School District is 'Ahead of the Game' with Proposed Budget

The Board of Education began planning the 2011/2012 school budget last July.

At last night’s informal Superintendent Forum, Superintendent of Schools Dr. David Miceli said planning ahead allowed him, the members of the Finance Committee and Business Administrator James Testa the time to come up with the best budget under the state’s 2 percent cap increase.

“In a normal budget process, we would kick off around October or November,” Miceli said. “So we felt like we needed to be out in front on this, ahead of the game, and try to move forward with as many things as we could so we could get to a good place at this time of year.”

At this point, Miceli said the board is waiting for state aid and debt service numbers, which should be given to the district within two days of Gov. Chris Christie’s Feb. 22 budget address and may affect the proposed budget.

But assuming the district does not receive any state aid, the will impose a one percent tax levy increase for residents, resulting in $76 for the 2011/2012 school year based on the average assessed home of $285,000.

Expenses will increase by 0.88 percent, amounting to $280,000. The budget will also allow all student programs and extra curricular activities to be maintained.

“Because we started when we did, we are light years ahead of where other districts are in their budget process right now,” said Adam Smith, a member of the Finance Committee. “I think we’re the only district that I have seen so far in the papers that have come out and told what our proposed budget is going to look like in terms of an expenditure increase and a potential impact on the tax levy.”

During weekly meetings that began in July, Miceli said the Finance Committee looked for as many efficiencies as possible, opportunities for shared services with other school districts, the state’s mandated 2 percent cap and how to come up with a budget under that cap.

With those goals in mind, the committee made any possible reductions in staff through retirement, and the Assistant Superintendent position and her assistant’s position were decreased to .8 positions. The Treasurer of School Monies position was also eliminated.

At the forum, members of the Taxpayers Association raised the suggestion of eliminating the Assistant Superintendent position all together so the proposed tax levy could potentially be zero.

But Smith said eliminating that position would be detrimental to the operation of the school district.

“We are as bare boned administratively as we can get,” Smith said. “To cut that position entirely would have such an operational impact on the district and we didn’t think the public would want that.”

With regard to sharing services, Miceli cited an example from two years ago where the district was also able to share services for professional development programs with Berkeley Heights.

“We saved a tremendous amount of money as opposed to sending each administrator out for those 12 hours to go to separate workshops,” Miceli said. “We brought everyone together, both administrative teams, and had that presenter come in for four different sessions for three hours each, and we saved a tremendous amount of money doing that.”

To find other ways to share services, Miceli said he met with the Superintendents from Berkeley Heights, Chatham and Summit in January.

“We went through a number of things out there. It was a very successful meeting,” Miceli said. “Each of those superintendents were invested in the process and interested in doing that, and we arranged for subsequent meetings with other personnel in each of districts to talk about curriculum and talk about special services.”

Miceli said the district also found other efficiencies with having the custodial and maintenance staff learn how to mount projectors and smart boards in the schools.

“Most districts have outside professionals come in to mount all of this. Instead of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to have private consultants come in to install the equipment, our own guys did it and it was a commitment from them,” Miceli said. “These things have been happening for many, many years. When I first came to the district, the motto was ‘we budget to need, not to cap.' And I think that that has served this community well for many years and that has been our goal.”

Some residents raised the issue of upgrading technology in the schools, including computers and software for computers so that the programs students are working on at home are compatible with programs on the school’s computers.

Other residents discussed how to make the budget process more clear to senior citizens in town, and the issue of the magnet school in the county and the impact it has on the district's operating budget.

Miceli said all students have the ability to apply and if accepted, the district must pay for transportation and that tuition, which is about $6,000 per student. The district also has no discretion over the cost.

The district is currently spending $200,000 for magnet school tuition and transportation, Miceli said. The district also does not receive any recognition or credit for the success of the magnet school students.

Regarding concerns raised over the increase in expenditures and the tax levy, Finance Chair John Wolak said it is his job to continue the district’s performance as a top district in the state.

“That’s what I’m really looking to do, in addition to trying to minimize the burden on the tax payer, because I’m a tax payer, too, and I’m not anxious to spend more than I have to,” Wolak said.

A second Superintendent Forum is scheduled for March 9 at 7 p.m. in the high school/middle school media center.