Neptune High School graduates, June, 2016. at the Great Auditorium. Jean Bredin photograph © Blogfinger staff.
Editor’s note, November 16, 2017 (Paul Goldfinger, Editor @Blogfinger.)
Last August 12, 2017, we posted the Letter to the Editor below. An interesting discussion ensued in our comments section (click comments below; lower right hand corner.)
Today a Neptune parent sent a comment, so it seemed appropriate to reintroduce this post now in case there are those who might want to discuss the issues further. The last time around, school was not in session, but now parents have had a few months under their belts, so maybe some might want to add to the conversation:
TO THE EDITOR:
Since we are discussing the high cost of education in Neptune, financed by our property taxes, I would like to know if we are getting our money’s worth.
A review of NJ high school ratings by SchoolDigger.com shows that in 2016, Neptune High School ranked worse than 92% of high schools in New Jersey, having some of the highest cost per pupil in the State and some of the lowest scores.
The school’s rank for 2016 is 367 of 399 NJ high schools. Asbury Park is 379 of 399.
The Neptune school district is among the 50 top spenders per student at $25,920. Asbury Park is $35,636.
Clearly money is NOT the answer.
SCHOOL WATCHER, Ocean Grove NJ,
August 12, 2017
When I read the original letter and posts on this topic I was moved by the comments on standardized testing / website rankings as it relates to the community of Neptune.
I felt the taxation discussion missed the bigger picture.
Having lived in Neptune (I do not live in Ocean Grove, but have always thought of OG as a part of Neptune) for over 15 years now, I too have been frustrated and perplexed on why our school system as a whole can not break through to improve performance in what I assume are impartial state wide rankings.
With that said, my children are performing well against the state standardized tests and I believe they are not being failed by the Neptune school system.
Yes, there is obviously room for improvement but the schools in this district are not the disaster that recent comments are indicating.
In my opinion getting the improvements we all want in rankings is not a tax discussion. It is a discussion about community and one that will require a hard look and meaningful dialogue about real issues in order to make an impact. These topics include economics, racial diversity, white flight, equal opportunity, family structure, religious support, after school programs, and volunteerism, among others.
I have always marveled at the truly great diversity of Neptune Township (including Ocean Grove) both from a demographic and geographic standpoint. We are one of the most diverse populations in Monmouth County with beaches, rivers, a county park, wooded trails, historic homes, national treasures, highways, farms, golf courses, and a top medical center within our borders.
The question that I see, is can we all accept this diversity, embrace it, and improve our town as a whole and not just our own interests.
In my opinion, until we do, Neptune as a whole, including the school system, will continue to fall short of its potential.
Oldtimer: You seem to think that the amount of your taxes which goes for the school budget should have a 1:1 relationship with academic results.
But if Neptune’s schools score low academically, you still have to support the school budget, because no matter how well your students score, and that has to do with multiple variables—not just the amount of money spent per pupil—-your town still has to run a school system, and that costs money to pay for the schools: teachers, classrooms, supplies, programs, etc.
In fact, in poorer school systems, it will be necessary to spend more on students to try and correct deficits such as poverty, psychologic problems, special needs, remedial programs, etc.
So your money is not going down the drain—unless the budget is flawed due to duplication, fraud, idiotic programs, waste, abuse, etc. But there is no reason to assume that in Neptune.
It’s my impression that the Neptune School Board contains motivated and high quality members from the community.
However, all of us need to pay attention to how our tax money is being spent across the board.
As for the wisdom of paying an equal share to the schools even if one has no kids in the system, you can complain, but unless you could change how that system works, you are just blowing smoke. (Note: I have no kids in the local schools either and I do wish for lower taxes.)
A commenter above asks if it is not the case that education benefits the entire community? Does that not make the >50% of our taxes we pay for schools seem like a good investment?
I respond: it might if the schools were even just merely bad. But the truth is that the schools are at the very bottom of the State.
Thus I ask: why should we — the OG taxpayers — pay many thousands of dollars for a service that very few use that is nearly worthless?
Thought experiment: if we gave the schools in Neptune 30% less money than they now get, would anyone notice a difference in how “well” the students do? Would the schools drop any further in the rankings (hard to do given they are already so near the bottom). Face it.
The hard-earned cash paid to the Neptune schools is just getting flushed.
Obviously, we don’t get our money’s worth if more than half of our tax dollars go to a school system that we are not using. But isn’t education beneficial to the entire community? Would you rather pay much less for education and have more crime and then end up paying for more prisons? Don’t we already have way too many people in prison in this country?
And consider that YOU (reading this) probably got a good education and then a good job which made it possible for you to afford to buy a home in our lovely little village.
So, why are you being so selfish?
Believe the funds went to the North End Hotel renovation initiative,
NEHRI for short. The Hotel has been in dire straights since 02 and is important to the township’s revenue.
Taking this back to the question of what we get for all our taxes…..Well, I believe that those who own in OG — where very few people use the public schools — are basically just getting screwed.
Of course we all knew how terrible the schools were when we bought in OG, but there is obviously a HUGE subsidization of Neptune from OG. It’s a travesty. This is why young families do not buy in OG (high taxes and terrible schools).
What is interesting is that I am paying the same rate of taxes in OG (I live one block from the beach) as I do in my main house in Princeton Township (about $2,300 per $100,000 of assessed property value). I can tell you that we get much better schools and better/more all other services there than we do in OG.
Where does all the money go in Neptune?
I agree with Blogfinger’s first post. As a parent with three children in the Neptune school system, I have come to realize that the socioeconomic factors are a higher component to standardized test score results and rankings than most people understand.
The facilities we have in Neptune are excellent, and the teachers I have interacted with are, with very few exceptions, hard working, caring, dedicated professionals. They are teaching a State approved curriculum.
The children in our district are not less intelligent than those who live in districts with higher rankings.
We as a community (school board, educators, parents, tax payers, and businesses must appreciate and understand these other factors and decide what we can do together to further support and enrich our children’s education.
I always find it interesting that the private schools in the area cost much less then it cost the public schools.
CBA (Christian Brothers Academy) tuition is 15,000/yr followed closely by RBC (Red Bank Catholic) then SJV (St.John Vianney)and Mater Dei. It cost as little as 12k for a private school education in Monmouth county, yet its costing us double for public school
In a letter dated August 8, 2017, 11th District Assemblywoman Joann Downey and Assemblyman Eric Houghtaling reference “a school funding crisis..” They say that there are “damaging budget cuts.”
If any of you are following these issues, please send a comment for Blogfinger readers to understand what’s happening.
What’s equally interesting is that the State of NJ system severely punishes school districts who spend ABOVE the per student cost cap that they arbitraily define.
If your town’s school district wanted to spend more than the cap — say for PhD teachers, or new computers for every student — they would loose the educational funds that the state dolls out to every school district (>$1.5 million in the case of the NJ town we live in when not in OG).
Why would the State want to limit a town’s investment in the education of their children?? Why would the State allow Neptune and Asbury Park to spend more per student than they allow Madison or Clinton, or >500 other school districts in the state?
The answer is obvious — they want to bring everyone down to a lowest common denominator. A concept typically called socialism. Little do they realize that controlling the cap does not control the quality of education, for reasons Blogfinger states above. Stuff like the school spending cap and mandated affordable housing quotas, etc., means that the citizens of towns in NJ cannot control their own destiny. And that’s just not right.
Academic success depends on many variables other than those that are found in school budgets. Those variables have to do with community safety; absence of drugs and violence; encouragement, devotion, love, affection, values, and support at home; good hygeine; decent family income;, accomplishments of family members; two parent households; availability of friends as role models; religious participation; values in the community; community support (sports, music, recreation; mentors and volunteers;) clean and comfortable housing; good nutrition; good sleep; quiet; clean clothing; medical care; sources of joy and happiness; availability of school choice (e.g. charter schools), etc.
Kids who don’t have these advantages will have a tougher time succeeding academically no matter how much is spent per pupil.
The budget component is where the necessary elements to provide a good education are found: teachers, facilities, programs, supplies, computers, extracurricular functions, and special needs such as psychologists, coaches, counsellors, etc.
The components that are found in the budget (as well as additional Abbott funding) must be examined to see if any of the expenditures are useless or duplicated. That’s where the money saving might be located.
I am reminded of Mountain Lakes, a town in Morris County, whose schools are always rated very high in quality. Their high school is ranked 19th in the state, and 2/3 of their students take AP courses. They spend $24,933 per pupil compared to Neptune’s $25,920.00
But Mountain Lakes is populated by upper class,educated families whose kids are naturally achievers. It is a place where academic excellence is expected, applauded, and achieved. Success is promoted there. College admissions reflect that.
Neptune is an Abbott District, and therefore receives remedial funding, As quoted below from Wikipedia, it doesn’t make any difference in performance. Another way to look at it is that schools get paid more to perform poorly. So why improve if the funding then goes away?
“One evaluation concluded that the effect on academic achievement in Abbott districts was greater in lower grades and declined in subsequent grades, until there was no effect in high school. The achievement gap in math test scores for fourth graders narrowed from 31 points in 1999 to 19 points in 2007, and on reading tests from 22 points in 2001 to 15 points in 2007. The gap in eighth grade math narrowed less, from 30 points in 2000 to 26 points in 2008, and did not change in reading. The gap did not narrow in high school.[5] A 2012 study by the New Jersey Department of Education, however, determined that score gains in the Abbotts were no higher than in those in high-poverty districts that did not participate in the Abbott lawsuit and therefore received much less state money.[6]”