Jersey Jazzman reports in excruciating detail about Teach for America’s bold plan to expand in New Jersey, which seems to happen most often in states with rightwing governors and/or legislatures.
Their expansion is linked with a $150 million development in Newark that will build three new charter schools and provide low-rent housing for their teachers. One of the major backers is Goldman Sachs, whose chairman attended the groundbreaking.
The project is funded mainly by tax credits. JJ says, “$100 million in tax credits; not too shabby. If anyone tries to convince you that billionaires are interested in charter schools solely out of altruism, point them to this project.”
And more:
“There’s been plenty written about how TFA has become a political organization. But I suspect it’s also poised to become a power broker in the brave new world of 21st Century urban development. Cities used to have to put together marketing campaigns and development plans to start gentrifying neighborhoods. Now, they just have to give TFA a call, and the yuppies will come rolling in. And it’s all paid for with public monies. Everyone cool with that?”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
It’s worse than JJ thinks.
Right now, Parochial schools are gearing up to get communities to vote in candidates that will attach special ed. dollars to special ed. children, so that they can go to parochial schools and their special ed. dollars follow them. It’s intended as a stepping stone to vouchers.
I do happen to support parochial education, but not at the expense of public schools. They intend to gentrify so that not only is there racial segregation, but, so that they’ll have the power blocs necessary in the areas they need to push through vouchers.
Remember, these are voters too.
This is absolutely disgusting. More corporate entitlements.
What repulsive lampreys.
Speaking of private schools and special education services, students who qualify for IEPs can have access to specially designed instruction from a special education teacher in the students’ areas of need. That means that students must be dual enrolled in both the private and public schools. Those students will be transported to and from their home private schools to receive services by the public school district. In some cases there are itinerant special education teachers, but from my understanding these students are usually brought to the public school. I will have my first such student next year, and I have learned that there are approximately 400 students with IEPs and dual private/public enrollment in my district.
How long do the below market value rents for new teachers last?
Are they permanently linked to income level? Who owns the buildings? Is there incentive for teachers to contain their salary levels in order to continue to qualify for the reduced cost housing?
Is this truly affordable housing or simply reduced cost housing? There is a difference . . .
Are these teachers required to be fully certified, and if not, to what extent is the public aware that their public tax dollars (be it directly used, be it in the form of not taxing the wealthy and giving them enormous breaks) are being used to hire non-certified teachers to take daily custodianship of children?
Meanwhile the displaced career teachers will end up living in a Hooverville tent city.
It also say, to me, that such teachers who live in affordable housing will have little to no incentive to raise their salaries (by whatever means, starting with collective bargaining) so that one day they too may own their own homes. . .
Sounds like the 19th century factory owners who provided housing for workers and miners in industrialized 1870-to-1935 America. . . .
But all of these horrifcs will only resurrect all the more strongly a new labor movement.
As a Newark resident, I am very divided on this project. From a community development perspective, I suspect it will have a positive impact. If any of you are familiar with Newark (it’s okay, I don’t expect you to be) this building is being put up in a really blighted area that desperately needs foot traffic to connect 3 of the only safe neighborhoods the city has, which are all separated now by blight. Injecting a bunch of 20 somethings right in the middle will probably drive development while not really pricing people out (as I said, it’s a blighted area, no one really lives around there). That said, TFA is super annoying and will probably further undermine Newark’s beleaguered public schools (although at this point TFA is only in the charters I think).
I also don’t think that the units are only for TFA or the people who teach at the charter schools housed there. Despite the name, I’m not even 100% sure you have to be a teacher to live in them, that might just be what it’s marketed for.
I’ll be honest with you though, I know a lot of Newark public school teachers, the overwhelming majority of whom don’t live in Newark. It’s not because they can’t afford to, it’s because they can afford not to… The city used to be twice as big, there is an abundance of family housing at rock bottom prices (think 5 BRs with a view of NYC for $250k) that doesn’t fill. Teachers don’t live there because Newark is a hard city, not really a place to raise a family if you can avoid doing so.
So they want to build a clubhouse for young outsiders; what do I care? So what my tax dollars are paying for it (they’re already paying for Panasonic’s new headquarters on Raymond Blvd anyway)? If it has a chance of driving development in a city that has been chronically under-invested in since 1967, it’s worth the risk. I’ll take the complaining about this project a bit more seriously when my building’s 3 and 4 bedrooms (charming apartments, though in a bad neighborhood) aren’t all empty. You guys looking to move!? We’d be happy to have you, there’s plenty of room!
CC, I’m working on a piece now that explores some of what you are speaking about. I’ll add this for now:
Teachers Village is located directly across Broad Street from the Prudential Center. I’m no expert on urban development, but I’d think that makes the neighborhood a prime candidate for gentrification in a city that doesn’t have very.
In any case, as I say here:
http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2013/06/tfa-new-gentrifiers.html
TFA is supplying gentrifiers, but those young renters will not get the benefit of any rise in property values. I find that exploitive.
And I don’t see a positive economic impact for Newark by supporting an organization and a real estate project that encourages charterizing the city’s schools, which converts unionized teacher jobs to non-union jobs with a lot of churn.
Again – more tomorrow.
I agree completely re the charter proliferation, but again I think the economic benefit to Newark will come from neighborhood development (and again in my experience most Newark teachers do not live in Newark). As for gentrifying on Broad (although it’s not on Broad, it’s on Halsey), I agree sort of, but your argument will have more traction when the condos outnumber the dollar stores, drug dealers, and adult movie theaters.
Despite what I think about the politics, there will be some positive results from putting several hundred young people with disposable income into a concentrated area. That neighborhood sorely needs a shot to the arm (if you don’t believe me, meet me at Washington and West Kinney @ 2AM tomorrow… I’ll be the one who’s nowhere near there).
I mean I wish they weren’t TFAers… but it’s delusional to say that nothing at all will happen. I can see the benefit to the city, it’s hard to attract a block of employed young people to a place like Newark and TFA gives them that. Maybe I don’t agree with it, but I understand it…
I look forward to reading your column tomorrow.
JJ
Hub tax credits
May be sold to another company for up to 75 percent of their initial value. So if your NJ tax liability was $1,000,000. You could buy $1,000,000.Tax credit for $750,000(or less) and save $250,000(or more) in tax payment or 25%. That is a pretty good savings!
Up to 30 million cash for the 40 million tax credit.
Federal New Markets tax credits
39% over 6years 1 day on investment
For a $1,000,000 investment, it would cost the Bank
$53,700 over 7 years to borrow $1,000,000.from fed at .75% the Bank would earn
$390,000 savings for 6 years 1 day ( and it is the Feds money to begin with)
Total savings of 336,300 on federal income tax (it is probably more since they will save additional tax on the money they borrowed)
And guess who is really paying for these profits!