The Boston Business Journal has created an interactive map and has posted community by community data illustrating the fastest-growing school districts in Massachusetts.
How Newton school enrollment is growing compared to the rest of the state
by Greg Reibman | Apr 11, 2013 | School Committee | 43 comments
Based on the chicken little rhetoric that the tax-hikers were spouting, I was under the impression that Newton was unique in having enrollment growth in excess of its general population growth.
Furthermore, according to this guy’s report, its confirms my initial observations about we could have offset a significant portion of the vaunted “enrollment growth” in Newton by no longer enrolling 538 non-resident kids in Newton Public Schools.
http://www.movingnewtonforward.org/we_say/we_say.htm
Still, I think that I was able to make a good point in my month and a half that the “enrollment growth” was more rhetoric than reality. Furthermore, I don’t expect to be at a time disadvantage for the next override, which is in all likelihood going to take place in about five years.
This article presents the increase in enrollment as percentages, rather than numbers of students. When talking about enrollment, the number of students is the reality you need to deal with.
It’s also important to note that all the surrounding “green” communities on this map have passed overrides to address school infrastructure issues and overcrowding, and a number have passed multiple overrides. Lexington has passed 12 and Belmont 6, and that’s just off the top of my head.
With regards to Belmont having 6 overrides, last I checked, Newton’s general fund expenditures per student are 36% higher than Belmont’s even though Belmont kids do better on the MCAS than the Newton kids!
As for the increased number of students rather than the increased percentage, I thought I made it abundantly clear that if we stopped enrolling non-resident kids (unless we get the full-reimbursement of tuition rather than partial reimbursement) in Newton Public Schools, it would have offset a significant portion of the NPS enrollment growth during the period in question.
Belmont has a homogeneous population of 25K. Newton has a population of 85K of varied socioeconomic levels. Belmont kids don’t do better across the board in MCAS. They may have slightly higher results but it’s negligible given the circumstances.
You overstate your point Joshua.
Kim, Newton spends 36% more per student than Belmont and yet Belmont kids do better on the test scores (in total and when you break it down by comparable student demographics).
So basically, you have proven my point that more money does not necessarily correlate to better performance.
The interactive map gives the increases both as a percentage as well as actual student enrollment numbers. For Newton they are as follows:
Location: NEWTON
1993 Enrollment: 9,992
2001 Enrollment: 11,243
2011 Enrollment: 11,743
2012 Enrollment: 11,880
1-year Change (%): 1.2
Change since 2001(%): 5.7
Change since 1993 (%): 18.9
From 2001 through 2012 the increase in number of students is 637. So Joshua does have a point. However, the total number of non-resident kids in Newton schools likely hasn’t changed much over the past decade, so the enrollment growth can likely be attributed directly to population growth or just having more families with kids in Newton than 10 years ago. My understanding is that having non-resident kids in Newton schools was intended as a means to increase diversity. The benefit thereof may outweigh the added expense we now face as taxpayers.
Also interesting to note is that the rate of growth from 1993 to 2001 was about double that from 2001 through 2012.
Peter, I analyzed and evaluated the annual cost associated with the six non-resident kid programs. My group and I concluded that the annual cost associated with the six non-resident kid programs to Newton taxpayers was over $7M/year net of state aid. If we didn’t get $3M/year in state aid, the annual cost would have been well over $10M/year.
http://movingnewtonforward.org/we_say/we_say.htm
With regards to “having non-resident kids in Newton schools was intended as a means to increase diversity”, we have concluded that the diversity issue would not be one iota different if Mayor Menino sent along a check for $7M/year to pay for 400+ Boston students. Think about this: Boston taxpayers pay taxes and those taxes are designed to fund a number of activities including providing a free public education. But the reality is that we pay to educate 404 Boston resident kids and 134 other kids who live in other cities and towns. METCO is but one of six programs that enable non-resident kids to come to Newton Public Schools.
Peter- The map uses percentages and actual numbers, but Newton has a much larger, more diverse student population than any of the neighboring communities, so the use of percentages is not a valid statistical measure. An increase in student enrollment of 3% in Newton with close to 12,000 students, and 3% in Wellesley with 5,000 students, or 3 % in a Westwood with 3100 students present very different scenarios.
The only valid statistic when dealing with increased enrollment is the actual numbers of students in the system. The question is simply this: do we have the space to accommodate the number of students enrolled? This year in Newton the answer was no, as was the case several years ago when the system purchased 4 modulars for 4 elementary schools. In addition, thirty three communities in the Metro-Boston area (many in “green” communities) participate in the Metco program and those students are included in the student enrollment statistics on this map, so that really is a separate discussion. Josh sees the Metco program in purely monetary terms; other people see it as an invaluable asset to the school system.
Jane, Newton doesn’t need six programs to educate 538 non-resident kids in our school system.
let’s analyze who derives a value from these programs:
The sending districts, since they avoid having to pay millions of dollars to educate these kids
The teachers union, since there is a greater number of students in the system which enables them to push for more staffing
The administration, since they don’t have to engage in redistricting
The transportation company since its an $800K/year contract
The construction contractors, since the 538 kids in the system help keep another school open and reduce available capacity, forcing the city to hire construction contractors to build new schools instead of closing old superannuated schools like Angier
Unfortunately, the Newton taxpayers lose out on this arrangement, since it costs over $7M/year net of state aid.
Joshua – you left a few other groups who derive value from these programs.
* the students
* the city of Newton and its citizens
Now we clearly have different ideas about what that value is but its a bit of an oversight to leave these off your list entirely.
I think the problem is that what you mean when you say “derive value” you mean money. That’s an awfully narrow definition.
Jerry, I find it to be fiscally irresponsible to ask working class families and seniors on a fixed income to pay a median tax increase of $343/year in order to subsidize programs that collectively cost Newton taxpayers $7M/year net of state aid.
If these programs are such a value to you that you want to pay this yourself, that’s your issue. Please don’t make it mine.
Explain how would the value you get from these programs change in anyway if Boston sent us a $7M/year check for educating their kids in our school system? Think about this: Boston taxpayers pay taxes and those taxes are designed to fund a number of activities including providing a free public education. I insist that Boston (and the other cities & towns) must pay Newton for the costs that Newton incurs in educating its kids in our school system.
Joshua – As I said, we clearly have different ideas about the value of that program. I was just pointing out that you omitted two of the most obvious groups that derive value from the program.
Whether that value justifies the city’s participation in the program isn’t up to me or to you. It’s up to all of us.
As for the “pay this yourself” suggestion – that’s not how civic life works. It’s no more reasonable than telling someone who advocates for increasing the national defense budget to mail a personal check to the Pentagon if that’s what they believe … and stop bothering the rest of us with their personal beliefs.
As for Boston writing a check to Newton for $7.5 million. Yes that would be great and wouldn’t detract from the value of Metco one bit. Frankly, I don’t know of anyone but you that truly believes there’s a shred of a chance of Boston ever writing that check. I suspect that even you know that the “Boston write a $7.5M check” is not a real possibility. In that case, this discussion is really about whether or not Newton should continue participating in Metco. That’s a perfectly reasonable discussion to have.
If you believe the program has no value to the city, then by all means go ahead and advocate for ending it. If the majority agrees with you, great. If the majority doesn’t, it doesn’t mean someone’s jamming their personal agenda down your throat.
Also, endlessly repeating the $7M/year figure doesn’t somehow make that number any more accurate.
“I don’t know of anyone but you that truly believes there’s a shred of a chance of Boston ever writing that check.”
If Boston doesn’t want to pay the costs of educating their kids in our school system and they don’t want to give reciprocal offsets such as allowing 404 Newton kids to go to Boston Latin or any of the prestigious exam schools, then they can’t send their kids here. Period, end of discussion.
Newton also has 134 non-resident kids from other programs besides METCO (Staff kids, EDCO, Tuitioned-In SPED, Homeless kids and other approved to attend). We get full reimbursement for four of those kids. As for the other 130 kids, if their home districts don’t want to pay us the costs (net of state aid) associated with educating their kids in our school system, then they can’t continue to send their kids to our school system. Period, end of discussion.
“In that case, this discussion is really about whether or not Newton should continue participating in Metco. That’s a perfectly reasonable discussion to have.”
I’m not heartened by this statement from you. We’re told that “this is a reasonable discussion”, “these things should be discussed”. The reality is they have not been discussed. And because of that, we just had an override. The people who I represent, are looking for change. We are looking to move Newton forward with fiscal responsibility. That is not what I’ve seen from our government.
“Whether that value justifies the city’s participation in the program isn’t up to me or to you. It’s up to all of us.”
I don’t think these programs justify $7M/year in Newton taxpayer moneys net of state aid. These programs collectively cost Newton households over $230/year. If an investor invested $230/year in a high quality portfolio of stocks and bonds (such as a no-load balanced mutual fund or Berkshire Hathaway’s Class B shares) for 30 years with a 12% expected return, their portfolio would be worth $55,506 after year 30.
Joshua – “Period, end of discussion” “Period, end of discussion”
My mistake, I didn’t realize you were in charge of all these discussions. I’ll stop now.
Jerry, would you have preferred I said “and that’s the bottom line” instead?
We’re never going to agree on the merits of spending $7M/year (net of state aid) on 538 non-resident kids. If Boston (and the other cities and towns) want to make up the costs that are not covered by the meager state aid, then we wouldn’t be having this discussion and the school department could even consider the idea of having an Upper Falls School rather than busing those kids to many different schools.
Jerry said:
“Joshua – you left a few other groups who derive value from these programs.
* the students
* the city of Newton and its citizens”
Can you articulate the value of METCO? Not financially per Joshua. Why does the program exist at all today? What are the benefits from the money, whoever has to spend it, and from the hassle of busing kids all over metropolitan Boston, since Newton isn’t the only city that participates. Why ARE we doing it?
Barry – The larger question is whether it make sense for the city to spend the modest amount (not the fictional $7 m Joshua keeps bandying about ) it does on METCO. That’s an open question that can only be answered by each of us – the entire citizenry.
Barry, since you asked though, I’ll tell you two personal stories of how it has value to two very specific families that I know. Good friends of ours, who live in Boston have a very bright daughter. Boston’s automated lottery school assignment, assigned her to a terrible school in Boston. The parents were extremely disappointed with the placement and looked into METCO as an alternative. They got a METCO slot for their daughter in Dover when she entered first grade. Dover is quite a hike from their home and their daughter has to get up very early and returns much later than she would at a local school. For these very committed parents, that METCO opening was an incredibly important opportunity for their daughter’s future. Despite her somewhat grueling schedule, they’re thrilled that their girl is getting an incredible opportunity that she would otherwise have been denied.
My daughter is African-American. She lives in a city that is overwhelmingly white and overwhelmingly middle-upper class. For her, the METCO program means that there are a few more faces in the school that look like her – that’s no small thing. For my wife and I it means that our daughter will grow up with a little wider experience than she would otherwise. The METCO students, overall have a different life experience then do the students of Newton. Much as we love Newton, it’s important to us though that our daughter be raised with a wider view of the world.
Now I do understand that for some people, METCO has no perceivable value to Newton and its citizens. For us it definitely does. I don’t think because we value METCO, that we should expect everyone else to pay for it. Likewise, I don’t think that if a few people thinks METCO is worthless that they should expect that the program must be stopped.
I hope the majority of citizens agree with us about the value of METCO but if they don’t, I don’t say I want METCO so “period, end of discussion.”
Jerry,
Thanks for the reply.
It’s nice that you see METCO as personally beneficial. That’s not enough reason to spend a lot of money and a lot of useless time on buses, have kids experience a lot of cultural disharmony, and create a lot of tension in communities like this over the tax effects of catering to unique needs.
Everyone in this world has issues. It used to be a philosophy of the US that people were self-reliant and figured out how to solve their own problems. Now, especially under Obama and so-called “progressive” Democrats, everyone’s problems must be solved by the government, especially where it imposes penalties on the majority of people to cater to minority needs.
I, and I think you said you went to school in Boston. I also volunteer in the BPS. There are a lot of good schools in Boston that are easier to get to than the suburban schools. There would be more if Menino didn’t assume that he could send his better students out of the city. It would be much better for these kids to stay in Boston and improve the school system there. To send a kid to Dover from Boston to get an education is absurd.
Regarding your own daughter, every community has certain people who are ethnically or culturally in a small minority. If you didn’t like that, you should have lived somewhere else. Setti did fine growing up in Newton. Should we import South Asians or East Asians because there aren’t enough here for those few to feel a better identity? Should we import Chassidic Jews because there are a few here who are out of place. People make their own lives. If you want more African Americans in your community, live in a community where there are more. Don’t force everyone else to cater to your needs.
Only my opinion.
METCO’s time is way past. It fit a guilt need in the civil rights movement of the 60’s, and even then was an over-reaction to de facto segregation.
Barry – I’m beginning to think we’re just talking past each other. I wrote
and you responded
You say “Don’t force everyone else to cater to your needs.”. I don’t think I am.
My only point in writing this post was to point out that “there’s no value in METCO” is clearly wrong. All sorts of other arguments against METCO are fine with me – “we can’t afford it” or “the benefits aren’t worth the cost”, etc. But if you tell me there is no benefit, than I know you are wrong.
Jerry, I hope you heard Barry Cohen’s underlying message: you and your daughter should move because he doesn’t want to spend money on making Newton a welcoming community.
Barry, I was struck by your argument that: “It used to be a philosophy of the US that people were self-reliant and figured out how to solve their own problems. Now, especially under Obama and so-called ‘progressive’ Democrats, everyone’s problems must be solved by the government, especially where it imposes penalties on the majority of people to cater to minority needs.”
You are right. Hoover and the Republicans followed that strategy and gave us the Great Depression. FDR and the Dems created Social Security and the New Deal to put millions of people out of work and help the working poor survive. The Lochner era Republican Supreme Court upheld “freedom of contract” in order to protect employers who forced 6 day workweeks and 16 hour work days on the working class. FDR and the Dems enacted labor laws to protect workers from “mill towns” and other abusive and exploitative practices of employers who were interested only in their own profits. As recently as the 1960s, millions of retirees and seniors could not afford health care, so Johnson and the Dems created Medicare. And Johnson also got civil rights and voting rights legislation passed to remedy generations of racial discrimination. Now, Obama and the Dems passed Obamacare to help provide affordable health care for every American.
Yes, it is clear that those progressive Democrat bastards ruined our country by helping poor people pay for food and a roof over their heads, helping working people get decent working conditions, helping older people get decent medical care, and helping racial and ethnic minorities and women receive equal treatment under the law.
“put millions of people back to work”
Sheesh. More coffee needed here.
Jerry,
I know what you wrote, but I was just reflecting on the fact that the only justification you could put forth for the continuation of METCO is personal needs. I see no justification at all. It’s a huge waste of time and money, even if a few kids benefit. There are other ways for them to benefit also.
Ted, what can I say? You are off track here. You’re citing things that are either a distortion of history or unrelated to what I said. I know you love being a so-called “progressive Democrat”, but, as smart as you are, your arguments are irrelevant. There are too many for me to bother to debate them. I’m sticking with METCO, which you didn’t even try to justify.
Barry, I think the confusion is that what I wrote was not intended as a justification for the METCO program. I wrote two personal anecdotes to illustrate that value it brings to a few individuals.
If you want to evaluate the value/cost of METCO to the city it would be equally ridiculous to base that on “Jerry likes it” as it would be on “Barry thinks its a waste of money”. Like any program, it doesn’t provide benefits uniformly to all citizens.
I’m perfectly willing to discuss the program, its benefits and its costs. Like any program, its costs have to be justified against its benefits. However whenever I see a comment that says “METCO has no value” rather than “METCO has no value to me” or “METCO doesn’t bring enough value to justify its expense”, it raises my hackles, because I know that’s not true.
Jerry,
I didn’t say it doesn’t have any value, I don’t think. I asked what was the justification for keeping an expensive, complicated, and bothersome program like METCO. Certainly some people will benefit, but that’s not enough reason to continue it. I want to know why it’s still going on, given its drawbacks, other than some feel-good sensation felt by people like Ted that they are helping disadvantaged black kids, as if they are the only disadvantaged kids around, or exposing suburban white kids to inner city black kids, as if that’s the only different exposure worth facilitating.
PS: Greg, what’s with the non-spam check box?
Barry –
My mistake, that was Joshua Norman.
Regarding METCO, Josh Norman continues to declare:
“it costs over $7M/year net of state aid.”
“… spend 7 million dollars a year”
“… annual cost associated with the six non-resident kid programs to Newton taxpayers was over $7M/year net of state aid.”
“…spending $7M/year (net of state aid) on 538 non-resident kids.”
Only incredibly imaginative and biased accounting could find that Newton SPENDS 7 million on METCO or that its COST to Newton is 7 million dollars.
As a program, METCO should be reviewed, if for no other reason than it’s mission is 45+ years old and likely needs updating. First, at the state level, with full participation of the receiving districts. Then at the Newton level, based on any revised mission.
By no one will listen to voices that continue to rely on inaccurate data. One has to be credible to have a “seat at the table” so to speak.
I love whenever there’s an issue on the schools it always comes back to METCO. Yeesh.
Jerry,
I am really pleased that there are some people such as your family, who have gotten some value out of METCO. Thanks for sharing
Barry,
You hit on something very relevant. Barry said that if Boston had better schools, people wouldn’t be so fast to send their kids hundreds of miles away to get educated (paraphrase, of course).
Maybe with a new Mayor in Boston this won’t be as large of an issue….but, who knows.
Tom,
An important thing for making schools good is having good students. Newton’s school system may be mediocre. I don’t know. But, in a city with a high percentage of professionals of above-average income, and probably above-average IQ, where families encourage their kids to study in order to succeed in life, largely through college education, the schools will turn out good graduates and the students will do well on standardized tests and the classes themselves will be more or less disciplined. If Boston kept the kids who are traveling long distances to the suburbs because they crave a good education, then the schools in Boston would be better as a result. Teachers will look better, because they won’t waste a lot of time on discipline problems, and will be able to teach.
Fahey, Terry and Jerry, you’re missing the point.
METCO is but one of six programs that educate non-resident kids in Newton Public Schools. These programs enabled 538 non-resident kids to come to Newton Public Schools in FY 2013.
I’ve recently spoken to a number of people who voted FOR the overrides and they agree with me that these programs cost at least $7M/year.
Even your friend Jeff Seideman insists that Newton needs Boston or the Commonwealth to pay the difference between our general fund expenditures and the state METCO grant. And that is just for the METCO kids. Don’t get him started on the teachers kids.
Terry, I got my numbers from Newton’s School Committee and Central Administration.
http://newton.patch.com/blog_posts/blog-newton-public-schools-has-seen-a-spending-surge-not-an-enrollment-surge#photo-13809745
Barry, would the value that Ted and Jerry derive from these six programs change in any way if Boston and the other cities and towns collectively sent us a $7M/year check for educating their kids in our school system?
Joshua, I’d rather eliminate the program. It’s based upon unsound logic and is a huge pain. The main beneficiaries are the bus companies. In the 60’s, at a time of de facto segregation, schools in black neighborhoods in Boston were inferior. The buildings and supplies were inferior and the teachers were not as choice. The courts instituted mandatory busing throughout the city to achieve racial balance, as in other cities in the US. The suburbs were afraid it would be extended to them and volunteered the METCO program. The result of busing in Boston itself was that white families moved out and the whole school system became largely black. So, the suburbs were the only vestige of a way to achieve some sort of racial balance. But, in 2013, attempting to achieve racial balance is in itself discriminatory. The situation is no longer 1965.
Joshua – I view Village 14 and the Tab blog as ways to discuss the issues of the day in Newton. I’m completely happy reading views that are completely opposite of my own and I have no problem talking about any of the issues you have raised.
It’s been months now. If you’re just going to repetitively, relentlessly and endlessly repost slightly re-worded versions of the same half dozen talking points over and over and over again – its no longer a conversation or a discussion. It just becomes annoying and pointless.
… just one man’s humble opinion.
Barry, here is the position that my group and I have taken with regards to the issue of 538 non-resident kids:
1. Their home districts pay us $7M/year to educate their kids in our school system
2. Their home districts offer us one for one reciprocity to send up to 538 of our kids to their school systems and they pay us the difference between the number they send us and we send them.
3. Or we stop enrolling their kids in our school system
Professor Jeffrey Pontiff of Boston College made an excellent analysis and evaluation of the METCO program in 2009. I only wish he had put together analysis and evaluation of the non-resident staff kid program (93 students in 2013) and the EDCO program (31 kids in 2013).
http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/lifestyle/columnists/x1931051320/Pontiff-How-to-hire-83-new-Newton-teachers-without-spending-a-dime#axzz2QLtZHBwd
Jerry, My group and I put together three reports that touch on the issue of the non-resident kids and I can certainly say that I have put together a significant amount of original research, high quality analysis and thorough data sourcing in each one. If you and your fellow travellers for higher taxes want to rebut them, feel free to do so. If not, then don’t. I don’t know when precisely my next one will be but I know that I will continue to demolish the arguments made by Geoff Epstein, Marcia Tabenken & Company.
Joshua,
Why don’t you advocate getting rid of METCO and maybe other non-resident students, instead of finding a way to manipulate money to cover it? It isn’t just a money issue.
Most school systems will accept a limited number of out-of-system students for special reasons, but not on a grand scale like METCO, which is the majority of ours, and probably every participating school system.
I just read that there are about 3200 Boston students in the program. I don’t know the split, but if it’s 25% high school, 25% middle school, and 50% elementary school, which is a reasonable assumption, then these kids could be housed in, let’s say, one new high school, two new middle schools and two new elementary schools, and be bused, if needed, only within Boston, which is much easier. Those schools could be top quality, like NNHS (;-)). Then Boston can ask for a tax over-ride to pay for their new schools, instead of us.
Barry, my group and I are advocating forcing the city government and the schools to have to make tough choices just like we have to do.
We are offering win-win solutions with regards to these programs. Our goal is to take away the ability of Boston and other towns to send 538 of their kids to our school systems without compensating us for it (after adjusting for applicable state aid).
We have offered three objective and reasonable choices. We would be satisfied with Choice 1, 2 or 3. However, we are adamantly opposed to Choice 4 (the status quo).
1. Their home districts pay us $7M/year to educate their kids in our school system
2. Their home districts offer us one for one reciprocity to send up to 538 of our kids to their school systems and they pay us the difference between the number they send us and we send them.
3. Or we stop enrolling their kids in our school system
Joshua-you keep referring to “my group and I”. So who is “my group and I”?
I meet with several groups of people from different parts of my life and assume others do as well. There’s one significant difference: we don’t expect the city (or anyone else) to do what “my group” wants it to.
This is silly. We need a blog party.
Jane:
I hereby appoint you chair of organizing committee
Jane, my group was the dedicated citizen activists that worked with me on the most recent override campaign and will be working with me in order to move Newton Forward with Fiscal Responsibility.
We represent the interests of the taxpayers who were opposed to the three extravagantly expensive property tax increases that will end up going to fund more of that 80% of what we’re spending on all the time (which is compensation and benefits).
The difference between people like me (Newton citizens for limited taxation and fiscal responsibility) and people like you (people who never met a tax increase they didn’t like) is that we’re not looking to run your lives, but unfortunately your kind seeks to use our means to fund your ends. If you want to pay higher taxes personally, that’s your business, don’t make it mine.
Actually , you didn’t answer my question: who is “my group”: what is the name of your group, who are the officers? Either you have complied with campaign finance law that states “a ballot question committee is not intended to have an indefinite life; it must dissolve after the resolution of the question at the election” or you have formed into a new group. Just wondering what’s going on here.
Well, I was referring to my fellow citizen activists that made up my old group Moving Newton Forward With Fiscal Responsibility.
That group has officially dissolved however the citizen activists that made up that group are reorganizing and reforming into a new group to be named at a later date.
I find it amusing that you’re more concerned about our activities and whether we’ve crossed all of our “i’s” and dotted all of our “t’s” than the fact that the Newton Public Schools wastes $7M/year of taxpayer dollars to provide a public education to 538 non-resident kids.
Did you ask Rob Gifford and Company in 2008 the same questions you’re asking me?
http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/x2138482150/Override-group-Move-Newton-Forward-merges-staff-bank-account-with-nonprofit#axzz2QLtZHBwd
I second the motion.
All in favor?
Thanks for volunteering Jane!