Education Commissioner Saul A. Cooperman of New Jersey recently initiated proceedings to assume control of the Jersey City public schools, asserting that the urban district is plagued with political favoritism, corruption, and financial mismanagement. This is the first instance in which the state’s new school-intervention law has been employed, as the commissioner has issued a show-cause order to district officials, giving them until June 3 to provide reasons for why the state should not take over and manage the schools. While several states have similar intervention laws, Jersey City is the first school district in the country to be labeled as being in a state of "academic bankruptcy."
In addition, education officials have filed a separate motion with the New Jersey office of administrative law for "emergent relief," which could place the district’s fiscal and personnel management under state control as early as mid-June. Commissioner Cooperman held a press conference on May 24, where he unveiled a comprehensive, three-volume, 2,000-page report on the failing Jersey City district. The report, which cost $200,000 to produce, highlights numerous deficiencies that critically impact the district’s operations. Cooperman stated, "The school district has failed both the children and the residents of the city. Our utmost priority must be to advocate for these children and ensure they receive the education they deserve."
The report also accuses district officials of violating state contract-bidding laws and allowing political interference in school matters. It describes the Jersey City School District as a public institution that has reached a state of managerial bankruptcy, lacking the determination and resources necessary for a transformative change in the schools. Governor Thomas H. Kean initially proposed the intervention measure in 1986 and faced a year-long battle with the Senate before its eventual passage in January of this year.
The law grants the education commissioner the authority to replace a district’s superintendent, administrative staff, and school board. It also empowers him to increase local taxes and evaluate principals. Moreover, the law permits the termination of tenured administrators after a three-stage evaluation process. Teachers, on the other hand, are not directly affected by the law, as they were previously protected through vigorous opposition. However, Commissioner Cooperman indicated that all union contracts must be renegotiated in the event of a state takeover. He considers the proposed takeover as "invasive surgery" and an "intrusion" that should only be implemented on rare occasions.
Since 1984, the Jersey City schools have consistently failed to meet state standards in the monitoring process. According to New Jersey law, each district must be certified based on criteria such as student achievement, attendance, facilities, desegregation efforts, and fiscal management. Currently, 97 percent of the state’s 583 districts hold certification. With an enrollment of 29,000 students, Jersey City is the second-largest district in the state, consisting predominantly of black and Hispanic students. State statistics reveal that only roughly 25 percent of the 1,600 Jersey City students who took the state’s High School Proficiency Test passed all three sections, namely mathematics, reading, and writing.
Nevertheless, this performance represents an improvement compared to the 1986 school year when only approximately 15 percent passed all three sections. In the district’s 28 elementary schools last year, 66 percent of 3rd-grade students achieved passing scores in the reading and mathematics sections of the Metropolitan Achievement Test, a nationwide exam. This figure increased from the previous year’s record of 48.6 percent for reading and 53.6 percent for mathematics. Franklin L. Williams, the superintendent of schools for the city, argues that the district encounters the same socioeconomic barriers that hinder other urban school systems and suggests that increased funding would expedite the pace of reform. Currently, the district’s budget exceeds $171 million.
According to a recent survey, a significant number of individuals within the school system are supporting the state’s efforts. Out of the 90 principals and administrators in Jersey City who were surveyed, 65 percent fully supported the state takeover, even though there was a risk of them losing their jobs. Another 15 percent said they would support a takeover under certain circumstances, according to Henry Miller, president of the New Jersey Association for School Principals and Administrators, which conducted the survey.
The state’s report, which summarizes the findings of two independent consultants who conducted the investigation, dedicates over 70 pages to exposing corrupt management practices. The report states that "political patronage, union pressure, and cronyism" consistently influence decisions regarding hiring, firing, promotions, and staff deployment at all levels. It further asserts that these employment practices are carried out without considering the impact they will have on the education of the children. The report also accuses the school district of violating contract-bidding laws on at least one occasion.
Richard A. Kaplan, director of the state’s office of compliance, stated that the report will be handed over to law enforcement officials for further investigation. The report concludes that due to the advanced stage of decay within the Jersey City School District, more decisive and nontraditional intervention by higher public authorities is needed. Mayor Anthony R. Cucci, who is implicated in the report for improper intervention in district affairs, commented that he would need time to assess the validity of the allegations before making a statement. However, he expressed his support for the state’s involvement if it leads to an improved quality of education for the children.
The state has already begun actively recruiting a new superintendent to serve in case the takeover is approved. Once the superintendent is found, they will collaborate with state officials to establish a 15-member board of education. This board will initially serve in an advisory capacity for three years. After that, an election will be held to select nine board members for terms of up to three years. The state will remain in control for at least five years or until the district meets certification requirements. If the district challenges the takeover attempt in its response on June 3, the arguments from both sides will be heard by an administrative-law judge within 20 days. Even if the judge rules in favor of the district, the decision can be overridden by Mr. Cooperman, who may proceed with the takeover. According to the intervention law, the education department has six months to complete a managerial overhaul. However, if the city directly challenges the attempt in a state court, the takeover could be delayed until late 1989.
In the meantime, district officials are required to attend a hearing before Mr. Cooperman on June 7 in Trenton. This hearing will determine whether the state should take control of the school system’s fiscal and personnel operations. Walter J. McCarroll, assistant commissioner for the division of county and regional services, stated that based on the evidence, it is necessary to exert some control at this point. The district can appeal this decision to the state board of education and state courts. However, Mr. McCarroll expressed confidence that the motion will go unchallenged at the June 7 hearing and that the state will gain partial control of the district by the end of the month. If that happens, there will be no immediate staff changes, but the current staff will be closely monitored to ensure they act in the best interest of the children once the takeover begins.
