Search

Increased attention to proposed federal early childhood education (ECE) legislation has sparked a debate on what the future holds for state-funded ECE systems. This brief explores how the goal of universal preschool is being shaped by the federal agenda and examines state programs in various stages of development. President Obama's Preschool for All program is outlined, along with associated funding strategies. An overview of selected state-funded preschool programs is provided. Recommendations for state policymakers are included: (1) Build upon existing ECE infrastructure; (2) Make state-supported ECE programs a comprehensive investment; and (3) Implement a state-supported ECE program in phases.

1974 is a watershed for New Jersey public schools, a time when the State is under court order to reform its discriminatory and ineffective method of raising and distributing educational revenues. The existing approach to financing education in the state of New Jersey assigns higher educational resources to pupils in richer school districts, yet taxes the poorer districts at higher rates. Its basic flaw is the low proportion of equalizing state funds relative to the proportion of local revenues. Thus the state fails to overcome the disparities in local ability to support schools. Two alternative directions for reform seem to emerge. The first assumes that the Court opinion was essentially directed at requiring the state to meet the educational needs of its pupils. This view implies that policy-makers should concentrate their efforts on establishing the costs of a "thorough and efficient" education. The second direction is grounded in an attempt to reform the existing state aid structure to meet the Court's objections. By markedly increasing the proportion of state equalizing aid, the plan is intended to eliminate discrimination against low wealth school districts and thus guarantee the ability of all districts in the state to provide an adequate educational program. (Author/JM)

Public schools in New Jersey are financed primarily by local property taxes. This system of finance is unconstitutional, according to the New Jersey Supreme Court, and therefore it must be revised. The proposals for revision range from very slight increases in state school aid to complete state financing of schools, but all of the proposals shift at least part of the burden of school finance from local property taxes to state taxes. Thus, all of the proposals for revision provide some relief from property taxes. This paper examines the economic effects of this property tax relief, especially the effects on our hard-pressed central cities. The current system of school finance in New Jersey is unfair primarily because some school districts receive an excessive share of non-residential property taxes. It is also unfair because it encourages exclusionary zoning and because Federal tax laws treat homeowners and renters differently. It is inefficient because the property tax, despite its appeal as a revenue source, has undesirable long-run effects on the growth of central cities. An increase in state aid to schools would reduce these inequities and inefficiencies in proportion to the size of the increase. In particular, more state aid would lower property taxes, raise property values, lower rents, and help revitalize our dying cities. (Author/JM)

The study reported in this document found no evidence for the minicipal overburden (m/o) hypothesis of urban school finance. The theory asserts that there is a causal relationship between high levels of non-school municipal expenditure or tax rates and low levels of school spending. Demand for expenditure on education in a sample of school districts in Connecticut, New Jersey, and Virginia was estimated using a median voter model and the hypothesis was tested by including in the estimating equation several versions of a variable representing municipal overburden. The following conclusions are reported: (1) m/o does not influence the demand for expenditure on education are demand for municipal services and demand for education are influenced by much the same factors, so that where the demand for one is high the demand for the other is also likely to be high; (3) demand for education behaves similarly to demand for any other good in that the quantity demanded responds positively to income and negatively to price, with elasticities that are within the expected range for a good that absorbs an appreciable fraction of income, for which quantity can be varied, and for which there are substitutes; (4) proxies for preferences also play expected roles; (5) federal and state aid influence demand for education in ways that are not satisfactorily explained by either the income-constraint expanding role or the "flypaper" mode; and (6) none of the forces often alleged to lead "inexorably" to high expenditures for municipal functions is found to do so. Two tables of statistical data are included. A discussion of the methodology used to estimate the demand for municipal services, details of the regressions used as tests of the municipal overburden hypothesis, and a list of five references are appended. (FMW)

This document reports on a survey of 30 school districts (five percent of all New Jersey school districts) which contain over two-thirds of the State's total minority enrollment. Twenty-three of the 30 districts are classified as urban communities and over 98 percent of the minority students live in them. Property taxes are the primary source of funds for all public services. Communities with low property values generally offer marginal, if not inadequate, municipal and educational services and in addition rely heavily on State and Federal aid. Some of New Jersey's major urban centers count on such aid to underwrite as much as 50 to 75 percent of their municipal and educational costs. Most of the districts in the survey are low socioeconomic level communities. It is noted that although money alone will not solve the educational problems in these communities, adequate funding is necessary. It is suggested that minority professionals and interest groups must become involved in the policy making arena. (Author/MC)

The current system of financing postsecondary education in New Jersey and that proposed by the Booher Commission in its final report, "Financing in an Era of Uncertainty," are compared. The Booher Commission was a public, blue ribbon commission appointed by the New Jersey Board of Higher Education. Implementation of the recommendations of the Booher Commission would mandate changes in present state financing strategies and the reallocation of state resources. The report considers major components of the current and proposed system in relation to student financial assistance and institutional aid. The state's appropriation to higher education is examined in total and across major expenditure categories. Attention is also directed to: fund allocation to various sectors or postsecondary education; the effects on students as classified by institutional sector and family income; and the impact of the two plans on New Jersey's taxpayers. The comparisons concern expenditures in 1976 dollars, and current higher education expenditures are derived from the adjusted funding year 1976 appropriation. A basic thrust of the commission's recommendations is that a larger proportion of higher education funds would be distributed to students directly through programs of financial aid and a smaller percentage through direct subsidies to institutions. In comparing the two alternative systems of financing postsecondary education, attention is focused on the effect of state student aid financial programs on the tuition and fee charges faced by New Jersey. The effect of federal student aid programs on the cost of college attendance is addressed in an appendix. The commission used a cost simulation model to determine full tuitions at each sector. (SW)