Mercer County
609-292-8537

Middlesex County
732-777-6999

Monmouth County
732-780-6772

Morris County
973-631-6285

Ocean County
732-255-0818

Passaic County
973-225-7146

Salem County
856-935-4700

Somerset County
908-707-9010

Sussex County
973-383-5602

Union County
908-820-3256

Warren County
908-475-5703

Section 8 Homeownership
Telephone: 609-292-9025
Through the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs, participants in the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program can also purchase a home using their Section 8. The voucher is applied to the mortgage payment, instead of the rent. The Section 8 Homeownership program also provides housing counseling and information about financial and community resources.

Public Housing
Telephone: 609-292-3000 (For a listing of local housing authorities in New Jersey)
Website: http://www.nj.gov/dca/codes/affdhousing/affdhsgguide/index2.shtml (Guide to Affordable Housing in New Jersey)As with Section 8, the objective of the public housing program is to provide housing that is affordable to very low-income households. This federal program is administered by local housing authorities, of which there are about 100 in New Jersey. Most housing authorities have rental units, but some have houses for sale. Rents and sale prices depend on household income, and public housing authorities may give priority to people who live or work in the communities they serve.

Homeless Prevention Program
Telephone: 609-889-6720
The homeless prevention program may be able to provide limited financial assistance to those who, because of temporary financial problems beyond one’s control, face eviction or foreclosure. For individuals and families who have become homeless, financial assistance may be provided to help secure permanent housing.

Subsidized Housing for Seniors & Disabled
Telephone: 609-292-3000 (For a listing of subsidized housing for seniors & disabled)
Website: http://www.nj.gov/dca/codes/affdhousing/affdhsgguide/index2.shtml (Guide to Affordable Housing in New Jersey)Subsidized Housing specifically designated for seniors and people with disabilities is available throughout the state. To locate subsidized housing for seniors and people with disabilities in your area, contact your local county office for the disabled and/or you local county office on aging. County contact sheets, which list the contacts for these offices, are available through Brain Injury Association of New Jersey.



www.njhousing.gov

The New Jersey Housing Resource Center, a FREE online, searchable registry of affordable and special needs housing located in New Jersey. Additional housing resources may be available at your county level, including non-profit agencies that assist residents in finding and obtaining affordable housing. For more information on your county resources, dial 211 and be connected to the Information & Resources Helpline for health and human services, community resources and governmental assistance for your county.

SPAN - Statewide Parent Advocacy Network, Inc.: http://www.spannj.org/

35 Halsey St.
Newark, NJ. 07202

Telephone: 973-642-8100

Homeownership for the Developmentally Disabled

The HMFA initiated the Developmental Disability Home Ownership Program in order to assist individuals with disabilities to purchase a home and/or to modify a residence to make it accessible for the prospective homeowner. The program is available to prospective borrowers who have a developmental disability, who are at least 18 years of age, who have the legal capacity (or a co-signer with the legal capacity) to enter into contract, and who can demonstrate sufficient income to support the mortgage loan. Additionally, the Division of Developmental Disabilities Regional Office Assistant Director (RAD), Intake Manager, or other appropriate DDD designee must refer eligible borrowers, in writing consistent with requirements of the Department of Human Services 1994 Capital Bond Act.

For information contact Yirgu Wolde, Community Development Officer, 609-278-7521.

July 26, 1981
New Jersey Housing; NEW SCHOOL IS 'HOME' TO DISABLED YOUNG
By ELLEN RAND
NYTIMES

PARAMUS WHEN Lauren Valenta was 2 years old, doctors advised her parents that she had cerebral palsy and should be institutionalized because, as her mother recalled, there was ''nothing for her.'' Undaunted, the family moved from Sussex County to Bergen County largely because the latter had a program for such handicapped youngsters.

Earlier this month, Lauren, who is now 6, was among the initial group of more than 100 students to be enrolled in the state's first regional day school for the multiply handicapped. The school occupies a new building in Paramus, and its opening might be said to represent as much of a meeting of challenges as Lauren's own.

The school is the first of 11 regional facilities whose construction was given the go-ahead in 1973, when New Jersey voters approved a $25 million bond issue. Of the 10 other facilities, five are under construction (in Atlantic, Salem, Ocean, Middlesex and Morris Counties), three are scheduled (in Camden, Mercer and Hudson Counties) and bids have been received for the remaining two (in Essex County).

Unlike the Bergen County school, these 10 also will serve the needs of deaf, deaf-blind and severely emotionally disturbed children. At the time of the bond issue, the Bergen County Special Services School District was operating its program out of space it had rented from Bergen Community College. Why has it taken eight years for the first of the 11 schools to open?

''I wish you hadn't asked that,'' said Dr. Frank Johnson, a planning associate in the state's Department of Education. ''Actually, we probably went as fast as we could. In the beginning, several plans were advanced, including use of a few surplus schools that some people wished to be considered. It took time to extricate the state from those kinds of negotiations.''

As planning proceeded, it also became clear that it would be more desirable to have 11 smaller schools built rather than the five that were called for in the bond issue. The state's Attorney General had to rule on that decision.

And considerable time was spent in acquiring the land, at no cost, for these schools. To do this, the Department of Education had to negotiate with the counties, cities, local Boards of Education or colleges that owned the property involved.

According to Dr. Russell Layden, Superintendent of Bergen County's Special Services School District, much of the credit for convincing legislators and the Department of Education to locate one of these special schools in Bergen County belongs to the county's Board of Chosen Freeholders, the school's parents' group and its Board of Trustees. (The school is owned by the state and run by the county.)

Ironically, none of the children involved in the county's program for the multiply handicapped eight years ago will be students in the new $3.2 million facility in Paramus.

The new school is designed to serve as many as 155 pupils, ranging in age from 3 to 21, from Bergen, north Hudson and Passaic Counties. In Dr. Layden's words, it is ''one of the most barrier-free schools in the country. It has everything we feel that the handicapped will need. Fortunately, the architect was listening to what we were saying.''

All concerned had told the Iselin-based architectural firm of Rothe-Johnson Associates that the school should not look like an institution. Only half joking, Leon Butchko, the program director, pointed out that the color green had been expressly forbidden.

Instead, the interior, which imparts a sense of airiness because of the use of skylights and clerestory windows, is painted in what Mr. Butchko referred to as ''ice cream colors'' (cream, blue and tangerine pastels).

But the planning process behind the school delved beyond surface esthetics. Acknowledging that the first months of work on the school were an emotionally difficult period, Edward N. Rothe, the architect, explained that months of observing the children, interviewing their teachers and therapists, visiting other facilities - and even testing ideas and hardware by sitting in wheelchairs - helped his concern to devise its plan.

For example, since the children spend much of their time in activities on the floor, the architects adopted a vinyl floor that is easy to maintain and is warmed with hot air recycled from the roof. And rather than have the youngster staring up from the floor at fluorescent lights, indirect lighting is provided.

The key design element of the 45,000-square-foot, single-level school is a spine-like corrider, which the architects prefer to compare to a street. There are clusters of classrooms on one side of the corridor, and therapy rooms, an infirmary, a vocational workshop, a gymnasium and a ''home training center'' on the other side.

The last two elements are particularly important, according to Mr. Butchko. ''The gym is the one place that lets children be children,'' he said. ''They're supposed to be so good so much of the time. They're supposed to be good at home, good on the way to and from school and good in the classroom. It's very important that they have a place to let go.''

The ''home training center,'' which by any other name would still be a small apartment built into the school, has been designed with appliances and bathroom facilities geared to the handicapped. The purpose of the apartment, much like the purpose of the school itself, will be to train young adults in the everyday skills they will need for independent living.

As Mr. Butchko envisions it, two or three students will live in the ''apartment'' for two-week periods. During that time, they will be responsible for maintaining themselves, preparing meals, doing laundry, cleaning up and entertaining guests.

''Many of these kids have not had to take responsibility for the kinds of things we take for granted,'' Mr. Butchko said. ''We still get kids at 16 who have never been to school. At 18, they may not know how to handle personal hygiene. With the 'teaching bathroom,' for instance, they'll learn how to transfer to the bathtub or how to use the shower.''

Mrs. Valenta, who does not know whether her daughter will be able to be ''mainstreamed'' as she grows older, nonetheless thinks that the apartment is a ''great asset.''

As for Lauren, Mrs. Valenta said, she was excited about the new school on opening day partly because it is air-conditioned, partly because there is a poster in her classroom like the one she has in her own room at home and because there is a ''real bathroom in her classroom. She thinks that's top banana.''

''She loves school,'' Mrs. Valenta added, ''but that has nothing to do with the building.'' Clifton 14 Canterbury Drive 3-bedroom, 2 1/2-bath split-level $112,500 Central air-conditioning, finished basement. Taxes: $1,400 Little Falls 17 Villa Road 3-bedroom, 1 1/2-bath split-level $92,000 New driveway, fireplace. Taxes: $1,341 Pequannock 6 Baxter Place 3-bedroom, 2 1/2-bath Colonial $100,000 Pool, electric garage-door opener. Taxes: $2,028 Ringwood 143 Cupsaw Avenue 3-bedroom, 2-bath contemporary $98,900 Cathedral ceiling, central air-conditioning. Taxes: $2,186 Wayne 180 Beechwood Terr. 3-bedroom, 2 1/2-bath Cape Cod $98,500 Deck and brick patio, fish pond. Taxes: $1,641 Sales in Other Areas Avon, Conn. 6 Cottonward Lane 2-bedroom, 2-bath condominium $83,000 Built in 1976. Monthly charges, $119; taxes, $969 West Hartford, Conn. 63 Arnoldale Road 4-bedroom, 2 1/2-bath Tudor $94,500 Built in 1923, gas heat. Taxes: $1,632 Weston, Conn. 42 Mary Lane 4-bedroom, 2 1/2-bath Colonial $180,000 Occupies two acres, built in 1973. Taxes: $2,822

PARAMUS WHEN Lauren Valenta was 2 years old, doctors advised her parents that she had cerebral palsy and should be institutionalized because, as her mother recalled, there was ''nothing for her.'' Undaunted, the family moved from Sussex County to Bergen County largely because the latter had a program for such handicapped youngsters.

Earlier this month, Lauren, who is now 6, was among the initial group of more than 100 students to be enrolled in the state's first regional day school for the multiply handicapped. The school occupies a new building in Paramus, and its opening might be said to represent as much of a meeting of challenges as Lauren's own.

The school is the first of 11 regional facilities whose construction was given the go-ahead in 1973, when New Jersey voters approved a $25 million bond issue. Of the 10 other facilities, five are under construction (in Atlantic, Salem, Ocean, Middlesex and Morris Counties), three are scheduled (in Camden, Mercer and Hudson Counties) and bids have been received for the remaining two (in Essex County).

Unlike the Bergen County school, these 10 also will serve the needs of deaf, deaf-blind and severely emotionally disturbed children. At the time of the bond issue, the Bergen County Special Services School District was operating its program out of space it had rented from Bergen Community College. Why has it taken eight years for the first of the 11 schools to open?

''I wish you hadn't asked that,'' said Dr. Frank Johnson, a planning associate in the state's Department of Education. ''Actually, we probably went as fast as we could. In the beginning, several plans were advanced, including use of a few surplus schools that some people wished to be considered. It took time to extricate the state from those kinds of negotiations.''

As planning proceeded, it also became clear that it would be more desirable to have 11 smaller schools built rather than the five that were called for in the bond issue. The state's Attorney General had to rule on that decision.

And considerable time was spent in acquiring the land, at no cost, for these schools. To do this, the Department of Education had to negotiate with the counties, cities, local Boards of Education or colleges that owned the property involved.

According to Dr. Russell Layden, Superintendent of Bergen County's Special Services School District, much of the credit for convincing legislators and the Department of Education to locate one of these special schools in Bergen County belongs to the county's Board of Chosen Freeholders, the school's parents' group and its Board of Trustees. (The school is owned by the state and run by the county.)

Ironically, none of the children involved in the county's program for the multiply handicapped eight years ago will be students in the new $3.2 million facility in Paramus.

The new school is designed to serve as many as 155 pupils, ranging in age from 3 to 21, from Bergen, north Hudson and Passaic Counties. In Dr. Layden's words, it is ''one of the most barrier-free schools in the country. It has everything we feel that the handicapped will need. Fortunately, the architect was listening to what we were saying.''

All concerned had told the Iselin-based architectural firm of Rothe-Johnson Associates that the school should not look like an institution. Only half joking, Leon Butchko, the program director, pointed out that the color green had been expressly forbidden.

Instead, the interior, which imparts a sense of airiness because of the use of skylights and clerestory windows, is painted in what Mr. Butchko referred to as ''ice cream colors'' (cream, blue and tangerine pastels).

But the planning process behind the school delved beyond surface esthetics. Acknowledging that the first months of work on the school were an emotionally difficult period, Edward N. Rothe, the architect, explained that months of observing the children, interviewing their teachers and therapists, visiting other facilities - and even testing ideas and hardware by sitting in wheelchairs - helped his concern to devise its plan.

For example, since the children spend much of their time in activities on the floor, the architects adopted a vinyl floor that is easy to maintain and is warmed with hot air recycled from the roof. And rather than have the youngster staring up from the floor at fluorescent lights, indirect lighting is provided.

The key design element of the 45,000-square-foot, single-level school is a spine-like corrider, which the architects prefer to compare to a street. There are clusters of classrooms on one side of the corridor, and therapy rooms, an infirmary, a vocational workshop, a gymnasium and a ''home training center'' on the other side.

The last two elements are particularly important, according to Mr. Butchko. ''The gym is the one place that lets children be children,'' he said. ''They're supposed to be so good so much of the time. They're supposed to be good at home, good on the way to and from school and good in the classroom. It's very important that they have a place to let go.''

The ''home training center,'' which by any other name would still be a small apartment built into the school, has been designed with appliances and bathroom facilities geared to the handicapped. The purpose of the apartment, much like the purpose of the school itself, will be to train young adults in the everyday skills they will need for independent living.

As Mr. Butchko envisions it, two or three students will live in the ''apartment'' for two-week periods. During that time, they will be responsible for maintaining themselves, preparing meals, doing laundry, cleaning up and entertaining guests.

''Many of these kids have not had to take responsibility for the kinds of things we take for granted,'' Mr. Butchko said. ''We still get kids at 16 who have never been to school. At 18, they may not know how to handle personal hygiene. With the 'teaching bathroom,' for instance, they'll learn how to transfer to the bathtub or how to use the shower.''

Mrs. Valenta, who does not know whether her daughter will be able to be ''mainstreamed'' as she grows older, nonetheless thinks that the apartment is a ''great asset.''

As for Lauren, Mrs. Valenta said, she was excited about the new school on opening day partly because it is air-conditioned, partly because there is a poster in her classroom like the one she has in her own room at home and because there is a ''real bathroom in her classroom. She thinks that's top banana.''

''She loves school,'' Mrs. Valenta added, ''but that has nothing to do with the building.

NJ DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION REPORTS

Pls take a look thru this... informative..

everything from teacher report cards, school progress reports.. surveys..

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

(Download here)

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009—On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed Public Law 111-5, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). The following Recovery Act tables are available:

A table (last updated 04/02/2009) showing the Initial Release of Recovery Act Funds, by State in PDF [14KB] and MS Excel [44KB]. Initial funds for the following programs were released April 1, 2009 to States that submitted the certification required by section 1607(a) of the Recovery Act:
ESEA Title I Grants to LEAs
IDEA Parts B and C
Rehabilitation Act State Grants
Independent Living State Grants
Services for Older Individuals who are Blind

The initial release of State Fiscal Stabilization Funds, also shown on the table, will occur within 2 weeks of approval of a State's application for these funds.

For many parents that are curious as to where their child is going to go.. pls take a moment and search for the school within this database..

NJ School Report Cards
Source


"The annual New Jersey School Report Card is required under a 1995 state law. It presents thirty-five fields of information for each school in the following categories: school environment, students, student performance indicators, staff, and district finances.

The assessment results displayed on the New Jersey School Report Cards are based on the state assessment data without any NCLB conditions applied. Therefore, the assessment data in the NJ School Report Card may be different from the assessment data displayed on the NCLB Reports where there have been NCLB conditions applied to the test results."

Ever heard of the term.. the devil is in the details?

well...

"Services to Parentally Placed Students with Disabilities in Private Schools (nonpublic)

• Under 34 CFR §300.133(a) each LEA is required to spend a minimum amount of its
subgrants under Part B Grants to States and Preschool Grants programs on children with
disabilities parentally-placed in private elementary and secondary schools. This is also
required for ARRA special education funds. The amount of the proportional share will be
provided when you receive your district allocation letter. "


.... this can be found at the bottom of page 10 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Guidance
for Title I and IDEA -- REVISED

( Download here )

This is an incredibly informative document....

Plunging economy a test for schools
Already-pared budgets are going before voters
Sunday, April 19, 2009
BY KRISTEN ALLOWAY
Star-Ledger Staff

The Bloomfield school district is considering replacing 71 full-time teachers aides with 142 part-timers to save $800,000 on health benefits.

Mount Olive is axing 10 administrative posts, five aides, an art teacher and its Chinese language program.
South Brunswick is eliminating 25 central office jobs and offers a budget with no tax increase -- the first time it has done that in more than a decade.

But none of this may be enough.

Voters go to the polls Tuesday in 548 districts to approve school budgets and choose board members. And with the national recession hitting home, this election will test New Jerseyans' love of their schools as much as any in memory.

Districts say it's not as if they're not trying. They are shaving spending, and only 11 will ask voters special permission to raise spending for new positions or projects, down from 70 to 100 "second ballot questions" sought in past years.

"We're seeing a lot of budgets with staff cuts -- non-instructional positions, teachers aides. In some places, teaching staff is being cut," said Frank Belluscio, a spokesman for the New Jersey School Boards Association. "These are not growth budgets that are going to be on the ballot."

Voters will decide if districts are getting close enough to the bone. And even if they reject a budget, their local governing bodies could overrule them.

In the past, voters have been a friendly bunch. Last year, as the financial downturn started to take hold, voters still approved 73.5 percent of the spending plans, slightly better than average for the decade.

"We'd like to believe voters would recognize that our proposed zero increase on expenses and 1.5 percent on the tax levy is very reasonable given the current economic climate, and (that they) would support the budget," said Ray Krov, business administrator for Hunterdon Central Regional High School.

The cuts don't come without costs.

Michele Lehman, 53, a preschool aide for children with autism in Bloomfield, said she will re-apply for one of the part-time jobs if the cuts are maintained. But she thinks many of her colleagues will have to seek full-time jobs elsewhere, and she's concerned about what that means for the students.

"We take data. We teach. We implement behavior programs. We meet with the behaviorist (to be) trained to take care of specific behaviors," Lehman said. "I don't think part-time people will be trained as we were. ... It's about the quality of the education these kids will get."

A second round of federal stimulus money amounting to $609 million and announced by Gov. Jon Corzine Thursday may provide a bit of relief. Bloomfield superintendent Frank Digesere said he is hopeful some of that money may help him save the full-time jobs of his aides, but he still needs to negotiate that with the state and his school board.

He said he had taken the step of eliminating the positions reluctantly, because while children would still be served, employees would lose full-time pay and benefits. "That's not what I wanted to do," he said, "but I didn't have a choice."

The stimulus money has been key to staving off massive cuts and layoffs in New Jersey. Last month, the state used an earlier pot of about $1 billion in stimulus spending to shore up state aid to education.

But although districts received at least as much aid as last year, officials said they still faced difficult choices with rising fixed costs, things like increases in teacher salaries and benefits negotiated before the recession.

Even with the spending cuts Bloomfield planned to implement -- including delayed capital improvements and some custodial positions lost through attrition -- the $85 million budget still will mean an average $174 tax hike for Bloomfield residents with a home assessed at $140,000, Digesere said.

Jerry Cantrell, president of the New Jersey Taxpayers Association, said he is encouraged to see districts budgeting tighter but feels they should do that every year, not just in a time of fiscal crisis.

"In a year as we're experiencing now, it behooves local board members to hold the line. They should be seriously looking at no increase in taxes," Cantrell said.

South Brunswick was able to accomplish that but it meant trimming 25 jobs after the executive Middlesex County superintendent -- a state appointee -- told the district it needed to slash administrative costs and make other cuts, according to superintendent Gary McCartney. The district had already cut 41 positions in the last several years, he said.

This is the first year county superintendents are taking more of a public spending "watch-dog" role, said state Department of Education spokesman Richard Vespucci. The change comes after new regulations were created last year to govern school spending, including a requirement that budgets rise by no more than 4 percent.

"If it's not directly related to teaching a subject, you've got to explain why you're doing it," Vespucci said.

In South Brunswick, 13 of those 25 jobs being eliminated will come through attrition. They include assistant principals at elementary, middle and high schools, a public information officer, aides and custodians.

Should the budget fail, McCartney said, the district might consider "pay to play" fees for extracurricular activities.

Hunterdon Central Regional High School's board managed to keep its tax hike at 1.5 percent by eliminating six positions, hopefully through attrition; delaying the purchase of a school bus and some other equipment; and reducing money spent on printing, according to Krov. Six top-level administrators also volunteered to freeze their salaries for next year.


Staff writer Jeanette Rundquist contributed to this report. Kristen Alloway may be reached at kalloway@starledger.com.

Friday, April 17, 2009
D.O.E. Bait and Switch


The Education Law Center has been busy. After apparently going AWOL after the Judge Peter Doyne ruled last month that the new State Funding Reform Act was constitutional, the ELC has emerged with guns blazing. First was the report that detailed the cuts in school aid from districts with large amounts of impoverished students in spite of the the fact that SFRA guaranteed millions of more dollars. (See post below.) And Wednesday Stan Karp, Director of the ELC’s Secondary Reform Project, testified before the State Board of Education on the D.O.E.’s “ill-advised retreat” from its Secondary Education Initiative (SEI) -- the years-in-the-making architecture designed to raise high school achievement for high school students and whittle away at the achievement gap. Says Karp,

Yet, over the past year, as the Department rolled out its high profile campaign for "secondary transformation," support for SEI has virtually disappeared. Last June, the SFRA regulations watered down SEI requirements. SEI’s well-attended network meetings were abruptly discontinued. The consultant contracts to provide technical assistance to districts were allowed to expire. Department personnel providing implementation support for SEI were released or reassigned. The district pilots designed to test and modify the reforms were never conducted. A research and evaluation plan required by regulation was never developed. The SEI Advisory Committee was disbanded, while a new Secondary Advisory committee required by the SFRA regulations was never convened.

Followers of the D.O.E. will detect a familiar pattern: a kind of "bait and switch" technique that promises reform or improvement and then mysteriously disappears.

We’re thinking about starting a catalogue to keep the D.O.E.'s strange subterfuge straight:

1) N.J. Steps: High School Redesign:
Algebra II is a requirement. On second thought, never mind.
All high schools will require a course in finance. Well, maybe we'll try a pilot program with 6 schools.
All high schools will require a full year of lab chemistry. Hmm. Well, maybe something chemistry-like.
"Personalized learning plans" will be required for all high school students to promote differentiation of instruction. Oops -- no funding. And we really meant just 15 high schools.

2) The D.O.E. will mandate free preschools for all poor three and four year olds.
Just kidding! Maybe for some poor three and four year olds. And there's no funding promised for next year.

3) The D.O.E. will consolidate all non-kindergarten through 12th grade school districts.
Well, maybe most of the ones without actual school buildings. And we really didn't mean consolidation; we were really talking about just sharing services, already widely implemented among N.J.'s 616 school districts.

4)No school districts will lose state aid. In fact, every one will get an increase.
Except for the ones that get decreases, which will be everyone because the D.O.E. is stiffing all districts on their Spring aid payment. Also, some districts that receive "extraordinary aid" for multiply-disabled students will see a zero in that column.

We are accepting contributions for our catalogue.

Now, it's not clear that the D.O.E.'s intent is to scam the public into buying into a plan or a budget that it never intended to deliver. That is an unlikely scenario, with all due apologies to Stan Karp. What is more likely, and not necessarily any better, is that the D.O.E has lost too much credibility to successfully manage a well-intentioned reform of a broken system.
Posted by NJ Left Behind at 11:26 AM

Thursday, April 2, 2009
Consolidation Consensus? Not So Much...


Is school district consolidation efficient or inefficient? Today’s papers give us both sides of the argument. First, the Asbury Park Press reports on a panel discussion in Freehold hosted by the New Jersey Association of School Administrators. Participants included Bruce Baker of Rutgers University, Monmouth County Executive Superintendent Carole Knopp Morris, and State Sen. Jennifer Beck, R-Monmouth. Morris, who has been outspoken about the potential benefits of consolidation in Monmouth, said that creating all K-12 districts would “improve programs and be more cost-effective.” Senator Beck was a bit more circumspect, remarking that the need for voter approval in every affected town might quash any consolidations.

However, over in Mulshine-land, the inimitable columnist for the Star-Ledger gives us his bottom line:

They say that bigger isn't always better.
But dumber is always dumber.
He’s talking generally about the D.O.E.’s mandate that all non-operating school districts be merged into their receiving districts, and specifically about the tiny town of Glen Gardner in Hunterdon County, population 1,902. Elementary-age children go to Clinton Public School and high school kids go to Voorhees High School, part of the North-Hunterdon-Voorhees Regional School District. Of course, Glen Gardner still has a school board that mainly writes checks to Clinton and Voorhees. Mulshine argues that this is a beneficial arrangement all around and that eliminating non-operating districts will only raise taxes and benefit union employees. The D.O.E., when queried, was less than helpful:

[Clinton Mayor Christine] Schaumberg complained that the state Department of Education won't tell the town just how or when this merger will be imposed. Department spokesperson Kathy Forsyth told me, "We know there are a lot of issues surrounding the non-operating districts. The department is working on all these issues and we hope to have a solution soon."

To cap off the debate, Governor Corzine weighed in during a question and answer session with community newspapers at Drumthwackett. CentralJersey reports that his determination to press for consolidation among school districts and municipalities is strong, despite the “difficulty of overcoming grass roots ‘home rule’ resistance.” When asked specifically about the need for non-operating school districts – like Glen Gardner – to maintain school boards to oversee their own students, Corzine replied,

”You would think that you could put together a system that watches out for the spending and the education of the children without having to have another administration."

The governor said that the multiplicity of governments and districts of all kinds in New Jersey is “one of our biggest problems on cost and, I think, on corruption ... so many units and levels without transparency.”

He said that public resistance to consolidation was, in part, due to “a historic failure of political courage. It will only change when people feel and are convinced by their political leadership. ... People have to vote for the people that they think will make this change.”

So there you have it. Mulshine waxes lyrical over Glen Gardner's charm, describing "driving past that red mill on a pond that has graced a thousand postcards and calendars." Corzine talks about trust issues that interfere with a delegation of control and corruption due to New Jersey's 1,900 governmental units. Executive County Superintendent Morris's favorite word is "efficiency," but the odds seem slim that every affected district will support a consolidation proposal.

We're not quite there yet.
Posted by NJ Left Behind at 10:49 AM

Monday, April 13, 2009
Wimping Out on Consolidation


The D.O.E. has ordered Executive County Superintendents to file reports by March 2010 on consolidation of school districts, and word is leaking out that the emphasis will be on the more palatable sharing of services, rather than outright elimination of non-efficient districts. Corzine’s Local Unit Alignment, Reorganization and Consolidation Commission, or LUARCC, which must file reports on consolidating municipalities, seems to be on a similar trajectory. The Trenton Times reports today that while a merger of Hightstown and East Windsor in Mercer County, for example, would yield lower taxes, at least in Highstown, the recent report from LUARCC is takes the wind out of the sails of consolidation enthusiasts. The Times quotes the LUARCC report:
The literature suggests caution in drawing simple conclusions about the cost-efficiencies to be gained through consolidation.
However,

There is ample evidence that service sharing saves municipalities hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars a year ..." providing strong incentives to towns looking to cut costs and balance their budgets.

That tagline urging caution is likely to be the conclusion of many of the ECS’s recommendations: go with the safe, non-controversial sharing of services rather than the panic-inducing consolidation of existing districts. Why not? It will make everyone feel good and who can argue with, say, sharing purchasing or a bit of professional development, or even some special education transportation routes?

Here’s the problem: most districts do this already. They don’t need a governor-appointee to tell them that it’s cheaper to buy paper or toner cartridges in bulk, or that two neighboring districts can share a long trek to a private special education school for a couple of kids. Are municipalities so clueless that they're not doing this already? Or are the reports from LUARCC and the ECS's equally condescending and meaningless?

Sharing services is easy. Getting districts -- or municipalities -- to give up local control is hard, but that’s where the real savings are if the Legislature does it right and allows for a mechanism to even out tax rates. But right now it’s not clear that Corzine has the political will to push either consolidation of municipalities or school districts.

If Corzine is disappointed by the lack of support for his plan to reduce the number of towns in N.J. – there’s 566 of them, and a third house under 5,000 people – Lucille Davy is likely to be equally disappointed by the E.C.S. reports, which will probably recommend sharing of services rather than consolidation. There’s even some blowback from our 25 non-operating school districts. If we can’t get rid of those, then we might as well just throw in the towel right now.
Posted by NJ Left Behind at 1:36 PM