Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My full time job isnt to convince you. Dont believe me thats ok. I know what I have heard and read and yes both of my points are correct. Dont believe more then a handful of towns lost all funding? Look up articles when he cut 1 billion dollars and tell me what you find. Of course that would hurt your stance so your rather ignore that fact.
I did look it up, yes municipalities did lose funding but none lost all. You are entitled to your own opinions. Not your own facts. The facts do not support you.
Your quote atributed to Christie has been completely debunked. The internet is a powerful tool.There is simply nothing to support your views.
"The top salary would be $175,000 (equal to the governor’s pay), and because 75 percent of the superintendents earn more than that, the proposal would mean pay cuts for 366 superintendents at the end of their contracts. That would save school districts $9.8 million, the administration says.
We don’t want to hear any whining from school boards. They had the power to rein in salaries, but kept handing out chubby contracts, loaded with perks like cars, laptops, cell phones, fully funded health-care and exorbitant amounts of sick and vacation time."
"The top salary would be $175,000 (equal to the governor’s pay), and because 75 percent of the superintendents earn more than that, the proposal would mean pay cuts for 366 superintendents at the end of their contracts. That would save school districts $9.8 million, the administration says.
We don’t want to hear any whining from school boards. They had the power to rein in salaries, but kept handing out chubby contracts, loaded with perks like cars, laptops, cell phones, fully funded health-care and exorbitant amounts of sick and vacation time."
I just love this sentence from the link you posted:
And with 600 school districts in the state, many boards foolishly bid against each other for administrators like they’re “free agents in baseball,” Christie said. Financially strapped taxpayers foot the bill, of course
Ok so let me see a link to NJ funding of education in upper crust towns? I know they chip into cities but lets see the facts as you say. Again just to be clear NJ ranks 46 in terms of state funding of education. The buck is passed on to property owners and this creates turmoil. How do other states pay for education?
Here is the Ledger article regarding the cuts. Again, as I have said, no district receives ZERO state funding. There are two forms of aid, formula and direct. They slashed formula aid which is essentially free money the state puts in the schools piggy banks and they can spend however they want (this is why they're all screaming). What wasn't cut (actually increased) was direct aid where the state pays certain bills on behalf of the school district, things like pensions and post retirement healthcare.
Another 59 districts, including Livingston, Millburn and Berkeley Heights, had all of their aid eliminated.
The cuts came in what’s known as formula aid, money used for general education expenses. That aid is doled out based on enrollment, with additional money for students who are poor, have special needs or limited English skills.
While all the attention was on formula aid, State Education Commissioner Bret Schundler said other spending areas for schools were not slashed. For example, contributions to teachers’ pensions and post-retirement medical expenses increased.
You have repeatedly quoted this 46th ranking in state funding for education, what you have failed to realize and what I and several others have pointed out multiple times in previous threads is that the reason we rank low in percentage of state funding for schools is do to the way our school systems are setup.
In states that have fully state run school systems or county based systems, all funding, or very large percentages come from the state, paid with tax dollars.
In NJ and several other states the school's are controlled locally and the bulk of funding comes from those sources, hence they have a lower percentage of costs paid by the state. The statistics you are quoting are very misleading as they do not account for the different models of educational funding. What it all comes down to is which bucket the money comes out of. The local bucket, county bucket or state bucket. We could fund schools 100% through the state, but that would mean we would simply pay more taxes to the state vs. local property taxes as is done in other states.
Of more importance is the fairness and equality of educational funding as well as the overall amount of total economic activity in the state invested in education. The state of NJ is one of the top three states in the nation allocating a little over 50% of our state budget to education funding.
Here is the Ledger article regarding the cuts. Again, as I have said, no district receives ZERO state funding. There are two forms of aid, formula and direct. They slashed formula aid which is essentially free money the state puts in the schools piggy banks and they can spend however they want (this is why they're all screaming). What wasn't cut (actually increased) was direct aid where the state pays certain bills on behalf of the school district, things like pensions and post retirement healthcare.
You have repeatedly quoted this 46th ranking in state funding for education, what you have failed to realize and what I and several others have pointed out multiple times in previous threads is that the reason we rank low in percentage of state funding for schools is do to the way our school systems are setup.
In states that have fully state run school systems or county based systems, all funding, or very large percentages come from the state, paid with tax dollars.
In NJ and several other states the school's are controlled locally and the bulk of funding comes from those sources, hence they have a lower percentage of costs paid by the state. The statistics you are quoting are very misleading as they do not account for the different models of educational funding. What it all comes down to is which bucket the money comes out of. The local bucket, county bucket or state bucket. We could fund schools 100% through the state, but that would mean we would simply pay more taxes to the state vs. local property taxes as is done in other states.
Of more importance is the fairness and equality of educational funding as well as the overall amount of total economic activity in the state invested in education. The state of NJ is one of the top three states in the nation allocating a little over 50% of our state budget to education funding.
I did look it up, yes municipalities did lose funding but none lost all. You are entitled to your own opinions. Not your own facts. The facts do not support you.
Your quote atributed to Christie has been completely debunked. The internet is a powerful tool.There is simply nothing to support your views.
Here is the Ledger article regarding the cuts. Again, as I have said, no district receives ZERO state funding. There are two forms of aid, formula and direct. They slashed formula aid which is essentially free money the state puts in the schools piggy banks and they can spend however they want (this is why they're all screaming). What wasn't cut (actually increased) was direct aid where the state pays certain bills on behalf of the school district, things like pensions and post retirement healthcare.
You have repeatedly quoted this 46th ranking in state funding for education, what you have failed to realize and what I and several others have pointed out multiple times in previous threads is that the reason we rank low in percentage of state funding for schools is do to the way our school systems are setup.
In states that have fully state run school systems or county based systems, all funding, or very large percentages come from the state, paid with tax dollars.
In NJ and several other states the school's are controlled locally and the bulk of funding comes from those sources, hence they have a lower percentage of costs paid by the state. The statistics you are quoting are very misleading as they do not account for the different models of educational funding. What it all comes down to is which bucket the money comes out of. The local bucket, county bucket or state bucket. We could fund schools 100% through the state, but that would mean we would simply pay more taxes to the state vs. local property taxes as is done in other states.
Of more importance is the fairness and equality of educational funding as well as the overall amount of total economic activity in the state invested in education. The state of NJ is one of the top three states in the nation allocating a little over 50% of our state budget to education funding.
What do cost for pension and retired workers health care have to do with current employees?
Regarding the funding you are dead wrong. NJ formula for funding education allows this debate. YOU have tried to prove me wrong but honestly talking about buckets is just wrong. We pay for schools through municipal taxes. Other states allocate money correctly and dont pass on the cost to home owners. You are dead wrong and they are not the same buckets regardless of what you think. If you use a sales tax of some sort everyone pays it and not only home owners.
There is no link showing a municipality with zero state education aid, because a municipality with zero state education aid doesn't exist.
Oh and here is the link that doesn't show Christie making the statement you said he made.
I think you see a pattern. Links don't exist for events that don't happen.
Ok so pretty much I am lying? Honestly grow up and if I am a liar what are you? YOu said you found proof go ahead and prove me wrong. I aleady told you I like the first cuts to education.
Not trying to bash but I know you found nothing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm jealous. LOL
