Evesham school board rejects interdistrict choice program

In the face of widespread and vocal opposition, the Evesham Township school board voted Monday night to not apply to be part of the state's interdistrict choice program, which would have likely brought lower-income students to the affluent district along with new revenues.

Before the 7-2 vote, resident after resident spoke out, at times angrily, about the proposal they said they feared would harm property values and the educational quality of their high-performing district.

The need for additional revenue was the main reason to join the program, which became available to all districts last month, according to Superintendent John Scavelli Jr. The pilot program began in 2000.

During his presentation in the often-testy session, Scavelli said the district would take up to 63 kindergarten and first-grade students in the 2011-12 school year and only kindergartners thereafter. He said the district would limit the new students to those within 15 miles of Evesham. That would include several lower-income and lower-performing school districts.

For each student, the district would have received $9,227, or more than $581,000 if all 63 slots were filled, Scavelli said. He projected those revenues would reach $2.5 million in the 2018-19 school year.

The superintendent painted a gloomy fiscal picture without additional revenue.

He said the school faces a $5 million deficit in the coming year, but under the new 2 percent tax-increase cap, Evesham can raise only an additional $1 million in new taxes. Since 2003, school district enrollment has dropped more than 13 percent or 700 students.

With school-choice funds, Scavelli said, the district could retain staff and not substantially increase class sizes. Some classes actually would have had fewer students.

If additional revenue is not found, Scavelli said, "you may see large increases in class size, you may see programs go."

If the district joined the program, Scavelli said, students would be elected by lottery if more applied than there were slots available. However, he said, the district could refuse students with bad disciplinary records or some special-education students with extreme needs.

The superintendent's pitch did little to quell the apprehension and outright opposition of taxpayers who spoke out at the session, often drawing loud applause from fellow residents.

Several noted that other districts with similar income levels did not seem to be joining the program.

Many residents were upset to have learned only recently of the district's plan to apply for the program. Some urged that the board wait at least a year. This year's deadline is Oct. 29.

Suzanne Epstein, a parent, said the community should have been kept better informed.

"We are the owners of this company," Epstein said. "We are the taxpayers."

Resident Joe Barbagiovanni expressed a widely held concern about the possible negative effect on property values.

"You cannot make the prediction that this will not affect housing prices," he said.

Some speakers worried the new children would be behavioral problems. Others expressed concern that the applicants would require costly special education that could drain district finances.

Though the legislation to expand the choice program calls for school boards to apply, numerous residents in and outside of the meeting called for a referendum.

"Put it on the ballot," Natalie Rassmann said.

One resident, Diane Dzwill, spoke in favor of the choice program. She said the residents should welcome the children and "throw them a lifeline."

So far, 12 districts have applied to the program, a state education spokesman said. The state will inform districts if they are accepted sometime in January.

Districts that took part in the pilot program, such as Brooklawn in Camden County, found it provided needed revenue while giving their choice students educational options.