At Journal Square Community Association’s monthly meeting on Tuesday, the organization hosted the final forum for Board of Education candidates to answer the public’s questions before voting on Tuesday, November 5. Six of the seven candidates for three Board seats gave their positions on a series of questions ranging from superintendent evaluations to addressing inequities in school quality. Below are the candidates’ positions.Quality of Schools & EquityAccording to the latest results of several state assessments from September, Jersey City Public School district students saw minor improvements on a number of measures. Overall, the results depict a student body in which 50% or more of all students are failing to meet expectations in English, math, and science, with proficiency rates below the state average and varying drastically school by school. Additionally, there are stories of schools not having adequate air conditioning, bathrooms, and elevators, and overall facilities needing serious upgrades. Two audience members asked how the candidates would address these quality issues and ensure that solutions would not be implemented disproportionately across the district. “Sam” Sumit Salia (Parents for Education): Jersey City has 43 schools across seven wards. Salia likes the idea of targeting efforts on specific schools within each ward that need it the most because there are not enough resources to get every school up to standards at the same time. “Zone by zone, ward by ward, once we get more schools within the top 25, it’s going to bring the rest of the school district with it.” With the right intention and intensity, improvements can be made across the board while focusing on specific schools.Tia Rezabala (For Stronger Schools): For Rezabala, “the question is more about equality vs. equity.” She believes it’s important to consider what an equitable approach to distributing resources would look like, rather than simply giving the same amount to every school. This misunderstanding overlooks the systemic issues in Jersey City, where some schools need more resources while others may need less.Matt Schneider (For Stronger Schools): Schneider emphasized that the “problem isn’t teachers or the classroom, it’s getting the resources to the places that need them.” He is confident that the budget can address both educational achievement and facility issues, but the allocation of resources is inadequate and lacks transparency. Schneider stressed the importance of not diverting funds from other schools simply because one group of parents is more vocal.Melany Cruz Burgos (Education Matters): Cruz Burgos emphasized the importance of having a voice at the table to ensure concerns are heard. She pointed out the achievement, culture, and facility gaps between schools and stressed the need to address students’ basic needs: “We want our students to focus on learning, not worrying about air conditioning or the condition of their school buildings.”Ahmed Kheir (Education Matters): Kheir highlighted the role of principals, emphasizing that principals are accountable for their schools, so if resources aren’t being properly allocated, the conversation should start with them. Kheir also pointed out that while all schools are held to the same standards, the growing population in Jersey City affects each school differently, and this disparity needs to be addressed.Natalia Ioffe (Education Matters): Ioffe noted that the chain of accountability is often circumvented when their are problems in schools, leading to important issues being overlooked. “Every parent believes their complaint is the top priority, but the board has to determine where each issue fits within a queue of concerns from other schools,” she explained. To improve oversight and transparency, the Board has requested a project tracker from the Facilities Department to monitor progress and understand when projects are being completed.Taxes and the BudgetJCPS currently operates with a $1 billion budget, allocating just over $26,000 per pupil. While over the last two years Jersey City residents have not seen an increase in the tax “levy,” there were sharp increases immediately following a 2018 law called S2, which cut state aid to Jersey City in favor of less affluent districts, like Elizabeth and Paterson. Residents wanted to know how the candidates would handle the school district budget, especially with community concerns over raising property taxes.“Sam” Sumit Salia: Salia noted that the last forensic audit was performed in 2019, and it uncovered many deficiencies. He proposed conducting audits every four months. “Publicly traded companies do quarterly audits, and we should follow the same model.” He also suggested hiring more accountants, pointing out that only $300,000 is currently being spent on accounting systems, which is just 0.003% of the budget.Tia Rezabala: Rezabala also agreed that a forensic audit is needed when looking at the budget. “I think we need to figure out where the $1 billion is before we can ask people who have been here for years to come out of their pocket with more money,” she said.Matt Schneider: Schneider questioned whether the budget is being used efficiently and effectively, also agreeing an audit is necessary to ensure we know exactly where the money is going and how it’s being used. “We need to challenge ourselves to operate efficiently. With all this funding, we have the potential to change the course, but we need to make sure the money is reaching the students and not getting tied up in contracts, overhead, or projects that don’t directly benefit them.”Melany Cruz Burgos: Cruz Burgos called for improved transparency over the budget, suggesting the district’s website could be more informative. However, when it comes to potentially raising taxes, she said, “As board members, we have an ethical duty to provide a thorough and efficient education for our students. If state funding were cut to zero, I would support raising taxes, because where else would we get that funding? We owe it to our students.”Ahmed Kheir: Kheir emphasized the importance of accountability and oversight in managing the budget. He agreed with Cruz Burgos that the district should improve its communication channels to ensure the community has better access to key decisions, such as contract agreements, and can more easily understand complex documents like the district’s budget.Natalia Ioffe: Ioffe explained that Jersey City has been targeted as a wealthy area, leading to cuts in state funding, which has placed a burden on residents due to the tax levy. “What residents are paying now is what the state used to contribute to the school district,” she said. “We are not meant to balance the books ourselves but to ensure the books are well-balanced. The $1 billion figure doesn’t represent what’s going directly into our children’s K-12 classrooms, and that’s something taxpayers need to understand.”Superintendent EvaluationsIn August, the Board voted to cancel and create a new contract for Superintendent of Schools Dr. Norma Fernandez, giving her a more than 20% salary increase. The move was heavily criticized for the lack of transparency in the evaluation criteria and because test scores had not yet been released. Therefore, many people felt the raise could not be justified since she could not be properly evaluated on district performance. Two attendees focused in on the superintendent’s contract, asking how a raise could be justified when the budget is increasing but the district didn’t see much improvement in performance and what criteria they would use to evaluate the superintendent.“Sam” Sumit Salia: Salia stressed the need for accountability, stating, “The superintendent is like the CEO, and we need to ensure she’s doing her job.” While he agreed with a raise in principle, he questioned the timing. “The board realized she wasn’t in the top 25% of earners in the state, and gave her a raise because of bureaucracy.”Tia Rezabala: As a former teacher, Rezabala draws on her experience with assessments, explaining that she expects the superintendent to be evaluated similarly. “Show us you can meet the terms of the first contract before negotiating a pay raise. She needs to demonstrate results, particularly in closing the achievement gap, and ensuring the majority of our kids are prepared for when they leave.” Matt Schneider: Schneider emphasized the need for transparency in the superintendent’s evaluation. “What’s been missing is the clarity. While she’s evaluated on multiple factors, education should be the top priority. We need to publish the data used for comparison.”Melany Cruz Burgos: Cruz Burgos highlighted that the superintendent oversees the entire district and pointed out that charter executives are often paid more just for handling one school. She proposed implementing a progress report to track how well goals are being met throughout the year.Ahmed Kheir: Kheir focused on looking at the market, asking, “What is the true salary required to attract top talent?” He referenced New York City, where salaries for similar positions are often high, and stressed the importance of balancing compensation to remain competitive. He also suggested evaluating the percentage of goals achieved each year to make sure the superintendent is staying on track with district objectives.Natalia Ioffe: As the only incumbent candidate, Ioffe defended her vote to approve the superintendent’s contract, explaining that Dr. Fernandez was evaluated based on five board-defined criteria: academic achievement, student equity, parent and family involvement, operations, and social and emotional health. While test score improvements were modest, Ioffe highlighted the superintendent’s significant achievements in other areas, which, in her view, justified the raise. She also emphasized that the decision was financially sustainable and wouldn’t negatively impact taxpayers.Relationship with City and DevelopersJersey City’s population is growing, which will change the needs of each school, particularly regarding class sizes. To address these evolving demands, community members stressed that it’s essential to collaborate with the city and developers to create effective solutions. They asked: how do we work with other stakeholders to ensure we’re meeting everyone’s needs? “Sam” Sumit Salia: Salia emphasized the role property developers can play in supporting the district, stating, “Developers should invest in our future. They benefit from better schools because that’s what attracts tenants. People will stay here, and more will move in.” He advocated for Private-Public Partnership models as a solution, highlighting the need for accountability in spending and proposing collaboration with the city to address these issues.Tia Rezabala: Rezabala, reflecting on the city’s rapid development, said, “With all these new buildings going up, there should be more incentives to ask, ‘What can we get back from them?’” She suggested using affordable housing to help close achievement gaps and building stronger relationships with the city council. “If Jersey City is going to continue to grow, what can bringing these buildings here do? Can we put a school in the bottom of the building? Can PILOT funds be used to make a recreation area? Can we do things adjacent to the school district to ease the burden of parents?”Matt Schneider: Schneider highlighted the importance of identifying the district’s needs early and working with stakeholders to meet them. “The challenge has been engaging the city effectively,” he noted. “We need to work with media, parents, and community groups to amplify their voices and ensure elected officials understand the challenges.”Melany Cruz Burgos: Cruz Burgos called for inclusive dialogue, stating, “I want everyone to feel like they have a voice and a seat at the table so we can act in the best interest of the kids.” She emphasized the potential for greater collaboration with community organizations to explore solutions.Ahmed Kheir: Kheir proposed creating a 5- to 10-year plan that includes strategies for expansion. “We need to figure out whether we should tear down old schools and build new ones or work with developers and the city to find space for new buildings. This can be funded through the SDA and other sources.” He stressed the importance of long-term planning for school development and capital gains.Natalia Ioffe: Ioffe addressed the lack of collaboration between the school district and the city. “There hasn’t been a strong relationship between the Board of Education, city council, and departments in charge of infrastructure and development,” she said.She emphasized that developers often have said there is little incentive to provide school space as a community contribution, which leaves little room for schools to negotiate for themselves.New Jersey voters can vote by mail, in person, or leave their ballots in secure drop boxes for the upcoming election. There will also be early voting from Saturday, Oct. 26 through Sunday, Nov. 3. On Election Day, polling locations will be open from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m.The post Board of Education Candidates Answer Community Questions at JSQCA Meeting appeared first on Jersey City Times.