The viability and acceptability of school consolidation— combining two or more schools or districts into a single entity, has been discussed numerous times over the years. In the early 1900s, the main targets of school consolidation were rural schools.
Education leaders and policymakers believed that a centralized model in which all schools functioned similarly would be the best approach for educating youth to become productive citizens. They also believed that consolidated schools could be operated more efficiently and economically.
One of the primary benefits of school consolidation was that school boards could provide more—and more enriched— curricular offerings to students by combining resources. More flexibility was possible when scheduling courses, particularly at the high school level, simply because more students would be taking the classes.
Consolidation focused on staffing. Most school business officials agreed that staffing in certain areas could be challenging. Larger schools formed through mergers could provide more student services, such as occupational therapy and physical and speech therapy. Having all the students in one location helped alleviate the challenge.
Lawmakers believed that consolidating school districts would reduce the number of administrative jobs, often the highest salaries in a public school system, and eliminate the mountains of redundant work between hundreds of surplus administrative offices.
New Jersey Senator Vin Gopal wrote, “One of the smartest ways to provide property tax savings is to regionalize services where we can save tax dollars while providing equal or better service. Let’s start with school regionalization. On average, more than 50 percent of every property tax bill goes into funding education from preschool to 12th grade. New Jersey students score second only to Massachusetts on national standardized exams, and the quality of our schools is one of our best selling points as a state.”
He also wrote in 2019, “Property taxes are higher than ever, and our taxpayers’ burden creeps higher yearly. Our state’s cluttered mess of 600 overlapping, competing school districts is about as far from efficiency as we can get. There’s a clear solution that any expert will tell you is long overdue: It’s time to consolidate.”
School consolidation was often touted as a method for saving money through an economy of scale. The merger of school districts could have provided the opportunity to reduce operational costs.
Assuming fewer school facilities would have been needed to house student enrollment in the combined districts, administrative, instructional, and classified staff positions could have been reduced, resulting in considerable financial savings. Operating fewer school buildings should also decrease capital spending on facility maintenance and upgrades.
