School budget awaits state OK

March 27 targeted for public hearing

By:Ruth Luse
   A tentative school budget for 2001-2002 that increases the tax rate in all three Hopewell Valley municipalities is on its way to the Mercer County superintendent of schools for approval.
   The spending plan totals $44,860,018, out of which $3,351,519 is for debt service — an amount already approved by Hopewell Valley voters and one that will not be part of the amount to be OK’d by voters April 17.
   The tentative budget represents an increase of $3,099,570 over the 2000-2001 budget, or 7.42 percent.
   The General Fund, which includes current expense, capital outlay, special schools and special revenue sections of the budget, totals $41,508,499. Administrators indicated Monday that this amount probably will change by March 27 — the expected date for the public hearing on the budget that will go to voters April 17.
   The tentative budget would require the school board to raise $36,900,216 in local taxes for support of the general fund section. This would mean the following estimated school tax rates: Hopewell Borough, $1.90 per $100 of assessed valuation (a 7-cent increase over the current budget); Hopewell Township, $1.64 (a 3-cent increase) and Pennington, $1.93 (a 4-cent increase).
   For those having houses assessed at $200,000 in Hopewell Borough, that would mean a school tax of $3,800; for those in Hopewell Township with an assessment of $255,000 (the average), that would mean a $4,182 school tax; and for individuals in Pennington with a house assessed at $225,461 (the average), that would mean a school tax of $4,351. In Hopewell, it would be a $140 increase; in Hopewell Township, $76; and in Pennington, $90.
   The county superintendent, on behalf of the state Department of Education, will review budget documents and either approve them or recommend adjustment, said John Nemeth, business administrator/board secretary. The school board, after that review, will have additional opportunities to modify the budget at future board meetings or at the public hearing.
   The budget plan, which is at cap, includes spending growth limitation adjustments for both changes in enrollment (which continues to rise with 165 new children expected next school year) and safety transportation. Hopewell Valley buses children who live closer to school than the state mandate: over 2 miles for elementary students (K-8) and over 2½ miles for secondary (grades 9-12) students. Hopewell Valley traditionally has bused elementary children who live a mile or more from school and secondary students who live 1.25 miles or more from school. That’s what is meant by safety busing.
   Because of the difficulty this year in keeping the budget plan at cap, administration made $713,576 in cuts, including $150,000 for a planned alternative Central High School program; $10,206 for a lacrosse coach and equipment for Timberlane Middle School; $35,000 for curriculum/staff training for summer school; and $5,400 for girls softball at Central High (a coach for a new team). A complete list of cuts and other budget information are available at the district’s Web site, hvrsd.k12,nj.us.
   One section of the budget that made staying at cap ( 6.27%) difficult is the increase in transportation costs (estimated at 19.61 percent). Three new routes were added to handle increased enrollment, two buses for overloads and 11 new routes for special education students. For some individual students, transportation costs alone range from $25,000 to $50,000 a year, depending on the child’s special needs.
   Other increases in the tentative budget are for additional staff in 2001-2002 to handle the projected 165 new students. In addition, this proposed budget includes increases related to special education costs — such as tuition, staff and required associated services (occupational therapy, physical therapy, and medical screenings).
   Board President Sally Turner explained Monday that some years ago, when there was difficulty in creating budgets that would pay for needed programs, which were in cap, school boards would immediately cut from maintenance accounts to make up differences. Since it became necessary over a decade ago to go to the voters with a special maintenance referendum to make up for past cuts, more recent boards have kept maintenance money in budgets yearly. That’s why, she said Monday, voters have been getting more special questions on ballots.
   At the March 27 public hearing, the board may approve special questions, in additional to the general fund ballot question. Separate proposals could include requests to spend:
   Money for technology, in the amount of $90,000, for a three-year lease purchase of 245 replacement computers at the three elementary schools and five each for Timberlane, Central High and administrative offices;
   $21,677 for extracurricular programs at Central High and Timberlane;
   $35,000 for security — continue the replacement of door locks in district buildings and to provide for video monitoring cameras at CHS, Timberlane and the three elementary schools; and
   $230,000 for communications, a five-year lease purchase of a districtwide telephone system. Currently, the district has, said Dr. Robert Sopko, a "disjointed phone system." He said that if he calls Bear Tavern, it’s a toll call. What’s needed, he added, is an integrated system.
   Dr. Sopko said that if these particular items — or ones like them —are put to voters as a separate question or separate questions, and if they are OK’d, the impact on the taxpayer would be slightly less than 1 cent on the tax rate. Separate questions, if not approved by voters, cannot be implemented that budget year.
   If a decision is made to begin a football program in 2001-2002 — which was another agenda item Monday — that cost could be placed in a separate question or placed in the budget after eliminating another expense of equal value.