We hear more and more about consolidation of school districts. Earlier in Governor Corzine’s term he spoke regularly about voluntary mergers of districts, but now the State Legislature is playing hardball. Forget voluntary. The passage of the legislation 18A last year created the sceptered post of Executive County Superintendent and, to the horror of proponents of home rule, this new throne has the power to order consolidation. Here’s the language from the bill itself, 18A:

No later than three years following the effective date of sections 42 to 58 of P.L.2007, c.63 (C.18A:7-11 et al.), (the Executive County Superintendent will) recommend to the commissioner a school district consolidation plan to eliminate all districts, other than county-based districts and other than preschool or kindergarten through grade 12 districts in the county, through the establishment or enlargement of regional school districts.

Easy, right? We’ve got scads of evidence that merging smaller school districts into larger regional school districts could save money. Back in 1995, Education Week estimated that New Jersey could save $123 million dollars by moving all our non kindergarten –12th grade districts into nearby districts. What’s that in 2008 dollars?

And here’s a study from 2001 by Syracuse University’s Center for Policy Research , which confirms that “holding student performance constant, we find evidence that school district consolidation substantially lowers operating costs, particularly when small districts are combined.”

Okay. It saves money, right? Uh, better talk to the NJSBA, NJASA, and the NJEA. Here in acronym-overload land, we’re just bursting with reasons why consolidation is a terrible idea. In a letter entitled “School District Size Matters,” Barry Galasso, the Executive Director of New Jersey Association of School Administrators, extols the superiority of small locally-governed school districts.

This body of research shows that when socio-economic factors are controlled, students who attend smaller schools are more likely to graduate and to participate in extracurricular activities. Smaller schools have lower incidents of crime and violence, and greater parental involvement…Certainly, a move to a countywide system would bring with it larger schools with larger student populations.

Consolidation and/or a move to a countywide system will not necessarily result in cost savings. Since cost savings cannot be guaranteed and a move to a countywide system will likely negatively impact student achievement, one must question the logic of moving to a countywide system for experimental purposes.

How about the New Jersey School Boards Association? (Let’s leave aside the fact that this group represents 4500 people who owe their offices to the fact that New Jersey accommodates 615 school districts.) Here’s a press release:

Consolidation of school districts is no cure for high property taxes and, in fact, could increase costs, an official of the New Jersey School Boards Association today told a legislative panel examining property-tax reform.

“Unless it’s considered case by case, school consolidation could easily result in higher costs – and higher taxes,” said Eva M. Nagy, NJSBA vice president for legislation/resolutions. “Certainly, that is not what this committee wants.”

And the New Jersey Education Association?

NJEA believes that the decision to consolidate school districts must be voluntary and be made voluntary with community involvement. The affected school districts must be required to involve their employees in the reorganization process through mandatory consultation with the employees’ certified collective bargaining representative. All employee rights, including seniority and tenure, must be fully protected.

So, it either saves money or it doesn’t. It’s either better for kids or it isn’t. Right? Last time I looked, the NJEA’s platform did not include advocacy for lower school costs. What’s with all the self-righteous harrumphing?

Time to put away our acronymous /acrimonious jeremiads and take a closer look.