When voters head to the polls on Tuesday, April 20, they will be voting on a flat 2010-’11 school budget of $155.9 million — the same as the current year’s spending plan.
But even that’s not enough to offset the damage caused by the dramatic loss of $7.56 million in state aid announced last month. The district is faced with making up for the dramatic reduction in revenues, particularly in state aid, and that means two things: up to 50 teachers may be cut, impacting the quality of education, and taxpayers will be shelling out more money.
While the district has eliminated an originally-projected $3.4 million increase in the overall budget, it is also proposing a total 6.5 percent tax levy increase — from $134.8 million last year to $143.5 million this year.
The total increase combines a 4 percent general fund tax levy increase — which meets the state-mandated cap of a 4 percent increase — and a 2.5 percent tax increase for debt service, which is allowed by law to be excluded from the cap.
Before the state aid cuts, a $159.3 million budget was on the table that would have increased taxes by 3.8 percent. That measure was a 2.2 percent increase over the prior year’s $155.9 million budget.
Plainsboro taxpayers would bear the brunt of this year’s increase, while those in West Windsor should see a relatively flat tax bill for 2010-’11. With regard to the calculation for the way the tax burden is divided, “this is the final year of the transition from equalized valuation to per pupil expenses,” explained Board President Hemant Marathe. “This is the last wide swing that is going to happen. Starting next year, there will be a much smoother change from year-to-year.” Marathe also said that in Plainsboro over the last five years, taxes have gone up, on average only 1.8 percent.
The revised $155.9 million budget, presented during the district’s March 31 budget public hearing, calls for reductions in the number of teaching, administrative, secretarial, and busing staff as well as cuts to extra-curriculars and sports programs.
Before the public hearing, Superintendent Victoria Kniewel and Larry Shanok, assistant superintendent for finance, spoke with the News about the budget. “Practically every area is being reviewed for reduction,” said Kniewel, who emphasized that the dramatic cuts were made on top of cuts the district has already been making over the past eight years.
“Within the last two weeks, we got the budget down to a zero percent increase,” said Shanok, assistant superintendent for finance. “We’re hoping people will see zero as an honest effort” to ease the burden on taxpayers and share the impact.
Plainsboro taxpayers would see their tax rates increase to $1.549 per $100 of assessed home value — an increase of some 10-cents over last year’s rate of $1.446. For a the owner of a home assessed at the township average of $395,000, that translates into an average tax bill of $6,119 for school taxes.
This represents an increase of about $400 over last year’s average tax bill. By comparison, the owner of an average assessed home last year paid about $5,719.
In West Windsor, however, the tax rate would remain relatively flat at $1.339 per $100 of assessed value. For the owner of a home assessed at the township average this year of $534,782, that translates into a tax bill of $7,161. Last year, the tax rate in West Windsor was $1.304 cents per $100 of assessed value. The owner of a home assessed at average value last year of $549,325 paid about $7,163.
Shanok pointed out that the average increase over the past four years, including the proposed budget for this upcoming school year, has been low. Collectively, the average annual increase to West Windsor taxes has only been 1.3 percent, and the average annual increase to Plainsboro taxes has been 2.2 percent. “That’s not a very large annual increase over these four years,” he said.
Keeping the budget flat will translate into some tough decisions. The district is looking at a formula that cuts 17 teachers per $1 million dollars that needs to be saved — in this case, $3.4 million. But the total number of teachers to be cut cannot be estimated right now for a number of reasons, including retirements.
In the case of retirements, a teacher at the higher end of the pay scale making around $80,000 could be replaced by a new teacher at a beginning salary of around $50,000. Those savings would partially offset the number of teachers to be cut.
In addition, the administration is working to determine which staff configurations are least damaging to the educational process. Until these numerous variables can be solidified, officials won’t have an estimate as to how many jobs will be lost. Also, “we’re hoping people can step forward” with more savings to avoid the cuts, Shanok said.
When the cuts do occur, officials plan to accommodate the student population by combining smaller classes at the high school level, which will slightly “pop up class size numbers,” Kniewel said.
But not all of the $3.4 million will come from the teaching staff. Kniewel said the administrative staff was also reduced, as well as the number of secretaries. In addition, “we won’t be replacing bus drivers” when they leave the district, she said.
Before the state aid cuts were announced, officials had already included a $1.5 million savings in the buildings and grounds area, a reduction of three administrative positions, and significant reduction of supplies. That budget relied on flat state aid.
The board had been preparing a worse-case scenario for a 15 percent decrease in state aid, according to information in the presentation on March 31. That would have meant a reduced number of guidance counselors, reduction of kindergarten to 4th grade teachers, a reduced number of elementary computer teachers, a reduced number of administrators, a reduction in capital spending, reduction of a secretary, and a reduced number of middle school teaching positions.
However, after the 71 percent decrease, the board had to make further cuts. That resulted in the reduction in athletics and co-curricular activities, which shows a decrease in the number of coaches and programs at both the middle school and high school level, a consolidation of schedules, and reduction in transportation costs. There was also a reduction in special education funding, including tuition, staffing, and instructional support.
Kniewel specifically pointed out that administration — targeted by critics each budget season — incorporates more than just the salaries of the administrators; it also includes secretaries.
The district will be cutting about $100,000 from the extra curriculars and athletics programs. Kniewel said the extra curriculars and sports teams that are undersubscribed will be on the chopping block. “If you’re an underutilized sport with a handful of kids, that’s where we’ll be looking,” said Kniewel.
As for the staffing reductions, officials will be looking at class size considerations and special area teachers at the elementary level. At the middle school level, they will look at the creation of mini-teams, as well as the restructuring of support teachers and the reduction of co-curricular and athletics. At the high school level, they will look to reduce staff through increasing class sizes, reduce courses with low enrollment, and reduce health and library services.
Officials have emphasized throughout the process that they have cautiously reduced the budget as much as possible to avoid impacts to education and curriculum. But with the dramatic 71 percent decrease in state aid, some damage has become unavoidable.
Kniewel and Shanok warned that if the budget fails at the polls this month, it will translate into further cuts and more impact to education. “If the budget goes down, that will mean more reductions,” said Shanok. “Those who are concerned should definitely vote.”
Kniewel and Shanok emphasize that a WW-P education is a relative bargain. The most recent “total comparative per pupil costs” released by the state Department of Education show that in 2009-’10, WW-P spent an average of $13,045 per pupil. By comparison, Hopewell spent $15,067, and Princeton spent $17,421. The district also spent below the state average.
They maintain that the district has continued to cut costs and find areas of savings while maintaining a quality education. And, they say, the district’s practice of cutting is not new, but that desperate times call for desperate measures. “You don’t wind up thousands of dollars below Hopewell and Princeton if you haven’t been cutting,” said Shanok. It has come to the point where “years and years of squeezing doesn’t allow us to squeeze any more,” and now drastic measures have to be made.”
The district offers “an excellent performance at a moderate cost,” he said. “I know a lot of people are hurting, but we hope they can see past that and see what we’re delivering. We’ve held quality. We would hope that’s worth supporting.”
Prior to the announcement of state aid cuts last month, the district came up with its own savings. Not only does the budget reflect a $1.5 million decrease in the area of buildings and grounds, but it also reflects the renegotiated contracts the board approved with the teachers’ and administrators’ unions last month — projected to save the district more than $1 million.
Under the new terms, salary raises will be frozen for a 12-week period beginning September 1, 2010, for the two unions. The teachers’ contract, which was originally set to expire in June, 2011, was extended to the 2011-’12 school year. That year, teachers will receive a 3.38 percent increase.
As for the contract negotiated with the WW-P Administrators Association, the members of the union will also forgo the previously negotiated salary increases for the first six pay periods in 2010-’11 and reduce professional conference benefits, for a savings of approximately $80,000.
The administrators’ contracts were also extended a year. Now, for the 2011-’12 school year, the members of the union will receive a salary increase of 2.9 percent.
The move was criticized, by residents and one of the board’s own members, who said the new contract should have included contributions to health benefits from teachers and administrators, which is not required under the terms of the renegotiated contract.
Residents around the community have pointed to private sector companies, which have frozen salaries all together, and criticized the board for agreeing to any salary increase at all in the extended year.
That was the most common complaint during the March 31 public hearing, which saw nearly a standing-room only crowd. Some residents criticized the board, saying they wanted to see more cuts and less of an increase.
Paul Pitluk, a resident of Village Grande, an active adult community with 540 residents, said the residents of the development were very interested in the school budget. “We love to vote,” he said, pointing to the development’s 60 to 70 percent voting record. He commended the teachers for taking the three-month freeze, calling it a “wonderful first start on the part of the teachers,” who showed willingness to come to the table in a time of need. However, “even more has to be done, in my opinion.”
He said he was a teacher in the 1970s in New York City, when the teachers there had to fight for their salaries. “We decided that we had to concede” and take a salary freeze for several years. “I consider this to be a similar situation. I think teachers have to accept their role in this problem. It’s time for the teachers to accept not just a three-month freeze, but for an entire year.”
West Windsor resident David Hitchcock criticized the board for failing to address teachers’ salaries. “What is your average certified teacher’s salary?” He also asked for information on the number of teachers who have applied to open positions, saying he read somewhere that on average, there are about 100 applicants to each open teaching position around the state. If this is true, “there is no reason for a salary increase.”
He said that his own compensation has gone down and that many residents like him cannot understand why the board would approve any increase.
“I don’t know whether I should laugh or cry when I see this fuzzy math,” said West Windsor resident Hemi Nae. He said the board should cut more to ease the burden so that residents do not have to chip in 6.5 percent more, “while everyone else takes.” He called for the board to reduce the budget by another 8 percent.
West Windsor resident Pete Weale said the board’s budget presentation lacked real numbers, including the costs of salaries, benefits, and pension costs. He criticized the board for having Shanok “recite” the presentation to the public and for not having the information on the website before the meeting.
“Why are numbers consistently missing in these juvenile presentations?” Weale asked. He also called for a reduction in the number of assistant superintendents. There is a “complete lack of meaningful detail, both pro and con,” he added. He pointed to the information provided by Lawrence Township’s school district, saying, “Don’t tell me it can’t be done.”
“We all know you can get statistics to lie to you,” he added.
West Windsor resident Bryan Maher also said there was more room for cuts. He pointed to the 42 paid days off given to administrators. “In the real world, people don’t get 42 paid days off a year,” he said. “Tell me you don’t see waste in there.”
Teachers defended themselves. Teacher Greg Bugge said he earned $54,000 a year, plus his benefits. “I fail to understand how my $54,000 is causing everyone else’s problem,” he said, adding that he worked in the private sector for 20 years and took a big pay cut when he became a teacher in the district. “It’s the most amount of work I have ever done for the least amount of pay I have ever earned.” A resident of West Windsor, he said he continues to pay taxes like everyone else and does so on his $54,000 salary.
Another teacher from Community Middle School said he has worked in the district for eight years and makes $50,000. He said he also took a pay cut when he left the television industry to become a teacher.
Not all residents were critical of the board. Jeffrey Yu, a sophomore at South, urged residents to vote in favor of the budget, saying that the district’s teachers are the reason why the district is successful. He pointed to his math teacher who holds tutoring sessions every day after school. Those students may have had to pay up to $100 an hour for a private tutor after school if they did not get extra help, he said.
He asked parents to ask their children if they liked learning in school. He said he felt parents would be hard-pressed to find students who were not happy with the school district, and that the responses would probably be different in areas like Trenton, where students are discouraged and unmotivated in school.
Board members responded to the public comment, saying they were doing the best they could. Marathe commended his board colleagues for coming up with the cuts in 24 hours. “How many companies have come up with $7 million in cuts and have done a reasonable job in less than 24 hours?”
He also said many of the residents who criticized the board for not cutting enough were the same people who criticized it for studying the possibility of outsourcing the custodians. “You can’t have it both ways.”
Marathe said the school district was only one of five districts, at most, in the state, where teachers and administrators renegotiated their contracts. “That has made this district good — what it is,” he said.
He also pointed to the West Windsor tax rate. “If you live in West Windsor, it doesn’t necessarily mean your taxes are going up.” In fact, he said, “some people are actually going to see their school taxes decrease. I would recommend people take a look at their assessments and tax bills before assuming their taxes are going up.”
Marathe also explained the percentage increase in the teachers’ and administrators’ salaries under the new contract is not as dramatic as it appears on paper. “If we reported our contracts the same way the federal and state governments do, the teachers would see a 1.5 percent raise for the fourth year, the new year of the contract,” he explained.
Each teacher moves up a step on the salary level each year automatically, and the district is required to report that increase on top of the negotiated increase in those levels. “The state and federal governments never report that step in there.”
A majority of teachers will only actually see about a 1.2 or 1.3 percent raise in the fourth year, he said. In addition, “any way you look at it, for the two-year period, the school is saving a $250,000 to $500,000, even after considering the (would-be) impact of the 1.5 percent contributions to health benefits under the new law. In the worst-case scenario, the district comes out a quarter million dollars ahead.” (The new law to which he is referring would require public employees to contribute 1.5 percent of their salaries to their health benefits once their current contracts expired.)
Marathe also criticized Weale, saying he “gave a big speech and then disappeared, like he always does” before hearing the board’s responses.
Board vice president Robert Johnson said the board has “made a deliberate effort over the last eight years” to whittle down the costs without damaging education. “We’re getting to the point where we’re cutting into the bone.” He said that the school board has even done a better job at controlling costs than governments at the federal, state, county, and local levels.
With regard to the renegotiated contracts, “settlements are negotiated — they’re not imposed.”
Board member Richard Kaye said the district was told by the state to prepare to dramatically cut its programs or increase its taxes. “To take something of excellence and destroy it would be a tragedy,” he said of the quality of education in the district. The board’s responsibility is to educate the community’s children. “The property values of everyone in the township would be destroyed” if the quality of education suffered, he added.
Responding to a critic who said the board should be comparing its figures to that of Montgomery, which he said performs just as well, if not better, than WW-P and spends less. Kaye said the Montgomery district is only not as old, and because of this, had hired teachers who do not have 10 to 20 years of experience like that of the teachers in the older WW-P district.
Board member Todd Hochman, who criticized the board earlier last month for approving a contract with the teachers that did not include contributions to their benefits, commended the board for “engaging in a Herculean task” of keeping the budget to a zero percent increase.
Shanok defended the board’s action in renegotiated the contracts and referred to the budgets of towns in the surrounding area. “How many have full freezes for police and township employees?” he asked. He added that the teachers and administrators came forward without being asked — before the governor even called on districts to renegotiate their contracts, and before the state aid figures were released. He maintained they did not have to do anything.
“WW-P has been recognized as a leader,” with respect to the renegotiated contracts, Kniewel added.
Marathe said the board is still trying to talk to the teachers, but said that even if there is an agreement, it would not lessen the tax burden. “If the teachers agree to a freeze, it would mean a return for saving the jobs that would otherwise be lost,” he said. “We are still optimistic that we can talk to come up with an agreement.”
Aside from the savings from the renegotiated contracts, the district is also anticipating a savings of $1.5 million in the area of wages and benefits in the buildings and grounds portion of the budget — a controversial issue all year. The district reviewed a study by consultant Edvocate, which suggested the board could find savings by outsourcing the custodial and maintenance services to a private company.
The district has gone out to bid for custodial, maintenance, grounds, and management services, but no decision on privatization has been made yet.
According to Shanok, there are 104 positions that would be affected by privatization. The district has “assumed, one way or another, the $1.5 million identified by the study. Whether that’s by movement or by outsourcing is still a decision the board has to make.”
Susan Levine, the president of the West Windsor-Plainsboro Service Association said on March 31 that the board and the union had settled on a contract, but said she could not release the details of the agreement until it was ratified by union members. The employees had been working without a contract for the past two years.
According to Marathe, the agreement is set up similar to the renegotiated contract with the teachers and administrators — it is a three-year contract with a one-year extension and also includes givebacks and salary freezes. However, Marathe said he could not give details on the terms of the agreement. “They are giving back substantially on healthcare and deductibles and pay,” he said.
“In spite of this being a difficult negotiation, I feel very good that both sides still felt comfortable and trusting enough to come to a resolution,” he added.
In other matters relating to school finances, a group representing SEIU Local 32BJ, based out of Newark, approached the board, urging it to look at its contract with Sodexo, the district’s food service provider. According to a handout presented to residents at the meeting, in the 2008-’09 school year, Sodexo charged the WW-P district $78,737 for workers compensation insurance and liability insurance. “We estimate that this is $21,000 more than Sodexo actually paid for insurance,” the handout stated.
