From 2004-05, when the S- 1701 legislation was passed capping the growth in the net General Fund (GF) (prior year appropriated, excluding rollovers) budget at the greater of 2.5 percent or Consumer Price Index (CPI), through 2007-08, when the School Funding Reform Act (SFRA) putting a direct 4 percent cap on the growth of the GF tax levy was passed, Jackson Board of Education geniuses gave us "controlled" 43.17 percent growth in final approved budget GF tax levy.

The CPI cumulative increase over the same three-year period as reported by New Jersey Department of Education was 11.01. Our "controlled" growth in the GF tax levy was four times the growth in the CPI to which it was supposed to be pegged.

The growth in the final approved (after Township Council cuts) net spending budget (total local revenues plus non-restricted state aid), which provides the basis for the comparative cost per pupil as shown in the Comparative Spending Guide (CGS) issued in March each year during that period was 18.28 percent.

The maximum thorough and efficient cost per pupil as determined each year by the state Department of Education reflecting the cost of teaching the core curriculum in New Jersey grew 11.01 percent, same as the CPI.

The enrollment in Jackson's schools over that same three-year period as reported each Oct. 15 by our board increased a paltry 1.8 percent. That is one-tenth the growth in the net spending budget.

That enrollment is currently decreasing and projected to continue doing so over the foreseeable future.

Clearly the Jackson Board of Education is taxing the taxpayers far in excess of what is needed for imparting a thorough and efficient education meeting core curriculum standards.

The hidden cost driver is the annually compounding cost of "valuable programs" intended to deliver "quality education" over and above the maximum thorough and efficient education cost as determined by a board of recognized national and state experts convened by the state Department of Education.

The Jackson school establishment never once claimed to have any representation on or input to that board.

When queried repeatedly in budget work sessions if they had any disagreement with the allocation in the SFRA of the categorical (transportation aid, special education aid) funds, no one on the administration or board ever seemed to have a clue.

But then, who cares, it is only taxpayer money and there is plenty more where this came from, right? "It's for the children!"

At budget markup time, the "valuable programs" serve as earmarks to be used to try and build sufficient support from single-issue special-interest voting groups to pass the always bloated and evergrowing budget (even when enrollment is actually decreasing).

Jackson board overriding "education quality" objective seems to be to ensure Jackson schools are ranked in the top of the 15 school districts in Ocean County (i.e., a "Big Frog in Small Pond" vision of education quality).

These placements are based on the test scores on applicable level state standardized tests (e.g., GEPA, HSPA) taken from the state school report card issued each year for the schools in Ocean County.

The individual school scores are sliced and diced and aggregated by school type (elementary, middle, high) weighted by enrollment. The final "scores" are useless for evaluating performance by component schools, which is what is intended in this PC nonjudgmental bureaucracy.

The raw test scores to begin with are simple pass-fail indicators. Students scoring in the upper "advanced proficient" range count the same as those who barely manage a score at the "proficient" passing cutoff level.

The resulting aggregated state standardized test score thus can hide an actual net "dumbing down" effect when "advanced proficient" students start sliding down into "proficient" status. (This is the recent trend at Jackson Memorial High School).

Jackson board incontinent spending on "valuable programs" to boost school performance on state standardized tests has passed the point of diminishing return.

Jackson board stimulus spending is targeted on the wrong student segment — the effort is focused on the middle schools, and by the time HSPA testing rolls around any gains are dissipated.

We will not even glance at SAT scores, which have been tanking below state averages and even more below national averages for the past five years.

Continued overspending on stimulus "earmarks" does not help the students. It only beggars their parents and grandparents before the students even get to college — that is reverse generational theft. After the recent revaluation, it's escalated to grand larceny.

Nicolas Antonoff Jr.

Jackson