The financial outlook for the upcoming school year was looking grim as WW-P School District officials described what currently is a 3.4 percent increase in the 2010-’11 budget — and that is without any additions to current services.
In preliminary discussions on January 26, administrators described “out of the box” thinking over the past year to come up with cost-saving measures that would define a “new normal” of what they needed to continue funding in order to maintain success — and items they could do without.
But cutting paper supplies and some clubs and activities still appears not to be enough to close what officials are estimating to be at least a $7.6 million gap. And, school officials fear, the shortfall could grow even larger with factors like the recent approval of a local charter school (see story below) and reductions in state aid.
“Just doing the same doesn’t necessarily cost the same,” said Larry Shanok, the district’s assistant superintendent of finance. “The impact of staying the same would mean a total increase of $7.57 million,” as of right now, he added.
Broken down, those projected increases are estimated to come from already-approved contracts, which will automatically increase next year’s budget by $3.25 million; benefit costs increases for all employees, at a pricetag of $3.2 million; an estimated $400,000 increase for utilities; an estimated $400,000 increase in special education tuition; and an estimated increase of $320,000 for busing costs, Shanok reported.
Specifically, Shanok said the district’s state-mandated pension payments increased by 37 percent in April, 2008, and in April, 2010, they are projected to increase by another 15 percent. The number of the district’s worker compensation claims has also reached the highest in history.
While the board was successful in keeping utility costs flat at $600,000 in the current budget, Shanok said he would be remiss, “if I don’t estimate those costs will go up next year.”
In addition, other areas could add costs to the budget, including a reduction in state aid.
In past years, the board has been safe in assuming flat state aid. The situation has worsened in that now officials are anticipating a reduction, especially since the state reduced the district’s aid by $624,000 last spring, Shanok said. There is a possibility that the state could cut $716,000 more this year, he added.
The state also recently approved the Princeton International Academy Charter School, and the district will have to re-direct some of its money to that school, including 90 percent of its per pupil costs for each student attending the new school. That could cost the district between $900,000 and $1 million.
That cost alone would add to the already-known increases. “That’s about $8.6 million more next year just to try to do what we’re doing this year,” Shanok said. “That’s a pretty daunting amount.”
Shanok also presented tax increase scenarios: a 2-percent increase would be $3.1 million; and a 3-percent increase would be $4.7 million. The 4-percent increase (the cap) on the general fund tax levy is $5.3 million. Currently, there is a gap of at least $2.25 million to just make the cap, Shanok said. The board would have to cut more than that amount for a lower tax increase.
“The problem for this budget is very real,” Shanok lamented. It’s especially daunting, he said, given that the district has been trying to maintain moderation over the past seven years. That includes avoiding taxes increases up to the amount permissible by the 4 percent cap.
He also spoke about the principals’ restraint throughout the school year in purchasing items for their schools, leaving extra money each year in the surplus, which is then used the following year to offset taxes. He also recalled that the board hired a consultant in 2002 to find savings in the central office area, which reduced administrative staff there.
Shanok reported on some of the other adjustments the board has made to try to keep costs down over the past few years: moving to the state public health benefits; installing a new chiller/boiler at South and a new boiler at Dutch Neck; refunding $60 million of bond debt; and becoming the first K-12 district to get a Triple A bond rating.
“Clearly we have been having moderate budget increases for seven years now,” Shanok said, pointing to the 4.3 percent overall increase in the budgets for 2007-’08 and 2008-’09 years as well as the 2005-’06, 2004-’05, and 2003-’04 years. In 2006-’07 year, the budget increased by 3.9 percent.
Shanok also pointed to the average per-pupil cost in the district, which was $11,609 in 2007-’08, the most recently recorded year. In that year, the district spent less per pupil than Hopewell, Lawrence, Princeton, and the state average.
While administrators indicated doom and gloom, residents and some board members said that they couldn’t support a budget with a 3.4 percent increase.
West Windsor Township Councilwoman Linda Geevers, who is liaison to the board, urged that they “hold the lines on the budget,” and follow the lead of West Windsor, which she said is trying to target a zero percent increase.
She said the council is also willing to sit down with school administrators to see if there are any opportunity for shared services to save costs. “There might be some avenues for savings,” she said.
Geevers also said she did not think residents would approve of an increase that doubles last year’s increase.
Speaking of the likely 3.4 percent increase, board member Todd Hochman said, “I do not believe we should be coming anywhere close to that number right now. While I recognize a budget with a zero percent increase is impossible, I can’t support a budget with more than a 2 percent increase.”
Resident Ramon Garcia said that people have mentioned that WW-P is not a poor district, but he said, there are residents who have suffered in the economic downturn. “You present a wonderful picture that you’re doing a good job. But as my mom and my teachers told me, you could do better.”
The discussion referred to the possibility that the board may privatize the district’s custodial staff. Members of the unions representing the custodians, foremen, and maintenance personnel, as well as their supporters, continued their presence at the meeting. Some criticized the board during the budget discussion.
Former school board president Richard Harbourt said everyone understood that the board “has been handed a lousy deck of cards,” and that the cost of education is hampered by the pensions and salaries of school employees. “I don’t think our custodians should bear the brunt of it,” he said. “I don’t think you’ll ultimately save what you think you’re going to save.”
School officials announced earlier that they had planned a visit to Robbinsville, where the district’s custodians were outsourced and a private maintenance company was hired. Sherri Bailey, a secretary at High School South, questioned whether a WW-P custodian or foreman was part of the visit.
Bailey also suggested one way the board could raise an estimated $1.295 million: allowing for advertising on banners on the fencing surrounding the athletic fields. At the same time, the board could charge students in extra-curricular activities a $100 activity fee, whether it is to play sports or some other activity. Students involved in more than one activity would only pay the fee once, she said.
Looking at the numbers, she said she found there are 1,068 students at one high school, and $100 each could raise $106,800. At the middle school level, there could be as much as $320,000 raised by implementing the fee.
School elections will be held Tuesday, April 20.
