Educators shake their heads at idea of county districts Thursday, October 19, 2006 • BY ROBERT SCHWANEBERG • Star-Ledger Staff Proposals to cut property taxes by centralizing school administrative costs at the county level drew a skeptical reception from the state's educational establishment yesterday. The state's largest teachers union, along with associations of school boards and administrators, told lawmakers the proposals could hurt education while doing little or nothing to lower property tax bills. "We must never sacrifice the quality of our public schools in pursuit of savings -- savings that may be minimal, ephemeral or even nonexistent," Barbara Keshishian, vice president of the New Jersey Education Association, said. John Lichtenberg, speaking for the state Principals and Supervisors Association, warned that by creating larger districts, "we risk kids spending more time on the bus, larger class sizes, losing kids in the crowd." Sen. Robert Smith (D-Middlesex), co-chairman of the Joint Legislative Committee on Government Consolidation, called those reactions "wholly expected. We knew there would be push-back from school officials whose continued employment relies on what we do to rein in property taxes." Smith said his proposal "could save as much as $400 million" by eliminating the "glaring inefficiencies" created by having 618 school districts, each with its own superintendent. His proposal would allow voters in each county to establish, by referendum, a "county administrative school district" responsible for purchasing textbooks and other supplies, providing transportation, negotiating contracts, hiring personnel and erecting and repairing school buildings. Local school districts would continue to exist and be responsible for all local costs, from teachers to janitors, Smith said, but local superintendents would be abolished. Each district would get a bill for the cost of centralized administrative services, which could be as little as one-fifth what they are now paying for local superintendents, Smith said. "There are no losers," Smith said. A draft version of Smith's legislation states "no student would be required to change the school at which the student was enrolled prior to the creation of the county district." Assemblyman Joseph Malone (R-Burlington) questioned whether such a restriction is workable in a bill intended to save money. He suggested that if one district needs space and a neighboring district has it, the county superintendent would order students bused rather than incur the cost of building a new school. "To not do that is not going to take advantage of all the efficiencies," replied John Donahue, assistant executive director of the N.J. Association of School Business Administrators. Malone said: "I can imagine how contentious it would be, moving students from Town X to Town Y. Parents go a little bit berserk when that happens." David Sciarra, executive director of the Education Law Center, which represents students in the state's poorest districts, said creating countywide districts "could help open up opportunities for children to transfer under the federal No Child Left Behind law." Depending on availability of space, that could "allow a student at Trenton Central High School to transfer to Princeton High." Sciarra said the discussion about school consolidation should focus on its educational benefits rather than possible cost savings. He said numerous studies have shown that "if you can create more socio-economic mix in our schools, all students do better." An alternative to Smith's bill, sponsored by Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts (D-Camden), would give existing county superintendents expanded powers to promote cost savings and veto local budgets that fail to achieve them. Donahue questioned whether either proposal puts too much expectation on one official. Noting that Roberts' proposal has been dubbed the "super-superintendent," Donahue said, "I don't know if we have super men and women out there who can handle the likes of 70 school districts in Bergen. The scope and size of it worries me." Robert Schwaneberg covers legislation. He may be reached at rschwaneberg@starledger.com or (609) 989-0324. © 2006 The Star-Ledger. Used by NJ.com with permission.