FEES FOR SERVICES:
STUDENT ACTIVITIES AND TRANSPORTATION

Report to the Assembly Education Committee

September 16, 2010

The New Jersey School Boards Association welcomes the opportunity to discuss the topic of assessing fees for participation in student activities and transportation services. We would like to share information collected in the spring from a survey to which 55 percent of the state’s school districts responded, along with data supplied this week by 117 school boards.

School districts across the state must do more with less, including preserving the activities that enhance students’ educational experience. Sports and extra-curricular activities are integral to the school program for many children, their parents, and the community at large.

It is not new for boards of education, administrators and staff to juggle priorities. The first business of schools is to educate the students. Budgeting—and revising those budgets—is an ongoing process. This year, the state of school finances and its impact on local school budgets have dominated many board of education discussions.

We are in extraordinary economic times, and to quote the old song, “somewhere, sometime, somehow, something’s gotta give.” And the “something that’s gotta give” is often extracurricular activities or non-mandatory transportation, or both. In efforts to preserve core educational programs and services, while still providing hazardous route transportation or sports programs and clubs, some school districts are opting to assess fees.

Activity fees are not a new concept. Anecdotal data collected by NJSBA through the summer of 2010 indicated that at least 33 New Jersey school districts were charging parents a fee for participating in extracurricular activities or sports. Some of these districts established fees as early as the mid-1990s.

In 2006, a nationwide school athletic organization reported on a survey showing that 35 percent of schools charged such fees. While the option has not been exercised as frequently by New Jersey public school districts, the current severe economic situation has increased interest in activity fees.

In NJSBA’s March 2010 survey on the impact of reduced school funding, 68 percent of the 324 responding school districts indicated they planned to cut extracurricular activities, such as sports, band and clubs. At the same time, 31 percent said they were considering charging fees for student participation in extracurricular activities—whether or not the district planned to cut back on such programs.

Where fees have been implemented children whose parents cannot afford to pay are not denied access to activities. Federal eligibility for free or reduced-price lunch is often considered, and a number of school districts also have a confidential application process for parents who feel they cannot afford the fees.

An analysis of those districts, which indicated in NJSBA’s March 2010 survey that they were considering activity fees, shows that those of higher socio-economic status were more likely to consider the option. NJSBA broke down the responding districts, using the state Department of Education’s district factor groups, which align districts according to income and education levels, and other variables. We found, for example, that only 20.6 percent of districts in factor group B, the second poorest group, were considering implementing activity fees. In comparison, 58.8 percent of those in factor group J, the wealthiest, were leaning toward establishing such fees.

Of course, between March and September, plans could have changed. Therefore, this week we sought updated information on the topic of activity fees. So far, 117 school districts responded. Of these, 22 said they are charging fees for extracurricular activities.

Let me share some examples of how elementary-level school districts are able to continue engaging students in extracurricular activities by implementing fees:

• Clinton Township in Hunterdon County reports that parents are paying the full cost of all sports and clubs, including the teacher stipend, officiating costs and tournament costs.


• Greenwich Township in Warren County offers clubs at $20 per student, with the exception of performing arts programs for which the charge is higher. That charge ranges from $125 to $200 per student depending on the grade level.


• Denville in Morris County reports flat fees ranging from $75 to $150, according to grade level. Certain clubs are exempt from any charges.


• Chester Township Consolidated in Morris County does not assess a fee for participation in service clubs, such as peer leadership and student government. It does charge $25 for an unlimited number of extra-curricular clubs, with the exception of musical groups that meet outside the regular school day. Participation in those music activities involves a $50 charge annually. Sports will cost $50 per activity, with an annual cap of $100.


• Marlboro in Monmouth County is charging $30 for clubs and $100 for sports, with no discount for multiple activities.


• Morris Plains in Morris County charges $35 per club or sport, with a cap of $100 per student.


• Washington Township in Morris County is charging $35 for clubs and $85 for sports.

High schools offer a far greater range of clubs and sports throughout the year. Here are examples of how activity fees are assessed in a variety of Kindergarten-through-12th grade and high school districts:

• Hunterdon Central Regional is charging a yearly fee for students for sports and clubs. The fee covers participation in multiple activities and has a per-family limit of $200.


• Northern Valley Regional in Bergen County assesses an annual fee of $50 for participation in any athletic or co-curricular activity.


• West Essex Regional charges an annual activity fee of $75 for junior high and $100 for high school, with a maximum charge of $200 per family regardless of the number of students in one household.


• Lenape Valley Regional in Sussex County assesses an annual fee of $100 per student for any sport or co-curricular activity.


• High Point Regional in Sussex has initiated a $50 fee for any extracurricular activity.


• North Warren Regional charges $75 for the first child, up to a maximum of $100 per family for participation in athletics or clubs.


• Montgomery Township in Somerset County charges a $100 maximum annual fee per student to support athletic activities and clubs.


• Kittatinny Regional in Sussex County has instituted an annual $25 fee per family for clubs and $75 for sports participation, with no limit on the number of activities or sports in which a student participates. It is also charging students a parking fee of $50.


• New Milford in Bergen County has an annual fee of $75 for one sport and four clubs. Participation in each additional program costs $50, with a maximum fee of $150. The district has also eliminated sports at the middle school level


• Somerset Hills Regional charges $25 per student to offset the cost of elementary school field trips; $25 per middle school student for participation in any activity, and $75 per high school student for participation in any sport or activity. The middle school sports program is primarily parent funded.


• Haddon Township in Camden County charges a participation fee for sports and activities at the middle and high schools, but not at the elementary school level.


• River Dell Regional in Bergen County established an annual activity fee last year. Middle school students pay $50 each and high school students $75 each, no matter how many activities they join.


• Westfield in Union County charges a $60 annual fee per intermediate and high school student for participation in one or more clubs. The district charges the same amount for elementary school students who are part of the “all-city” music program. Grade 8-through-12 athletics and performing arts participation costs $125 per student.


• Bridgewater-Raritan Regional in Somerset County charges $25 for most clubs, and $100 for each sport, as well as for cheerleading, marching band, rifle team and color guard.

In the best of all possible worlds, school districts would be able to continue offering a wide range of extracurricular activities and sports programs at no charge to students. In our current economic climate, that is not always possible. The New Jersey School Boards Association therefore, believes that school districts need the option of assessing activity fees, so that they can continue to provide a range of extracurricular activities to positively engage students and enhance their education.

Under state law, school districts must provide transportation to students who live more than two miles from an elementary school or two-and-a-half miles from a high school. State aid is provided on a per student basis for such mandatory transportation.

Often, children living closer to school than these so-called “remote-from-schoolhouse” limits would have to cross busy highways, walk along roads without sidewalks or cross railroad tracks. Safe transportation is a combined responsibility of the local school district, the municipality and the state. However, the cost of non-mandatory transportation, which is usually provided for safety reasons, has fallen primarily on the local school district.

Therefore, in times of tight budgets, such as those we face today, non-mandatory transportation, or courtesy busing, becomes a focus for many school districts.

In NJSBA’s March 2010 survey on the impact of reduced school funding, we posed the following question to local school officials:

“Will your district cut TRANSPORTATION as a result of the state aid reduction for 2010-2011?”

• 36.5 percent of school districts said they anticipated cutting transportation expenditures. This is a significant response because many of the districts that answered “no” to this question (63.5 percent of the respondents) do not provide any busing, mandatory or non-mandatory.


• Of the districts that anticipated transportation cut-backs, 26.6 percent said they would eliminate or reduce courtesy busing. Other examples of cutbacks include combining routes, eliminating late-afternoon activity busing, cutting busing for athletic programs, eliminating busing for field trips, and ending separate bus routes for Kindergarten pupils.

NJSBA’s survey also focused on the concept of subscription busing. Under statute, enacted in the mid-1990s, school districts may charge parents a fee for providing transportation to students who live closer than the remote-from-schoolhouse limits. NJSBA strongly supports this option; it enables students, who would otherwise have to walk along a busy roadway or cross a highway, the ability to travel on an existing bus route.

We asked school districts the following question:

“Does your district plan to charge parents for the cost of non-mandatory transportation (that is, institute subscription busing)?”

• 13 percent of responding districts indicated that they planned to implement subscription busing. (Please note that the other 87 percent of districts, which responded “no” to this question, include districts that do not provide transportation and/or do not provide courtesy busing.)

In addition to establishing subscription busing, school districts are using a variety of other approaches to control transportation costs. These include consolidating bus routes, establishing central pick-up areas for students, sharing transportation services with other school districts, reducing or eliminating afterhours busing for student activities, and working with the municipality to offset some transportation costs.

Seventy-two of the 117 school districts responding to our information update this week indicated that they do not offer courtesy busing or do not plan to eliminate or reduce the service.

Five districts said they plan to reduce non-mandatory transportation, but do not intend to charge a fee.

A notable example is Barnegat Township in Ocean County. That district found it necessary to eliminate 12 of 42 bus driver positions and, consequently, reduce transportation services. However, it has partnered with the municipal government to build sidewalks that enable many of the 1,000 Barnegat Township students, who live within the remote transportation limits, to walk to school safely.

Other examples of strategies to deal with transportation costs come from the following school districts:

• Hunterdon Central Regional has reduced non-mandatory busing. It no longer transports students who live within one-and-a-half miles of school. In addition, it offers subscription busing from three designated stops for a charge of $200.


• Clinton Township, also in Hunterdon County, has cut back on activity busing. For example, it will transport student athletes from the school to the site of “away” games. Parents, however, will provide the ride home.


• Linwood in Atlantic County has instituted subscription busing on 11 routes for non-public school students.
• Central Regional in Ocean County eliminated afterschool transportation for its band. Although it offers subscription busing, participation has declined due to a drop in the number of non-public school students who used the service.


• Delsea Regional in Gloucester County charges school clubs for transportation when they go on trips.


• Freehold Regional in Monmouth County has reduced non-mandatory transportation resulting in longer walks to bus stops for students. In addition, late (activity) buses were “drastically” scaled back, according to the district’s business administrator.


• The Press of Atlantic City has reported that the Galloway Township School District has reduced non-mandatory busing, but still buses children who live more than 1.5 miles from school. It has also been working with the municipality to increase the number of crossing guards.


• The Press also reports that Ventnor in Atlantic County eliminated busing for sports and afterschool activities, as did the Vineland School District in Cumberland County.

The New Jersey School Boards Association hopes that this information is useful to the Assembly Education Committee. We will provide updated information on student activity and subscription busing fees as it becomes available.