Editorial cartoon missed the mark

I am writing to complain about your political cartoon and associated editorial in the Sept. 16 issue of the Examiner. The cartoon is upside down. Our state and federal governments are the ones stoking the flames of growth in school budgets. Local school boards and citizen action groups are the ones trying to keep a lid on costs. I wonder if your cartoonist has ever heard of unfunded mandates. Virtually every state and federal law passed concerning education is another unfunded mandate — which means the government sets new requirements, but provides no funding for implementation. Thus, the local school boards are stuck with finding the additional money.

I have not been moved to write this letter because I was offended. As a member of the school board, I wouldn’t last long without being thick-skinned. What has me so upset is the reinforcement of a common, and damaging, misconception. Your editorial states, “It’s refreshing to see our leaders in Trenton trying to reform school spending.” I completely disagree with this premise! The laws mentioned, S-1701 and A-99, are just the latest example of why education laws are created. The intent is only to appear to be doing something about rising school budgets. Why would the state government want to actually change the current situation? They continue to exacerbate the problem, but the local school boards get the blame. Your editorial and cartoon only serve to reinforce this uneducated view.

Property tax reform and constitutional conventions are efforts aimed at the symptoms of the problem. The root cause of the problem is that the state funds (underfunds) a significant portion of school budgets. As they continue to pass unfunded mandates, making costs go up, they continue to decrease the amount of money allocated to most local school districts. A few years ago the state used to pay for 35 percent of the Millstone school budget. Recently, that percentage was down to 25 percent. As an example of the reasons given for less funding, in recent years the state has refused to acknowledge the increased enrollment in our schools in their funding allocation formula. As long as the state government continues to grow spending requirements and shrink their contributions to school budgets, there will be no relief from escalating taxes — changing the type of taxation won’t solve the problem.

During our recent school referendums, the Examiner was very helpful in getting detailed and accurate information to the public. Your reporters continue to work hard to understand school issues and report on them responsibly. But, your editorial and cartoon missed the mark this time. The caps imposed by the new laws are the state’s way of telling school boards to “do more, but spend less.” Not very “refreshing” from my point of view.

Although I believe many well-informed people will agree with me, the comments stated here are presented as my own opinions.

Sam Qutub

Millstone