Red Flagging Spending

New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine (D-taxes) has once again pushed a policy that will increase state spending and either increase the state's debt load or require a tax and fee increase to cover the new costs.

This time, the $532 million is to go to school districts that think they've been screwed by the Abbott district formula. Only 32 districts get Abbott funding, so those on the cusp think that they're owed more money. Gov. Corzine agrees, so they're getting to split up the $532 million. And because more money is being spread around, the Governor is hoping that the plan will sail through because money greases the skids:

"Some will find fault with some part of this, but we believe if you look at all of our children, we'll be a lot better off," Corzine said at the announcement, held at a Burlington Township elementary school.

Under the proposal:


More than 140 districts would receive 20 percent more in state aid next year, the maximum increase allowed under the plan. The big winners were in communities as wide-ranging as Bridgewater-Raritan, Rahway, North Brunswick and Rockaway, where enrollments or tax burdens -- or both -- ballooned in recent years as state-aid increases slowed to a trickle.


Another 200 districts would see increases of 10 percent or more, including some of the state's wealthiest communities.


No district would see less than a 2 percent increase in the coming year, a clear but expensive nod to the Legislature that in the coming weeks will review and, perhaps, vote on the plan.

Some of the increases will come with strings attached -- requirements the money go directly to property tax relief, state officials said -- although they provided little detail of how that would work.

That and other uncertainties left even some of the biggest apparent winners scratching their heads, cautiously welcoming the news but wondering if increases would evaporate as they put their budgets together.

And those getting smaller gains -- particularly in large urban districts -- criticized the state's new math, with some saying the plan could lead to deep cuts and will surely be contested in court, if not the Legislature.

There's a huge problem with all this. Actually, there are quite a few problems.

The amount of money that goes into education doesn't actually correlate with the performance of the state's students.

Let's take two neighboring districts.

Paterson gets a bunch of aid from the state and the amount spent per student is $14,995 per year. The district lags in the state tests for fourth grade (53% meet state standards in English /60% math) and eighth grade (48% / 35%). Paterson is an Abbott district, and all that money has actually gotten the district nowhere.

Fair Lawn, in contrast spends $13,304 per student and 87% meet state standards in 4th Grade English / 90% math, and the eighth grade has similar results 89% English / 84% math.

Now, I'm sure some will argue that these two districts could not be further apart in terms of demographics, and they might have a point. Paterson's demographic makeup is largely black/Hispanic, while Fair Lawn is 90% white.

So, with that in mind, let's turn to Garfield (another Abbott district), which is 46% black/Hispanic. They're not quite up to the Fair Lawn numbers, but considering that they're spending only $11,316 per student, that they're managing to have 77%/79% meet state standards in fourth grade and 60%/56% in eighth grade. Throwing more money at the problem isn't helping.

Let's look at a fourth city, this time Clifton (which will see one of the highest gains under Corzine's new plan). With 48% minorities, they're spending $10,315 per student and have 72%/80% for the fourth grade and 66%/53% in the eighth grade.

Again, it doesn't look like more money is the answer. There has to be more to the problem with student proficiency than simply money and throwing money at the problem isn't going to solve anything. It certainly hasn't done it in Paterson, and it's not doing it in Garfield either. If anything, years of throwing money at Abbott districts shows no results at all. Student proficiency on the statewide tests drops from the fourth to the eighth grade, which means the money spent on those students isn't actually helping. It may not be making it to the classroom or it may not have an effect on what happens in the classroom given that these students aren't getting the job done on the tests.

There is one factor not included in the NYT piece, and that's the percentage of students for whom English is not the first language. That might help explain why student performance lags and would be helpful in informing the debate on the issue.

Notwithstanding the language issue, the state can ill afford yet another spending binge on education when money isn't the problem. Abbott has been a failure and the Governor's answer to the problem is to throw still more money around to more districts to salve the political egos of those who weren't getting more state funds in prior years.