Front Page • About • Search Archives • Home

August 4, 2005 • Vol. XXIX • No. 3

State Board Hears from
School Boards on S-1701

Testifying before the State Board of Education last month on the proposed regulations to implement S-1701, Nancy Stern, president of the Fort Lee Board of Education, identified numerous problems the law has caused school districts throughout the state. “As trustees, we have been elected to provide a thorough and efficient education to our children, while being cognizant of our fiscal responsibility to the taxpayers,” said Stern. “As a result of this legislation, school board members throughout the state have had to make some very difficult decisions. Some districts have had to eliminate innovative programs, both academic and co-curricular, and other districts have had to reduce staff, thus increasing class size.”

When S-1701 was passed last year, regulations were put into effect by Commissioner William L. Librera for a 12-month period. These regulations must now be formally adopted through the normal administrative code process by the state board. This process includes a public comment period.

In her testimony, Stern also explained how the measure was especially punitive for Fort Lee, despite good fiscal management. In fact, certain aspects of the law have had results contradictory to the intent. According to Stern, Fort Lee “has consciously and carefully set aside funds, in the form of surplus and capital reserve, so that it would not be necessary to ask the taxpayers for additional funds when something occurred, which could not have been anticipated.” The law, however, reduces the amount of surplus a district may maintain and limits its ability to react to emergencies.

“Our foresight and planning should be commended, not discouraged. S-1701 has forced the Fort Lee Board of Education to reduce our surplus, which had previously been approved by the voters of our town. In essence, this law has punished Fort Lee for being fiscally prudent and responsible,” said Stern. “Some districts have had to sacrifice the safety of the students by cutting hazardous busing, and others have had to defer necessary and routine maintenance and repairs because of a reduction in their capital reserve accounts.”

Christopher Kniesler, director of governmental relations for NJSBA, addressed some of the more technical aspects of the regulations. As Kniesler pointed out, “One of the fundamental purposes of the law is to identify and eliminate administrative inefficiencies. The proposed regulations, however, do not include a definition of ‘administrative inefficiency.’ Also, the definition of ‘efficiency standards’ makes references to the Biennial Report, which has yet to be produced. School districts are entering the second year under S-1701 without the benefit of these standards,” said Kniesler.

He acknowledged, however, that the biggest problem lies not in the regulations, but in the law itself. The law exacerbates the already bleak fiscal picture caused by another budget where public education saw virtually no increase in appropriations and saw the funding formula ignored. “Our school districts face yet another year of flat state funding while the cost of utilities, fuel, insurance, transportation and special education continue to rise,” said Kniesler. This fact, compounded by the reduction in surplus levels and caps on administrative spending, will make it increasingly difficult for our schools to maintain their current programs.”

Action Needed on New Legislation Both Stern and Kniesler lauded the Assembly for unanimously passing A-3680 (Cryan). The bill amends several key sections of S-1701 to provide school districts with needed cap relief and flexibility. They also called upon the members of the state board to join NJSBA in asking the Senate to consider A-3680 (or the Senate counterpart, S-2329).

On August 2, NJSBA sent out an action alert via e-mail urging its members to contact their state senators to consider A-3680. For more information, call 1-888-886-5722, extension 5215.