Next month we get the opportunity to vote on the school budget. The West Windsor-Plainsboro school district deserves an award for creative budgeting.
Everyone knows that we are in a recession, residents are out of work, and our property taxes are already too high. What do they do? They propose a budget that increases spending by 2.2 percent and drives local taxes up by 3.8 percent. As a resident of the West Windsor-Plainsboro school district, I have decided that I will vote against the proposed budget.
Looking over the past several years, the district has consistently run favorable to the budget. The biggest part of the district budget is the General Fund. From the 2005-’06 year though the 2009-’10 year, spending has been favorable by $6,609,933, $5,914,729, $9,648,909, $9,489,622, and $7,973,836. We should applaud the district for carefully spending the public’s money, but this over budgeting has built a surplus of almost $20 million at June 30, 2010. Why can’t the district use this money to avoid a tax increase?
The district presents the information on a budget-to-budget basis, so they claim they have moderate increases. They overlook that actual spending has been lower than the budget for the past several years. So the actual-to-budget increase is much greater. In the 2009-2010 cycle the district claimed a 1 percent increase, but the budget was actually a 7.8 percent increase above the prior year. In the 2010-2011 budget the district claimed a 0 percent increase, which was really a 5.6 percent increase. The effect of this budget excess has been to drive up taxes and build a cookie jar surplus.
Digging deeper into expenses, the energy account is a great example of the budget creativity. Each year the energy budget has gone up. In 2005-’06 the budget for energy was $3,350,00. In 2010-2011 the budget had grown to $4,430,120. But the 2009-’10 actual was $2,942,012. As a result, this year’s energy budget was based on a 50 percent increase over last year.
If you look at the State Report Card that was just issued, the actual comparable cost per pupil in 2008-’09 was $12,048. For 2009-’10 the budget amount is $13,045, which is an 8.3 percent increase. In these tight economic times, how can we be increasing spending by 8.3 percent? This drives home the reality that the district is working from an inflated budget.
How does the district respond to questions on the increase? Denial and avoidance! At the recent board meeting, I asked about the spending and surplus. The response was a number of risks, possibilities, and problems could come up in the future, so their conclusion was to hold onto the surplus and to raise taxes. I call this “Just in Case” budgeting.
Even more frustrating were the formal budget presentations. As is the usual practice, the same platitudes were repeated, little detail was provided, and half of the presentation was rehashing the cuts made in last year’s budget. There were no new ideas or ways to control next year’s spending.
It is clear to me that the district operates with an entitlement philosophy. They feel that they are entitled to raise our taxes every year. Please vote no on the inflated budget. Tell them that our taxes are already too high.
Quentin Walsh CPA
Petty Road, Plainsboro
Editor’s note: The writer is the husband of School Board member Ellen Walsh. He notes that the views expressed in this letter are his opinions and do not represent her views.
