By Audrey Levine, Staff Writer
Residents pack meeting introducing $109 million school budget
After almost five hours Monday and surprising pleas from more than 100 residents to raise spending as high as the state will allow the Board of Education approved a tentative $109 million budget for the 2009-2010 school year that comes in about $400,000 below the state’s 4 percent cap.
”The residents expressed a desire to have the budget (raised) to cap,” said Hillsborough Middle School teacher Daynon Blevins, after a budget proposal had finally been approved at midnight. “It fell on deaf ears.”
In the 5-3 vote, Board of Education members Frank Blandino, John Donnadio and Greg Gillette voted against the proposal. Wolfgang Schneider was absent.
The board approved the $109,160,698 budget, an increase of about 3 percent from the $106,331,394 2008-2009 budget. The budget adds about $37 to the tax bill of a property assessed at the township average of $375,000.
The total school portion of the property tax bill would rise by 0.5 percent, from $7,383 to $7,420 for the average assessed property.
The board will hold a public hearing on the budget at 7:30 p.m. March 30, with members voting for final approval or further changes, after public comment.
The tentative budget with amendments proposed by Board of Education member David Lin reinstates several cuts made in Superintendent of Schools Edward Forsthoffer’s original proposed budget, including restoring four ASI teachers and seven of 14 special education aides; hiring a new Auten Road Intermediate School instrumental teacher to replace a retiree; adding funding for a curriculum writer; and setting aside one-third of the total cost of a new district communication system (about $168,117).
The budget also eliminates funds that had been proposed for a new student information software system, and, in total, is about $404,579 below the cap limit for spending increases.
Dr. Forsthoffer, presented his original plan for the tentative budget Monday, taking into account an additional $1,249,413 in state aid the district will receive this year, for a total of $27,487,392.
Dr. Forsthoffer’s initial budget proposal was about $515,662 under the 4 percent spending cap limit, which surprisingly fueled objections from the public.
”This district has a long-standing reputation of being conservative,” Dr. Forsthoffer said. “By not going to cap this year, we do fall behind. We have to go to cap some years.”
But almost all those in attendance at the meeting Monday which included teachers and residents expressed strong objections to Dr. Forsthoffer’s proposed cuts in the budget.
”It is a budget of cuts,” Carol Cropley, of Sheppard Court, said. “There is no form of enhancement, and if we are not going forward, we are going backward. We got here from years and years of being cheap.”
Mr. Blevins said that if the board had accepted Dr. Forsthoffer’s proposal, over the next five years, according to his calculations, the district would lose about $9.5 million in future increases.
”At the cap, we are still making cuts to the budget because we historically don’t go to cap,” he said. “But I strongly urge the board to put our children first, and put the budget at cap.”
ARIS instrumental teacher Nancy Gallagher expressed her concern that Dr. Forsthoffer’s proposed budget failed to include a new hire after the retirement of current teacher Gary Smith.
”It will increase class size to where we can’t accommodate,” she said. She said the instrumental teachers had been told they could hold lessons in regular classrooms while other teachers have a prep period. “But I can only imagine how my colleagues will feel teaching next door to a beginner saxophone class.”
Many parents expressed concerns that, if the board does not take the budget to cap, their children will not have the same opportunities that students before them received because future cuts could eliminate programs and more teachers in the coming years. Some said they moved to the township because of the school system’s reputation, and they did not want a lowered budget to have a negative effect on the opportunities available.
”I always tell my children to aim high,” said Liz Aleo, of Flanders Drive, who has children in Amsterdam Elementary School and Auten Road Intermediate School. “We have to do this for our children.”
With the applause that followed each comment about the need to bring the budget to cap, a few residents tried to prove that the additional cost to taxpayers to raise the budget is not really a large amount.
”We want to go to cap,” said Maria Strunk, a parent in the district, who expressed concern that the reduction in special education aides would mean the schools would not be able to meet the needs of special education students as outlined in their Individualized Education Plans (IEPs). “For $52 a year, that’s 10 cups of coffee at Starbucks, if you get a mocha.”
But in the end, many residents questioned why it would be a bad idea to bring the budget to cap. Then, if the budget is rejected by voters on April 21, they said, they can start reducing costs from the highest budget possible instead of from an already reduced plan.
”What is it going to take for us to get you to agree?” asked Kim Wright, of Banor Drive, as the number of people clamoring to the podium to speak began to thin.
Among all the residents, Mary Madonna, of Walker Drive, was the only one to ask for the reduction in taxes, saying she has never seen improvements in the REACH program, of which her children are part. She said she believes taxes already are high enough.
”It is the program for the gifted and talented, but they’re not getting anything new,” she said. “I think taxes are appropriately high, and I don’t agree with an increase in the budget unless we see (improvements) in the REACH program.”
Members of the board acknowledged the comments of the residents, saying that it would be a good idea to look into bringing the budget to cap.
”I think we’ve heard a mandate from the people in the audience that $52 is an appropriate amount (for taxpayers),” Judith Haas said. “I don’t think the short-term benefits of a flat budget are worth the long-term effects.”
Mr. Lin expressed a similar opinion about his reaction to the residents.
”We do things effectively, but we also do things cheap,” he said. “We have a responsibility to the taxpayers. Based on what I heard, I think there is a lot of support to go to cap.”
Mr. Donnadio, however, expressed strong concerns against bringing the budget to cap, saying that, in these economic times, many people are having trouble paying mortgages and car payments, in addition to property taxes.
”I don’t think we are picking the right year to go to cap,” he said. “We are facing an unprecedented economic year.”
Several members of the board also expressed concerns about the cut in teachers under the superintendent’s original proposal, and questioned the necessity of budgeting for new district communications systems and a student information system.
”The student information system would replace the current system, and parents would have real time access to it,” Dr. Forsthoffer said. “And our phones are old. We don’t know when they will go down. Now is probably the right time to budget it in because it is a purchase we will have to make.”
Still, the board members questioned whether these two system upgrades were worth the loss of teachers in the district, and whether there were alternate ways to budget for them, including using surplus funds when, and if, the phone system fails.
”If we used surplus, we would have to pay it back,” board member Steve Paget said. “This is a short-sighted method.”
From there, the board began to consider spreading out the payment for the system over several years.
”The phone system needs to be redesigned,” board member Neil Hudes said. “I would be in favor of doing this as a planned three-year plan. The impact on taxpayers should spread out over three years.”
”This is a budget of no progress educationally,” board member Marc Rosenberg said. “There’s an attitude that has pervaded the district that we will just get by. I am concerned that we dig ourselves into a deeper hole.”
”I can’t support a budget that puts the phones and information systems ahead of the teachers,” Mr. Blandino said. “I challenge the board to make a budget that is educationally efficient and fiscally responsible.”
This challenge was not an easy one to fulfill as the board began deliberating options for the budget, some of which raised the budget to cap, and others that fell short. The board addressed about seven different motions for amendments to Dr. Forsthoffer’s proposed budget before the approval was finally granted on a proposal that did not please the about 20 residents still remaining in the audience.
”I want to express my displeasure in the voting of the budget,” Mr. Blevins said.
The tentative budget will now go to the county superintendent for evaluation. The final approved budget will be placed on the April 21 ballot.
