Seven candidates for two seats address budget issues
By Ruth Luse
Recently the Hopewell Valley News asked the seven Hopewell Township candidates for the two open seats (three-year terms) on the Hopewell Valley regional Board of Education the following question:
If you had to cut 5 percent from this year’s school budget, where would you cut? Be specific!
The candidates and their responses are given in alphabetical order, as follows:
ROBERT GEHM, of Timkak Lane Let me start by saying that I support the proposed 2007-2008 budget and I feel the current school board has done a good job of making it as lean as possible. That being said, if I am elected, I will start the budget process from zero, rather than build the budget to reach the 4 percent state cap. This will mean going through every line of the budget and having the monies justified. The times of "That’s the way we did it last year" are over. We get over 88 percent of our school revenues from property taxes and we cannot wait for changes at the state level.
In budget decisions, my priorities would be to protect our rich and diverse curriculum, our broad performing arts program, our class sizes, and our athletics. Having attended numerous board meetings and budget presentations, I believe there are areas that deserve further scrutiny. Administrative expenses do not directly impact our curriculum. Also, reductions in legal expenses, may be found by doing a cost comparison between our current independent legal counsel versus an in-house attorney.
These two areas could represent savings of $800,000. Because staffing and health benefits make up such a big portion of the budget, we must take a hard look at them and be sure these costs are in line with private sector companies, with possible savings of $1 million. After all, the companies who provide health plans to school systems are entrenched in the larger market and do not offer special allowances for school district clients. While I am philosophically opposed to reducing non-mandated busing, it’s an area worth $400,000 that cannot be ignored.
It would be shortsighted to only refer to budget cuts without also discussing the ability for generating revenue, up to one million dollars, through partnerships, consortiums and inter-local agreements. It was my involvement in the grant agreement between Hopewell Basketball and the school board that first sparked my interest to become more involved in the school board and creative cost containment for the district.
A school board member in today’s difficult environment must scrutinize every expenditure as if it were your personal checkbook. You must have a broad perspective that looks to the future and ensures the educational experience we give our students truly prepares them for the next stages of their life.
WERNER GRAF (incumbent), of Reservoir Road Five hundred years ago, Leonardo Di Vinci was creating some of the finest anatomical drawings in history. His insatiable curiosity about human anatomy led him to observe that, as a body starved, nature shut down organs sequentially: non-essential systems went first, then more important organs like the eyes, until finally only the organs critical to life, like the heart, received nutrition.
My short tenure on the board convinces me that New Jersey’s education system is like a starving organism with individual districts discontinuing nonmandated services and programs like so many nonessential organs. Each year, we cut this or charge for that, prolonging the misery but not stopping the starvation. The erosion in services and the slow degradation in Hopewell’s standard of living continue every year.
The cause? It isn’t the caps that protect the taxpayer. The taxpayer is already overburdened and cuts occur even with increasing tax revenues. Unfunded mandates certainly contribute, but are not the exclusive reason.
The 800-pound gorilla in the room that nobody wants to talk about is this: The Education Establishment has made itself too expensive.
Education is a people-intensive business and, like every school district, our greatest asset is the people. That being so, it will only be the collective dedication of its talented people to understand, internalize and save this system from its slow, imminent death. From senior leadership on down, we have to reverse the entitlement mindset that guarantees 3-5 percent raises on some of the highest salaries in the nation, extensive stipends, and minimal contributions to healthcare. We have to come together with the understanding that we-all of us-are in this together and that without changes in our fiscal course, a breakdown is assured. Eventually there will be no other organs to shut down.
The board has taken an aggressive stance in negotiations as indexed against history and peer districts. Certainly the unions believe it’s aggressive as we are at stalemate on outstanding contracts. Yet even if agreed to tomorrow, we would be forced to cut programs or capital improvements again next year. Increases in annual compensation will outstrip available funds for current programs. This year, it’s strings, auto shop, and hazardous busing on the block. This is only the beginning.
Five percent? I’d take immediate reductions in positions and salaries, excepting maybe only the paraprofessionals. This would underscore the direness of the situation to the people most able to correct it.
KEN HANSEN, of Lake Baldwin Drive Where would I trim 5 percent out of the current (2006-2007) school budget?
Our $62,000,000 school budget looks like this: 62 percent goes toward teacher salaries, and that expense is mandated by a negotiated contract with their unions, and as such is unchangeable. Benefits for teachers and other administration adds another 13 percent to this pile of unchangeable expenses, and after you add the 7 percent of the budget that goes toward debt service, that takes about 82 percent of our school budget off the table!
So what is left in the budget? Operations and maintenance accounts for about 8 percent of the budget, and covers required expenses to keep our school s running and safe not too much to trim here. Transportation accounts for about 6 percent of the budget, and nearly all of it is mandated by the state, so again it is not negotiable. Administration accounts for an additional 3 percent, and since most of their activity is required to ensure our schools are operating in accordance with all regulations, nothing can really be cut from here either.
Last year, our budget had a number of capital improvements that amounted to just over $2,000,000. Regrettably, I’ll pull all of those costs.
I would not hire any new teachers to replace out-going staff, and would instead take the opportunity to revisit class sizes across the district, and staff only those positions absolutely required to meet state and federal requirements. This would mean some teachers would be redeployed outside their current department for emergency assignments, and courses would be cut. Busing is next up hazardous busing amounts to about $400,000, and when facing cuts of this size, it puts my position on hazardous busing to the test. I feel that busing is the responsibility of the school board, and while I am tempted to take that $400,000 and eliminate it, I can’t. Many families rely on busing, and our schools are not configured for a few hundred of parent dropoffs each day. Cutting hazardous busing creates too many risks.
So where are we? I’ve saved an estimated $2,000,000 by refusing all capital investment, and I’ve trimmed our teaching staff by as many positions as possible without laying off any teachers. If 13 teaching positions are cut across all six schools that amounts to $1,000,000 in savings, figuring an average $75,000 per eliminated teacher, based on $62,000 in average base pay, plus estimated $13,000 in benefits that are saved per teacher. But at what cost?
We would have bigger class sizes, reduced choices and opportunities for our students across all grades, teachers teaching outside their area of expertise, and a physical plant that is at risk of serious failure during the coming year.
Cutting 5 percent out of the school budget, when over 80 percent of the annual budget is non-negotiable, means you really are being asked to cut 25 percent of the negotiable budget. Let’s all hope this hypothetical never comes to pass, because the impact of this one year’s budget cut would be felt for years to come, to the continued detriment of all the students in our district.
KIM NEWPORT (incumbent), of East Welling Avenue This is a good question and exactly what the board has been dealing with for the past five years. In 2002, when the State of NJ stopped funding its public schools and imposed laws that restricted the way schools could be funded, we found ourselves in a financial black hole. While laws were changing at the state level, local expectations remained the same. Parents advocated for excellence in programs. Homeowners wanted lower property taxes. School expenditures grew as the cost of salaries, health benefits, energy, transportation, special education and state mandates continued to rise. The administration and board of education were forced into a position of cutting portions of the budget by millions of dollars each year in order stay under the state mandated spending limits. Our primary question became, "How do we manage these financial challenges and competing needs and still create a workable budget?"
All districts like ours are facing budget problems. Each day in the local newspaper there is another story about a school district that is eliminating non-mandated services, from busing to kindergarten. Many school districts have already introduced activity fees for sports and extra-curricular programs. Some schools have eliminated sports entirely from their middle schools. East Windsor is talking about large staff reductions. These are drastic measures that are reluctantly taken by school districts in order to protect core curriculum.
When the 2006-2007 budget was defeated, the three municipalities cut the budget by $2.1 million. Regrettably, this severe cut came from accounts reserved for much needed maintenance of our facilities and money reserved for emergencies. Another area to reduce costs is non-mandated busing which is a large expenditure in our budget. If the full amount were cut from the budget it would reduce it by $400,000. Lastly, salaries and health benefits comprise approximately two-thirds of the entire budget. The additional amount would have to come from these accounts in order to reach a 5 percent cut from the 2006-2007 school budget.
I can assure you that if we could cut 5 percent ($3.5 million) from the 2006-2007 budget and not damage the integrity of our school system in doing so, we would have already done it.
NEIL SEFTOR, of Blake Drive School districts are increasingly bound by financial constraints placed on them by outside sources, and Hopewell Valley is no exception. However, unlike some of my fellow candidates, I do not believe our board has acted in a fiscally irresponsible manner. The decisions facing the board are complex, involving tradeoffs between alternatives, and taking into account all aspects of the options; it is too simple to use business strategies of budget cutting to solve our problems.
That said, if we were forced to cut 5 percent, or nearly $3.5 million, from the budget, the choices would be difficult and painful. The vast majority of the budget is unable to be changed in the short term; wage and benefit contracts, special education expenditures, and debt service comprise a large part of the budget. In the remaining budget, it would be difficult to trim that much money, even from the relatively large expenditure areas of transportation, extracurricular activities, and technology.
Perhaps it is more important to look at this from another point of view. The board has an obligation to be an advocate for the students, and should make it a priority to make sure that the students are not harmed significantly by this restriction; therefore, the core curriculum and offerings should be left unchanged. Given the priorities of maintaining educational quality and opportunity for our students, we must find other ways to address the shortfall. This may require delays in capital projects or new programs, attempts to move some expenditures outside the budget, and exploration of alternative sources of revenue. In the long run, it would require renegotiation of contracts with teachers and staff, as we could not continue to operate with the current compensation and benefits packages. Sacrifices would have to be made by many groups, but the students should be spared.
While this is an extreme example, the fact is that districts continue to face more constraints on their budgets and decision-making. With the unfunded mandates of special education, caps on the budget, expenditures moved into the budget, increasing energy costs, class size considerations, and lack of property tax reform, school districts are squeezed by many external forces. However, we must continue to seek to make decisions for the right reasons and giving full consideration to future consequences. We cannot abdicate the responsibility of providing the best education possible to our children, no matter what pressures are put upon us.
AARON TELLIER, of Forrest Blend Drive, Titusville Over the past six years the budget has increased by 71 percent while the student population has increased by only 10 percent. Clearly we’re overdue for some fiscal responsibility. We can’t just look for savings at budget time, but rather it must be a year around process. Everything must be looked at with a critical eye. To make tough decisions we have to go line by line in the detailed budget. There are some specific areas where we can start that process.
Administrative costs. When compared to similar schools, we are top heavy with too many administrators. We are unfavorably ranked 86th out of 103 by the state in this area. We should look at both the number of administrators as well as carefully review those positions paying greater than $100,000.
Technology expenditures. The new budget contains $583,000 for replacement computers and supplies. Technology is certainly important in today’s world, but instruction from real teachers cannot be replaced so simply. We need to look at how much we can realistically expect to rely upon technology to educate our children. I’ve talked to students who have told me the same.
Shared services with the municipalities. There are a number of proposals already on the table including busing, security and recreation facilities and services. However, as I discussed last week, we need to improve our relationships before we’ll be able to successfully come to agreement. We can’t throw proposals "over the wall" and expect to get results.
Leveraging our investments. When we make investments in large infrastructure projects like the performing arts center, we need to make sure that they deliver revenue. We are spending $35,000 for a part time resource to schedule the center, but we’ve only been able to generate about $10,000 a year in revenue. Fortunately, the administration agrees we have to do better than that.
Containing the budget isn’t going to be easy. Hard choices will have to be made. In order to minimize the inevitable contention, the decision making process must occur within full view of the public. More information has been made available lately, but that isn’t the same as an inclusive process.
JAMES WULF, of Hart Court, Titusville Over the past six years, under incumbents Newport and Graf, the budget has increased by 71 percent, while student enrollment has increased by only 10 percent. Clearly we need greater fiscal restraint.
It is only recently, due to public pressure, that the district’s budget has been made available on the Web…and it’s still not all up there. But based on what I’ve been able to piece together, I have some initial suggestions.
First, I would make parents aware of the current priorities and engage in a dialogue with them to clarify the financial restraints, and the areas of the budget that may be at risk. Second, based on that feedback and consultation with staff, I would define key areas in which to look to trim costs and optimize investments:
Optimize Investments What’s the ROI? We need to get more out of our current facilities.
Generate more usage of the community High School Performing Arts theatre.
Expand adult education programs.
Reach out and create a panel of local business people and municipal representatives to come up with new ways to use School District facilities.
Trim Costs Enhance shared services.
While the current school board likes to crow about its inter-local agreements, as a percentage of the overall budget, what the district is currently saving is negligible. You can’t just make a handful of recommendations to the municipalities and hope that they fly. Communications and trust are key. The current school board has failed here. We need to truly engage with municipal leaders to define creative cost-saving solutions.
Administration overhead When compared to other schools, we have too many administrators. In the ratio of administrators to students, the state ranks us 86th out of 103. We need to determine the value the central office administrators provide to the education of our children.
IT/Technology We’ve made huge investments in a Voice Over IP system that still doesn’t work, while our base infrastructure is still not in place. As an IT professional, I’m convinced there are many areas here where we can trim. I’d look at the number of consultants we’re paying, and the kind of bang we’re getting for our buck. I’d also look to partner with local government and business to help create cost-effective network solutions.
Healthcare costs Healthcare bidding should be based on insurers truly understanding their risk, predicated on the district’s historical medical claims. This is not how it’s currently being done. I have some experience in this area, and I firmly believe we could do a better job in driving down healthcare costs. If we’re serious about long-term cost reduction, we also need to secure greater co-pay contributions from teachers.
Taxpayers cannot afford another 70 percent plus increase in the budget over the next half dozen years. The incumbents make a lot of their experience. But if by "experience" Kim Newport and Werner Graf mean we’re due more of the same should they remain on the school board then I’ve had quite enough of that experience…thank you very much.
We must examine and debate our priorities within full view of the public, in a mood of inclusion and openness. I think that you’ll find that if the public is truly aware of the choices before us, if they trust the leadership of the board and its vision, they’ll help pass a budget that meets the needs of all stakeholders including our most precious, our children.