The Tough Questions And Non-Answers About School Funding Capitol Comments

Assemblyman Alex Sauickie

TRENTON - I’m very grateful to serve on the Assembly committees dealing with agriculture, veterans, tourism and related issues. Doing so allows me to be as effective as possible in representing the particular needs and interests of our area.

However, I will confess to a tiny bit of temporary envy of my colleagues currently serving on the Assembly Budget Committee. They put in a lot of hours and do very hard work, but recently they had the opportunity to ask questions of the state Commissioner of Education, Angelica Allen-McMillan. As a legislator representing several school districts facing more state funding cuts this year and next, I admit I would have relished the opportunity.

Fortunately, tough but fair questions were asked by my colleagues. I have to give New Jersey 101.5 credit for the article it ran, focusing on questions asked by Assemblywoman Nancy Muñoz. She sought answers on a central point of the school funding for- mula, but got responses she said were unsatisfactory.

Still, the exchange shined a light on the not-entirely-secret point behind the formula. But before getting to that, let’s take a look at what Governor Murphy said in his budget address, when he unveiled his latest budget and school funding plans.

He said the budget contained “historic property tax relief,” and said “every penny” going to school aid is “property tax relief that lifts more of the burden off the shoulders of local taxpayers.” He also touted a 30% increase in overall school aid during his governorship.

All of that is fine as far as it goes, but left unspoken was the seven-year onslaught of cuts to aid for many of the state’s school districts, including Jackson’s. With all that additional school aid, why are some districts still being cut? What about the property tax relief for their residents?

Assemblywoman Muñoz delved into that issue. Like me, she represents school districts suffering from state aid cuts, and wanted the head of the state education department to say whether those districts should raise property taxes to compensate.

“I can’t speak to that,” the commissioner said.

Assemblywoman Muñoz then spoke about “adequacy,” which is the state’s calculation of what each school district should pay per student, using federal, state and property tax funds, to provide a constitutionally required quality of education. Her point was that the schools she represents are getting state aid cuts even though they’re spending more property tax money than the state says they should to meet adequacy. The commissioner said she doesn’t have an opinion on that, even while acknowledging that property taxes are a “specific element of the [state school aid] formula.”

The Assemblywoman then touched on the governor’s statement about state school aid being property tax relief. She asked, if property taxes have to be increased to provide students with the services they need because of state aid cuts, how does state aid relieve property taxes?

The commissioner responded that the state school aid formula provides “proper” funding to every school district.

Proper.

To be fair, I don’t blame the commissioner for not wanting to talk about property taxes, even though they are a main component of school funding. That would require her to contradict her boss’s statements about property tax relief. Nobody wants to contradict the boss in public.

This brings us back to that central, not-entirely-secret point about the school funding formula Gov. Murphy signed into law. It picks out certain school districts and says, you can afford to raise property taxes, so you’re not getting as much state aid anymore.

Here’s what a Senate committee said about that funding formula legislation: “The bill also requires that, for school years 2019-2020 through 2024-2025, a school district that is spending below adequacy and experiences a reduction in State school aid must increase its general fund tax levy by two percent over the prior school year.”

Translation: the formula doesn’t have higher property taxes as an unfortunate, unforeseen side-effect; it actually mandates property tax increases.

Gov. Murphy said his proposed budget is “focused on the pocketbooks of our families.” When it comes to school funding, he was certainly right – just not in the way he intended.

Alex Sauickie is a life-long Jackson resident who represents his home town and 13 other towns in the State Assembly.

Bill Would Ban Sale And Possession Of Gun Silencers

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), a founding member of the Senate Gun Violence Prevention Caucus, and Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.-12) reintroduced the Help Empower Americans to Respond (HEAR) Act – bicameral federal gun safety legislation to ban the importation, sale, manufacturing, transfer and possession of gun silencers or suppressors.

“Gun silencers are devices designed for a very specific purpose – to suppress the sound of gunfire from unsuspecting victims and reduce the chances they can run, hide, take cover, and call the police during an active shooter situation,” said Sen. Menendez. “It is well past time that we pass the HEAR Act, legislation that would prevent armed assailants from using deadly devices that only make incidents of gun violence all the more dangerous.”

“Silencers are not tools of self-defense, they are tools of murder. They have no legal application, which is why law enforcement officials around the country have called for their elimination,” said Rep. Watson Coleman. “The HEAR Act will save lives and is part of the common sense approach to firearms legislation that has widespread support among voters on both sides of the aisle.”

Sen. Menendez first introduced the HEAR Act in 2019 following the deadly Virginia Beach mass shooting, in which a gunman attached a suppressor to a .45-caliber handgun before opening fire in a local government office building where he killed 12 people and injured four more.

In addition to prohibiting gun silencers, the HEAR Act would:

• Authorize a buyback program for silencers using Byrne JAG grants;

• Provide individuals with a 90-day grace period after the date of enactment for individuals to comply with the ban;

• Provide limited exceptions for certain current and former law enforcement personnel, for certain Atomic Energy personnel and purpose, and for certain authorized testing or experimentation.

Violence Policy Center, Newtown Action Alliance, March For Our Lives, and Everytown support the bill.

“The Violence Policy Center applauds the introduction of the HEAR Act to ban silencers. Silencers are military-bred accessories that make it easier for criminals to take innocent lives and threaten law enforcement,” said Kristen Rand, States Government Affairs Director. “Manufacturers brag that silencers can make guns ‘whisper quiet’ while increasing shooters’ accuracy and ability to fire rounds more quickly. These characteristics only make silencers more attractive to mass shooters and terrorists. The Violence Policy Center documented the dangers of silencers in our 2019 study, Silencers: A Threat to Public Safety.”

“Common-sense regulations on firearm silencers and mufflers is a simple, straightforward step in encouraging responsible gun ownership,” said Elena Perez, Senior Policy Associate at March For Our Lives. “These devices drastically reduce the noise of shots fired, making it challenging to identify where the gunfire is coming from, a potentially fatal mistake in mass shootings. With gun violence increasing in severity across the country, why make already deadly weapons even deadlier?”

A gun silencer, which is also known as a suppressor, is attached to the barrel of a firearm in order to “limit the sound, muzzle flash and kickback” of a gun. Silencers pose a great danger to law enforcement officers and the public since they make it more difficult to detect the location of an active shooter. They diminish the effectiveness of gunshot detection technology deployed in many municipalities that rely on audio sensors to record the sound, time and location of loud noises. Gun silencers have been used in gun violence related incidents over the last decade:

• In Monterey Park, California, on January 21, 2023, an armed assailant with a semi-automatic weapon modified with a homemade suppressor killed 11 people and injured nine others.

• In Virginia Beach, Virginia, on May 31, 2019, a gunman armed with a .45-caliber handgun fitted with a suppressor killed 12 people in a government building. One individual who survived the shooting reported hearing what sounded like a nail gun.

• In Jacksonville, Florida, in December 2017, police arrested a man for planning to “shoot up” an Islamic Center. He was charged with possessing a silencer not registered to him that he purchased from an undercover detective.

• In southern California, in February 2013, a former Los Angeles police officer killed four people, and wounded three others over the course of nine days. As police investigated, they wondered why nearby residents were not reporting the shots. It turned out that, in an effort to conceal his murders, the shooter was using a silencer, which distorts the sound of gunfire and masks the muzzle flash of a gun.

• In Toledo, Ohio, in January 2011, a man fatally shot his coworker as he sat eating his breakfast in his office. No one at the office heard the gunshot and the victim’s co-workers originally assumed he had died of a heart attack. Police later surmised that the killer had used a silencer.

Gun silencers are among the fastest-growing segments of the gun industry. While several states, including New Jersey, outlaw gun silencers, these devices are currently permitted under federal law, but must be registered. According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, there are currently over 900,000 silencers registered under the National Firearms Act. A nationwide ban on silencers would ensure the devices are not trafficked into states where bans are in place.

Board President Giuseppe Palmeri said “the budget is in the works and we will have a presentation on the budget on May 8. We had JEA (Jackson Education Association) negotiations. I am the chair of that particular committee. It is ongoing and there is nothing further to report on but the next meeting (about negotiations) will be on May 10.”

Palmeri said there were Teamsters negotiations going on as well and Board member Erica Osmond was not present at that meeting to give a report on that.

“There is nothing further to report at this time but they are looking at a meeting date,” he said.

Principal Change

Sylvia Rosenauer Elementary School Principal Ronald Polakowski will transfer to the

Crawford-Rodriguez Elementary School in the next school year.

“Mrs. Adriann Jean-Denis, the existing principal is retiring. She is an amazing educator and will be missed tremendously. Mr. Polakowski is a good person to step into those shoes,” Pormilli explained. “He is an educational leader and will be a great fit. We plan to replace him with a new principal. We will post for a principal for the 2023-24 school year.”

Preventing Bullying

Noting numerous programs and activities that go on throughout the school district, the superintendent pointed out a particular program on the middle school level, “that is the program to prevent bullying, inappropriate behavior on cell phones and social media.”

“Both schools have held multiple assemblies, multiple approaches and multiple lessons in these areas. More specifically, the Ocean County Prosecutor’s Office has been working closely with us and has presented to every grade level about these dangers and the importance of staying safe and the importance of what you are posting,” she added.

Pormilli said, “a lot of discussions were followed up by guidance counselors. The Prosecutor’s Office also held a district wide parent night. We had 18 parents attend. It is real and a difficult challenge in schools and in society having phones and social media in the hands of our youth 24/7.”

She noted the school district continues to hold meetings, lessons and activities that stress the consequences of posting inappropriately on social media. “We have to send that message together that words have consequences whether said in person or online and that it creates a digital footprint - one that can last forever for students.”

“Working together we can address this difficult challenge,” she added. “We will continue to present our preventative programs and assemblies and lessons but it has to take all of us and we are asking for some assistance as well.”

Congrats DECA Kids

The superintendent also noted that township high school students who participated in the DECA program won an award during a conference in Atlantic City which led them to participate at the International DECA Conference held in Orlando, Florida. DECA prepares emerging leaders and entrepreneurs for careers in marketing, finance, hospitality and management in high schools and colleges around the globe.

“Congratulations to all those students,” Pormilli said.