A $100 charge for each household with students in grades seven through 12
By: Greg Forester
MONTGOMERY The Montgomery Board of Education adopted the 2007-2008 budget Tuesday despite continuing resistance from some Montgomery residents to a fee plan.
The new budget faced budget constraints brought on by the state-imposed 4-percent cap on tax increases, board members have said, resulting in a $2.1 million budget shortfall that forced a search for new revenue sources, including a controversial new fee.
"We had to look for creative ways to close the gap in order to maintain the quality of education," said David Pettit, board president. "The fee is a way to maintain the quality of education."
The new sources of revenue included selling naming rights to athletic facilities and a much debated $100 charge for each household with students in grades seven through 12.
Originally planned as a $250 fee for each student taking part in extracurricular activities, the board revised the proposal because of parental pressure.
While the Board of Education said the new plan is a way for parents to contribute to the school system, the reaction of residents at Tuesday’s board meeting was mixed.
Several residents said they opposed such a fee, despite the board’s revised plan.
"I’m against the activity fees," said school board candidate Matthew Galvin. "It’s essentially a tax that’s not being voted for by the citizens."
Another school board candidate and Montgomery student, Thomas McGrew, said he feared the effect the fees would have on participation in sports that already have significant cost attached in equipment or other costs."More involved sports already cost a lot," said Mr. McGrew.
Resident Bob Witanek, co-founder of the student organization APIECE, distributed a response to the revised fee, which stated that the new fee "is a foothold in the door," providing a way for the board to increase revenue each year.
Mr. Witanek said he would be presenting a petition against the fees to the school board prior to the final March 27 budget meeting."There will be legal costs to defend the program and staff running around trying to collect fees," said Mr. Witanek. "Expect annual fee-increase battles; this will be a Pandora’s box."
Board of Education President David Pettit responded by saying that the fee was not a "Trojan horse," and the board didn’t lower the fee now to raise it in the future.
Board Secretary Timothy Stys said the school district could handle the fee collection and administration in-house.
"We have the staff for it," said Mr. Stys. "The alternative to the fees would be cutting the programs."
Other residents said they supported the board, and the fee.
Resident Eric Weitze said he has seen his property taxes rise every year, so he supports the $100 fee, which keeps his taxes down.
"I think the activity fees are great," said Mr. Weitze. "I want to be able to live in Montgomery, not just today, but tomorrow."
Other residents said they supported the fee, and attacked the idea that it was an illegal tax.
"I disagree that this is a tax," said resident and former board member Richard Specht. "To suggest that the board just wants to raise the fees each year is incorrect."
Members of several educational organizations, including the Montgomery Township Education Association, the teachers’ union, and the Parent Teacher Student Association said they supported the proposed budget.
"Many moved here for the school district, which offers an astounding variety of not just activities, but courses," said PTSA member Maria Kauzzman. "I think it’s a reasonable fee and if that’s what has to occur I support the board’s decision."
Although some residents have called the fees an illegal tax, representatives of several state education organizations said there is no case law or statute that prohibits such a program.
"In terms of how it’s done, state law and regulation are silent on it," said Richard Vespucci, spokesman for the Department of Education. "It’s left open-ended for how school districts want to do it."
The across-the-board manner for Montgomery’s fees is just a new way of doing it, officials said.
"We’ve never seen them across-the-board before," said New Jersey School Boards Association spokesman Michael Yaple. "It’s up to the county superintendent for approval."
After the board’s adoption of the budget Tuesday, it faces review by the Somerset County superintendent’s office.
Somerset County Superintendent David Livingston said the district has the right to levy the fees.
"Parents can object to it, but the bottom line is that it’s in the school board’s discretion to impose," said Mr. Livingston.
Following the county approval, the budget will go before voters April 17.

