In a letter to the editor, Jersey City Board of Education Trustee Natalia Ioffe, who is seeking re-election on the “Education Matters” slate, details why the district deserves more state aid than it currently gets.
Dear Editor,
My name is Natalia Ioffe and the following statements are made in my capacity as a private citizen, and not in my capacity as a board member.
These statements are also not representative of the board or its individual members, and solely represent my own personal opinions.
Throughout the past few years, the Jersey City Public School (JCPS) District has faced an onslaught of negative public opinion, often driven by political narratives.
The most common criticism against JCPS has been the school budget being the cause of the increase in local property taxes.
Few of the critics have acknowledged the methodical and brutal cuts in state aid over the last seven years, totaling approximately $278 million.
In the school year 2017-2018, the state revenues supplied $413 million in funding to JCPS, and the local tax levy supplied $117 million, making up the bulk of the operational budget (not including federal revenues, Title funds, Pre-K and Special Ed grants, and fund balance reserve).
Today, the state revenues to JCPS amount to a little more than $136 million, while the local taxpayers supply the bulk of the funding — $443 million.
The respective roles of the state government and the local tax levy in supporting JCPS have been completely and deliberately reversed.
In 2018, I attended the state educational budget committee in Trenton, where a group of NJ state senators and assembly representatives discussed the financial fate of JCPS. The prevailing opinion seemed to be that Jersey City was less deserving than other school districts, because of our municipality’s perceived wealth.
As a result, in the years that followed, our schools have lost over a quarter billion dollars in funding, with the local taxpayers picking up the difference. Since then, JCPS has not had an apparent advocate in state government.
Other than the Jersey City Payroll Tax legislation sponsored by Senator Cunningham in 2019, which managed to somewhat supplement the gap caused by state funding cuts, and the litigation by the Jersey City Board of Education to restore its funding, no one has yet truly stood up in Trenton on behalf of the JCPS district and its students in a meaningful way.
Possibly because there has been insufficient clarity about the impact of the cuts and the glaring inequity in how the Jersey City Public School district has been perceived and subsequently treated compared with other comparable districts.
According to the published school budget data, JCPS is the second-largest school district in NJ (27,709 students), outsized only by Newark Public Schools (49,011), and followed closely by Elizabeth (24,597) and Paterson (22,829).
Keeping these numbers in mind, JCPS receives only $136 million in state revenues, while Newark district receives an impressive $1.2 billion, and Elizabeth and Paterson districts receive approximately $590 million each, despite having smaller enrollments than JCPS.
It would be reasonable to assume that these fellow large districts have more economically disadvantaged students than Jersey City, however that is not exactly the case.
According to Niche.com, a platform known for its comprehensive rankings of schools and colleges based on factors like academics, teachers, and student outcomes, Paterson’s total number of students eligible for free and reduced lunch is smaller than JCPS, based on the difference in enrollment.
Finally, it is important to note that some of the neighboring public school districts in Hudson County that have a fraction of JCPS’s enrollment receive almost as much state aid or more.
Bayonne, with 8,437 students, receives $129.8 million in state funding, West New York, which has 7,080 students, receives $135.3 million, and Union City, serving 10,812 students, receives $218.2 million.
While much can be debated about the perceived wealth of Jersey City as a municipality, its rising property values, and population growth, something remains forgotten.
Two-thirds of the children attending Jersey City Public Schools are classified as economically disadvantaged, and they remain largely unaffected by the city’s “wealth.”
Many face severe challenges, including homelessness, exposure to violence, acting as primary caregivers for younger siblings, or serving as translators for their immigrant parents.
Despite these hardships, public schools are the one stable institution in their lives, offering opportunities for growth—physically, mentally, and intellectually—and helping to break cycles of poverty.
Additionally, while U.S. Census data shows that 21.5% of Jersey City’s population is Black or African American and 27.2% is Hispanic or Latino, the student population is 27.8% Black and 38.5% Hispanic, highlighting that minority students form the majority of our students.
These vulnerable children, with limited options, are the ones most affected by the continued underfunding and neglect of public schools by various levels of government.
Natalia Ioffe
Interesting how Natalia just brushes aside JC “perceived” wealth as she calls it. Lets look at the numbers then, JC should receive less state aid than Elizabeth and Paterson, and it should be obvious why.
The property values for JC amount to over $52 BILLION compared with Newark, the largest city in the state, at $22 billion, Elizabeth at $14 billion and Paterson at $11 billion, according to the NJ Division of Taxation.
This shows that JC properties are 130% higher than Newark, 258% larger than Elizabeth and 342% higher than Paterson.
JC is not deserving of state aid.