By karl vilacoba
Staff Writer
BRICK — Councilman Frederick Underwood asked Superintendent of Schools Thomas Seidenberger point blank what, in his opinion, could be cut from the district’s defeated budget without hurting Brick’s quality of education.
"Nothing," Seidenberger replied. "… Anything that we do is going to go backwards."
Members of the Board of Education and district administration presented their budget to the Township Council last week and asked them not to make any dramatic cuts. The council is faced with the decision of whether to recommend cuts to the spending package, defeated by voters April 15, or leave it as is.
Seidenberger said this year’s budget was the 14th he’s worked on, and easily his most difficult. The second consecutive virtual freeze in state aid to the district has shifted more and more of the burden toward the local tax levy, school Business Administrator Nicholas Puleio said.
The $112 million defeated budget would have cost taxpayers an increase of 9.58 cents per $100 assessed value. This includes 7.249 cents to support the general fund and 2.331 cents in increased debt service. The owner of a home valued at $150,000 would have paid $144 more in taxes this year.
The official deadline for an agreement between the district and council is May 19. Council members asked Ocean County Superintendent of Schools Bruce Greenfield for a two-day extension so they could use their regular May 20 meeting for a vote, but that request was denied.
An item was placed on last night’s agenda to certify the amount to be raised by taxation to support the school budget. As of the Bulletin’s Monday press time, council members said they were undecided on what that amount would be.
About $3.3 million of the district’s approximately $5 million in fund balance –– the school district equivalent of surplus –– was applied to the budget to keep the tax rate increase down. But the state mandates that 3 percent of a district’s total budget be set aside as fund balance. Anything more allocated from the remaining $1.7 million would have to be replenished next year by taxation, Seidenberger said.
School officials emphasized Brick’s ranking toward the bottom of several comparative spending categories. Brick’s cost per pupil ranked 99 out of 101 districts of 3,500 or more students, and dead last in terms of administrative costs.
"Over the years, we’ve never asked the residents of Brick Township to pay any more than was absolutely necessary in taxes, and that’s what has put us in the situation we’re in right now," said board President Dr. William Boyan. "We’ve never developed a cushion."
Some were critical of the district’s efforts in selling the budget to the public this year, and at senior residential complexes in particular. In the nine voting stations organized in Brick’s senior communities, the budget was rejected by a tally of 1,043 to 349.
"Most of the people I spoke to couldn’t make heads or tails of the budget," said John Talty, who was defeated in the board election by only two votes.
Councilman Stephen Acropolis said the district should have provided budget information to the council much earlier in case it failed. Last month, the councilman criticized the board for its late-March budget adoption, which gave voters little more than two weeks to learn about the package.
Seidenberger, who joined the district as Philip Nicastro’s replacement in January, vowed to take extra measures to educate the public about the budget next year.