Welcome to School Board Notes

Regulations May Work Against Efficiency

The following opinion article by NJSBA Executive Director Marie S. Bilik appeared earlier this month in the Asbury Park Press, Daily Record (Morris County), Daily Journal (Vineland), Courier News (Bridgewater) and Home News Tribune (East Brunswick).

NJSBA believes most of the state’s new accountability regulations are financially and educationally sound. In fact, our Association supported the goals of … the legislation that the new regulations intend to carry out. But many sections of the regulations go beyond the law and, in fact, could increase administrative costs.

In districts that receive certain levels of state aid, the regulations will require a second independent audit by an outside firm. Audits are not cheap. A second state-required independent audit will drive up administrative costs.
Districts must set up a structure for maximizing reimbursement under the federal Special Education Medicaid Initiative. In a state where less than 3 percent of school revenue comes from the federal government—the lowest share in the nation—any additional support is welcome. But the onerous reimbursement-claim process will almost certainly require additional administrative staffing in school districts.
A provision that limits school board access to legal counsel has the potential to create liability issues for boards of education. For many, it could require the hiring of more administrative staff due to the regulations’ complex procedures.

The new state regulations also reach a level of micromanagement that is puzzling: a district cannot produce informational materials on glossy paper; it cannot employ a staff member whose exclusive role is public relations (even though virtually every unit of state government has a public information office); its food service operations must be financially self-sustaining (an admirable goal, but a difficult one for many districts which must provide large numbers of students with free and reduced-price lunches while receiving federal subsidies that fall below actual costs); and then there’s the donut restriction—at the end of an approved meeting, no participant may walk away with any of the light, but unconsumed, refreshments permitted under the regulations.

It appears that the source of many of these provisions is not widespread abuse, but rather isolated incidents—situations that the Department of Education should have dealt with directly, rather than by memorializing as restrictions for all districts. The fact is school boards had spending limits long before the new regulations. School district finances have always been subject to oversight by the state government. Proposed school budgets—unlike those of municipalities or counties—must go before voters. In addition, school board members are subject to a rigorous School Ethics Act.

What will be the result of the micromanagement reflected in the new regulations? It could be the undermining of the very goals of accountability and efficiency. The new regulations will rely on enforcement by one office: the Executive County Superintendent. Overseeing the use of glossy paper, regulating unauthorized donut-eating and reviewing every single piece of district-issued budget and voter information could only distract the executive from his or her most important role: directing and guiding school districts toward shared services and other cost efficiencies.