Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
33 user(s) are online (15 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 1
Guests: 32

tern, more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




« 1 (2) 3 4 »


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#75
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/16 23:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 553
Offline
Quote:

stateaidguy wrote:
Quote:

Quote:

135jc wrote:
[quote]
brewster wrote:
[quote]
135jc wrote:
Somerset has probably the lowest taxes in the state.


Not really, about average, but there's a wide spread

NORTH PLAINFIELD 3.665%
FAR HILLS 1.300%

It's funny how people howl about their taxes being high but never actually justify that. JC's are average, 2.216%, and Hoboken is on the low side, 1.313%. Hoboken could pay their way with no aid and still be well under 2%. Food for thought, no?
Tax rate of every town in NJ for 2015
http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/lpt/taxrate.shtml[/quote
Quote:


Lower property taxes will increase property value and naturally the opposite will lower values. Look at Essex county. So measuring property tax as a percentage of property value is pointless.


I don't think the measuring tax burden by percentage of property value (ie, Equalized Tax Rate) is pointless, but I agree with your point that high taxes can lower property values and low taxes can raise them.

I think therefore that tax relief for the most tax-burdened towns in NJ is desperately needed. High-tax, low-school spending towns like Prospect Park, Bound Brook etc are being wrecked by their tax burdens. People living there are seeing the values of their homes (their biggest assets) steadily diminish.

The point of state aid is to allow struggling towns to stabilize their taxes and arrest spirals of decline, but under the Christie/Abbott regime, there's no redistribution of state aid. Taxes steadily increase in towns that are already overburdened and their declines deepen.

http://njeducationaid.blogspot.com/20 ... y-wealth-in-njs-most.html



Doesn't it all come back to jobs? With a stronger economy less aid is needed. You can point to all the job reports you want this recovery is not what we are expected believe

Posted on: 2016/9/9 10:15
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#74
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3886
Offline
'Christie/Abbott' regime??

Christie wants Abbott to go away, no?

Posted on: 2016/9/9 9:56
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#73
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/10/20 20:40
From One of the Oranges
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 112
Offline
Quote:

Quote:

135jc wrote:
[quote]
brewster wrote:
[quote]
135jc wrote:
Somerset has probably the lowest taxes in the state.


Not really, about average, but there's a wide spread

NORTH PLAINFIELD 3.665%
FAR HILLS 1.300%

It's funny how people howl about their taxes being high but never actually justify that. JC's are average, 2.216%, and Hoboken is on the low side, 1.313%. Hoboken could pay their way with no aid and still be well under 2%. Food for thought, no?
Tax rate of every town in NJ for 2015
http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/lpt/taxrate.shtml[/quote
Quote:


Lower property taxes will increase property value and naturally the opposite will lower values. Look at Essex county. So measuring property tax as a percentage of property value is pointless.


I don't think the measuring tax burden by percentage of property value (ie, Equalized Tax Rate) is pointless, but I agree with your point that high taxes can lower property values and low taxes can raise them.

I think therefore that tax relief for the most tax-burdened towns in NJ is desperately needed. High-tax, low-school spending towns like Prospect Park, Bound Brook etc are being wrecked by their tax burdens. People living there are seeing the values of their homes (their biggest assets) steadily diminish.

The point of state aid is to allow struggling towns to stabilize their taxes and arrest spirals of decline, but under the Christie/Abbott regime, there's no redistribution of state aid. Taxes steadily increase in towns that are already overburdened and their declines deepen.

http://njeducationaid.blogspot.com/20 ... y-wealth-in-njs-most.html

Posted on: 2016/9/9 9:51
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#72
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/16 23:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 553
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
[quote]
135jc wrote:
Somerset has probably the lowest taxes in the state.


Not really, about average, but there's a wide spread

NORTH PLAINFIELD 3.665%
FAR HILLS 1.300%

It's funny how people howl about their taxes being high but never actually justify that. JC's are average, 2.216%, and Hoboken is on the low side, 1.313%. Hoboken could pay their way with no aid and still be well under 2%. Food for thought, no?
Tax rate of every town in NJ for 2015
http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/lpt/taxrate.shtml[/quote

Lower property taxes will increase property value and naturally the opposite will lower values. Look at Essex county. So measuring property tax as a percentage of property value is pointless.

Posted on: 2016/9/9 0:55
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#71
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4629
Offline
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Somerset has probably the lowest taxes in the state.


Not really, about average, but there's a wide spread

NORTH PLAINFIELD 3.665%
FAR HILLS 1.300%

It's funny how people howl about their taxes being high but never actually justify that. JC's are average, 2.216%, and Hoboken is on the low side, 1.313%. Hoboken could pay their way with no aid and still be well under 2%. Food for thought, no?
Tax rate of every town in NJ for 2015
http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/lpt/taxrate.shtml

Posted on: 2016/9/8 23:13

Edited by brewster on 2016/9/8 23:29:30
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#70
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/7/16 23:05
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 553
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

greenville wrote:
If this happens, it would wreck JC. Christie needs to go back to sniff Donald Trump's rear and resign.


A lot of this is being pushed by suburban towns-many of them Democrat strongholds, like Maplewood/South Orange, the Montclairs, Dover, that are getting bled dry by funding Abbott schools and getting little state support. It's not just rich Morris and Somerset County towns that are getting squeezed and seeing Newark and JC get $1.5 billion dollar/year with abysmal graduation rates (while spending way over the state average as well per student).


Somerset has probably the lowest taxes in the state.

Posted on: 2016/9/8 23:04
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#69
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3899
Offline
At the August Council meeting, Candice Osborne said the state will never change the formula as she voted yes on a tax abatement. I told her she is wrong, changes have been made, we use to pay $72 million and now we are paying $114 million.

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... g.html#incart_2box_hudson

Posted on: 2016/9/8 18:20
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#68
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/10/20 20:40
From One of the Oranges
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 112
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Maybe because spending more and more money hasn't been shown to result in improvements?? It's sure always easy to spend the money others have worked so hard to earn.

The best way out of poverty is proven to a) finish high school, b) don't have children out of wedlock, c) get a job, any job. If you don't do a), what do you think happens to b and c?

Since the 'war on poverty' began in the sixties more money has been spent than all the wars combined in our history, and poverty keeps winning. A, B, and C are the problems, not education funding.


So naturally the answer is "fuckem, they don't need books, heat, teachers, whatever". I'm all for cutting waste if you can find it, but from everything I've seen and heard, no one is getting a gold plated education in JC public school. I don't know where the money goes, but it sure doesn't show up in the classrooms or activities. But you're all in with "starve the beast", especially as you don't even live here and have to deal with the consequences.


I'm not saying that at all, and I agree that Christie's plan is a non-starter. But how about a plan that insists that local towns fund a minimum percentage of their own school costs? For all the talk of how JC is a melting pot, with lots of kids needing expensive ESL classes-well, it is the Latino and Asian kids that have much better graduation rates than our African American kids. And to an earlier point, JC graduation rates are only 5% higher than Newark kids-and JC is 15% lower than the state average, while spending 25% more per student than the state average.

Maybe begin with towns paying 33% of their own school costs (less than half of most suburban districts) and raise it a bit over time until it's 50%? That sounds equitable and, after all, shouldn't everyone pay their fair share?


The minimum percentage proposal isn't economically workable. For the poorest districts, like Camden, Bridgeton, and Woodlynne, there is no way they can pay 25% of even the state's average, let alone the higher amount they should be paying. Those three districts have Local Fair Shares per student of under $2,000.

(on the other hand, NJ does need a minimum local contribution from the Abbotts for construction. Right now they pay 0%)

The formulas of the current law, SFRA, would allow some money to be taken from Abbotts. Half of the Abbotts are overaided, even Camden.

While I believe that Abbott has become extremely unfair and has always been ineffective, I strongly disagree with the Republicans that the focus should be on taking money from the Abbotts since not all of them are overaided and they aren't NJ's only overaided districts either. There are many overaided exurbs, rural towns, and Jersey Shore districts too.


Posted on: 2016/6/22 9:50
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#67
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3886
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Maybe because spending more and more money hasn't been shown to result in improvements?? It's sure always easy to spend the money others have worked so hard to earn.

The best way out of poverty is proven to a) finish high school, b) don't have children out of wedlock, c) get a job, any job. If you don't do a), what do you think happens to b and c?

Since the 'war on poverty' began in the sixties more money has been spent than all the wars combined in our history, and poverty keeps winning. A, B, and C are the problems, not education funding.


So naturally the answer is "fuckem, they don't need books, heat, teachers, whatever". I'm all for cutting waste if you can find it, but from everything I've seen and heard, no one is getting a gold plated education in JC public school. I don't know where the money goes, but it sure doesn't show up in the classrooms or activities. But you're all in with "starve the beast", especially as you don't even live here and have to deal with the consequences.


I'm not saying that at all, and I agree that Christie's plan is a non-starter. But how about a plan that insists that local towns fund a minimum percentage of their own school costs? For all the talk of how JC is a melting pot, with lots of kids needing expensive ESL classes-well, it is the Latino and Asian kids that have much better graduation rates than our African American kids. And to an earlier point, JC graduation rates are only 5% higher than Newark kids-and JC is 15% lower than the state average, while spending 25% more per student than the state average.

Maybe begin with towns paying 33% of their own school costs (less than half of most suburban districts) and raise it a bit over time until it's 50%? That sounds equitable and, after all, shouldn't everyone pay their fair share?

Posted on: 2016/6/22 6:25
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#66
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/20 13:20
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2004
Offline

Posted on: 2016/6/22 3:49
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#65
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/5/11 22:57
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 449
Offline
Quote:

MattSchapiro wrote:
Quote:
by Monroe on 2016/6/21 20:22:31
...and seeing Newark and JC get $1.5 billion dollar/year with abysmal graduation rates (while spending way over the state average as well per student).


As a caveat, I am much more familiar with JC than Newark but it is foolish to equate the two school systems.

The Jersey City Public Schools have the benefit of an outstanding Superintendent and a flourishing population, both of which has dramatically improved student outcomes in our public schools.

Newark has a waning population and a fleet of half-empty public schools. Their trajectory is nowhere near as optimistic as ours.

Do the JC district schools still need improvement? Of course they do. But we are on the right track and don't let anybody paint all urban schools with the same broad, nasty brush.

Parents across the city of all backgrounds are seeing their children succeed here.


How about that there seems to be "de facto" segregation at the elementary level in Jersey City?

Posted on: 2016/6/21 23:58
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#64
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4629
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Maybe because spending more and more money hasn't been shown to result in improvements?? It's sure always easy to spend the money others have worked so hard to earn.

The best way out of poverty is proven to a) finish high school, b) don't have children out of wedlock, c) get a job, any job. If you don't do a), what do you think happens to b and c?

Since the 'war on poverty' began in the sixties more money has been spent than all the wars combined in our history, and poverty keeps winning. A, B, and C are the problems, not education funding.


So naturally the answer is "fuckem, they don't need books, heat, teachers, whatever". I'm all for cutting waste if you can find it, but from everything I've seen and heard, no one is getting a gold plated education in JC public school. I don't know where the money goes, but it sure doesn't show up in the classrooms or activities. But you're all in with "starve the beast", especially as you don't even live here and have to deal with the consequences.

Posted on: 2016/6/21 22:58
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#63
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/10/20 20:40
From One of the Oranges
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 112
Offline
Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
I really can't fathom what Christie is doing. Because there is a political constituency for redistributing aid. That would hurt Jersey City and some other Abbotts, but could possibly be passed on grounds of "fairness." This is so off the wall that it's hard to take seriously.


This would take money from all of the Abbotts except Hoboken, which gets $4100 per student.

But there are non-Abbotts who get more than $6900 per student too, although not that many.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d ... dA_3CEPAsiEpUI/edit#gid=0

Just state aid reform admits that there is a conflict between the underaided and the overaided and proposes to shift aid from the overaided to the underaided. Usually this is between districts that have gotten richer and/or smaller and districts that have gotten poorer and/or larger. As I says always, it is NOT suburban versus urban. Christie's proposal just pits the rich against the poor.

Christie's idea has no chance, but the framers of our constitution, in their infinite wisdom, gave the governor the ability to thwart the will of 2/3rds of the legislature and gave the legislature no ability to remove a governor except for criminality.

In the past Christie had supported cutting Adjustment Aid so I thought he might support it now.

I am afraid that now Sweeney's bill has no chance of becoming law either and we will not have reform until 2018 at the earliest.

Posted on: 2016/6/21 21:54
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#62
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3886
Offline
Maybe because spending more and more money hasn't been shown to result in improvements?? It's sure always easy to spend the money others have worked so hard to earn.

The best way out of poverty is proven to a) finish high school, b) don't have children out of wedlock, c) get a job, any job. If you don't do a), what do you think happens to b and c?

Since the 'war on poverty' began in the sixties more money has been spent than all the wars combined in our history, and poverty keeps winning. A, B, and C are the problems, not education funding.

Posted on: 2016/6/21 21:20
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#61
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4629
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

greenville wrote:
If this happens, it would wreck JC. Christie needs to go back to sniff Donald Trump's rear and resign.


A lot of this is being pushed by suburban towns-many of them Democrat strongholds, like Maplewood/South Orange, the Montclairs, Dover, that are getting bled dry by funding Abbott schools and getting little state support. It's not just rich Morris and Somerset County towns that are getting squeezed and seeing Newark and JC get $1.5 billion dollar/year with abysmal graduation rates (while spending way over the state average as well per student).


You know, beating the "abysmal graduation rates" drum gets really tiresome. Anyone with half a brain know why inner city districts with high levels of immigrants and poverty have abysmal graduation rates. It has little to do with how money is spent.

You could really care less about our graduation rates, you just want us to get less money.

Posted on: 2016/6/21 20:42
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#60
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/6/10 14:23
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 82
Offline
Quote:
by Monroe on 2016/6/21 20:22:31
...and seeing Newark and JC get $1.5 billion dollar/year with abysmal graduation rates (while spending way over the state average as well per student).


As a caveat, I am much more familiar with JC than Newark but it is foolish to equate the two school systems.

The Jersey City Public Schools have the benefit of an outstanding Superintendent and a flourishing population, both of which has dramatically improved student outcomes in our public schools.

Newark has a waning population and a fleet of half-empty public schools. Their trajectory is nowhere near as optimistic as ours.

Do the JC district schools still need improvement? Of course they do. But we are on the right track and don't let anybody paint all urban schools with the same broad, nasty brush.

Parents across the city of all backgrounds are seeing their children succeed here.

Posted on: 2016/6/21 20:38
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#59
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3886
Offline
Quote:

greenville wrote:
If this happens, it would wreck JC. Christie needs to go back to sniff Donald Trump's rear and resign.


A lot of this is being pushed by suburban towns-many of them Democrat strongholds, like Maplewood/South Orange, the Montclairs, Dover, that are getting bled dry by funding Abbott schools and getting little state support. It's not just rich Morris and Somerset County towns that are getting squeezed and seeing Newark and JC get $1.5 billion dollar/year with abysmal graduation rates (while spending way over the state average as well per student).

Posted on: 2016/6/21 20:22
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#58
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2007/4/10 22:51
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 426
Offline
If this happens, it would wreck JC. Christie needs to go back to sniff Donald Trump's rear and resign.

Posted on: 2016/6/21 20:12
ಠ_ಠ
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#57
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3886
Offline
People always advocate for others to pay their 'fair share', until they are the ones having to do the paying.

Posted on: 2016/6/21 16:29
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#56
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3899
Offline
I remember when former Mayor McCann wanted to cut the board of ed funding in 1990. The state said no and froze JC's contribution to $72 million. It stayed that way for a long time. I mentioned to various elected politicians that it will go up and was laughed at. Well in 2005, our contributions started to rise. It is now $114 million, $42 million higher. Politicians were wrong that our contributions will not rise and they are wrong about the change of formula. They want to justify the giving out of tax abatements.

Posted on: 2016/6/21 16:15
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#55
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/6/7 23:24
From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1167
Offline
I really can't fathom what Christie is doing. Because there is a political constituency for redistributing aid. That would hurt Jersey City and some other Abbotts, but could possibly be passed on grounds of "fairness." This is so off the wall that it's hard to take seriously.

Posted on: 2016/6/21 15:59
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#54
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/10/20 20:40
From One of the Oranges
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 112
Offline
Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
I am confident that Christie's proposal is a non-starter.

First, even between Republicans and Sweeneycrats in Trenton, this will probably not have a lot of support.

Second, the New Jersey Supreme Court will not allow it.

When the Court allowed the School Funding Reform Act (Abbott XX), it was based on the finding that the legislature and executive had developed a formula that remedied the defects that led to the Abbott line of decisions. Replacing this with a formula that ignores the needs of poorer students and urban districts ignores the entire line of cases, which the Court has made clear is grounded in a Constitutional mandate.

If Christie/Sweeney were serious about reallocating aid to districts based on appropriate need, the Court might buy it. But this is just Christie being a blowhard. Being Trump's cabana boy has rubbed off on him.


I agree with JPHurst that this is DOA; even the majority of the GOP will be against it.

Sweeney is completely against Christie's proposal. Christie's proposal has NOTHING in common with the increase in aid and redistribution that Sweeney has proposed.

http://senatorsweeney.com/press/sween ... ties-school-funding-plan/




Posted on: 2016/6/21 15:26
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#53
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/6/7 23:24
From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1167
Offline
I am confident that Christie's proposal is a non-starter.

First, even between Republicans and Sweeneycrats in Trenton, this will probably not have a lot of support.

Second, the New Jersey Supreme Court will not allow it.

When the Court allowed the School Funding Reform Act (Abbott XX), it was based on the finding that the legislature and executive had developed a formula that remedied the defects that led to the Abbott line of decisions. Replacing this with a formula that ignores the needs of poorer students and urban districts ignores the entire line of cases, which the Court has made clear is grounded in a Constitutional mandate.

If Christie/Sweeney were serious about reallocating aid to districts based on appropriate need, the Court might buy it. But this is just Christie being a blowhard. Being Trump's cabana boy has rubbed off on him.

Posted on: 2016/6/21 14:40
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#52
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/1/11 13:21
From GV Bayside Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4865
Offline
Gov. Chris Christie on Tuesday proposed a major overhaul of the state's school funding formula that would effectively reduce state funding to urban school districts and lower tax rates in suburban districts.

In a speech at Hillsborough High School, Christie introduced the Fairness Formula, which would provide every school district with $6,599 per student. The proposal would give 75 percent of school districts an increase in state aid, he said.

Under the proposal, districts would continue to receive extra funding for special education students but would no longer get additional aid for students who are low income or for students who are learning English as their second language.

The proposal will help reduce New Jersey's highest-in-the-nation property taxes while ending the overabundance of funding to urban districts with low graduation rates, Christie said.

More

Posted on: 2016/6/21 13:56
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#51
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4629
Offline
Quote:

stateaidguy wrote:
If NJ had a hypothetical equal tax rate, 100% state funding system there are plenty of suburbs whose taxes would be lower.


No doubt, since when I look at the effective rates they're all over the board. Random clicking on counties showed me effective rates from 0.6% to 4.6%! Just in Bergen County Bogota's 3.374% is 5.4 times the tax rate of Alpine's 0.617%. I know there's lots of variable but this seems insane.

Posted on: 2016/4/22 10:59
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#50
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/6/16 22:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3899
Offline
We spend all of this money on education then corporations say they cannot find qualified people. Then uses the HIB visa program. What is the point? Education is a business that bankrupts homeowners in NJ. It is the reason so many people flee NJ in general. Actually, education has become the new religion in fixing people, but it doesn't work.

Posted on: 2016/4/22 10:41
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#49
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2015/10/20 20:40
From One of the Oranges
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 112
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Suntime wrote:
The irony being that the only real "winners"
Are the wealthy developers that are the beneficiaries of this tax abatement welfare from the city. Children lose out, the average homeowner is then expected to pay more, and the developers line their pockets at jc's expense and retreat to their mansions in the burbs, taking all of their $$ with then. My point being that the residents of the suburbs are the ones that abuse the system to their advantage and our detriment.


I don't agree, I think the system is set up to be cage match getting us at each other's throats. Imagine the suburban hysteria if we got rid of the local schools tax and the entire local+state funding system and just had the state collect enough to distribute the funds equitably to each town according to their population, perhaps using the SFRA formula.

While we're fantasizing, lets consolidate the ridiculous number of districts. A commenter on Ciatterelli's letter posted this observant comparison:

There's nothing complex about it.

NJ 8,722.58 sq mi
FL 65,755 sq mi
NJ pop. 8,958,013
FL pop. 20,271,272
NJ has 591 school districts
FL has 57 school districts
NJ has 565 incorporated municipalities
FL has 410 incorporated municipalities
NJ has 466 local police departments
FL has less than 300 local police departments
NJ 21 counties
Fl 67 counties


We in NJ waste a STUPENDOUS amount of money on local control of all these services.


I don't see the plethora of school districts as NJ's #1 (or even top 5) school budget/tax problem, but I agree.

It wouldn't be easy, but I think it's at least possible to merge K-8 (sometimes K-6) districts with the other K-8 (or K6) districts that they share a regional high school with. Steve Sweeney is for this, so it's not impossible. The legislature passed weak legislation to this effect sometime in the Corzine admin IIRC.

However, mergers like this wouldn't resolve all the state aid equities you have. Say that North Haledon, Prospect Park, and Haledon merge (the districts that share Manchester Regional)... Ummm...the combined district would still be underaided by $19 million.

You wouldn't eliminate that many admins either. SOmetimes these tiny districts share admins. Manchester Regional's supt is also Haledon's supt. (his name is Miguel Hernandez)

And sometimes when you eliminate top admins you just have to add more middle management.

District consolidation is good, but it's a red herring.

I think you miss an important nuance about suburban hysteria if NJ had full state funding. Not all suburbs are affluent. Many are poor. There are plenty of suburbs who are among NJ's higher taxed towns. Your image of a suburb is out of date.

If NJ had a hypothetical equal tax rate, 100% state funding system there are plenty of suburbs whose taxes would be lower.

Posted on: 2016/4/22 10:24
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#48
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2011/10/1 16:23
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 32
Offline
Any thoughts?

"With the benefits of pre-K programs fading by the third grade, why would American want to spend billions more to add another year of school to an already failed 13?"

http://www.educationviews.org/vanderb ... ve-impact-young-children/

And a link to the Vanderbilt study: http://www.brookings.edu/research/pap ... rssid=LatestFromBrookings

Also, it is interesting that the more expensive prek's are moving away from the more "traditional" prek's in their curriculum. It's a legitimate question: why do we need ANY free prek? Why not subsidized daycare for those who qualify?

Posted on: 2016/4/21 22:59
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#47
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4629
Offline
Quote:

Suntime wrote:
The irony being that the only real "winners"
Are the wealthy developers that are the beneficiaries of this tax abatement welfare from the city. Children lose out, the average homeowner is then expected to pay more, and the developers line their pockets at jc's expense and retreat to their mansions in the burbs, taking all of their $$ with then. My point being that the residents of the suburbs are the ones that abuse the system to their advantage and our detriment.


I don't agree, I think the system is set up to be cage match getting us at each other's throats. Imagine the suburban hysteria if we got rid of the local schools tax and the entire local+state funding system and just had the state collect enough to distribute the funds equitably to each town according to their population, perhaps using the SFRA formula.

While we're fantasizing, lets consolidate the ridiculous number of districts. A commenter on Ciatterelli's letter posted this observant comparison:

There's nothing complex about it.

NJ 8,722.58 sq mi
FL 65,755 sq mi
NJ pop. 8,958,013
FL pop. 20,271,272
NJ has 591 school districts
FL has 57 school districts
NJ has 565 incorporated municipalities
FL has 410 incorporated municipalities
NJ has 466 local police departments
FL has less than 300 local police departments
NJ 21 counties
Fl 67 counties


We in NJ waste a STUPENDOUS amount of money on local control of all these services.

Posted on: 2016/4/21 22:53
Print Top


Re: Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?
#46
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2016/2/25 12:22
From Jersey city nj 07302
Group:
Banned
Posts: 38
Offline
The irony being that the only real "winners"
Are the wealthy developers that are the beneficiaries of this tax abatement welfare from the city. Children lose out, the average homeowner is then expected to pay more, and the developers line their pockets at jc's expense and retreat to their mansions in the burbs, taking all of their $$ with then. My point being that the residents of the suburbs are the ones that abuse the system to their advantage and our detriment.

Posted on: 2016/4/21 22:26
Print Top




« 1 (2) 3 4 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

remember me

Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017