Pages

Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Board Passes Budget with 4% Tax Hike

(Updated)

The Board of Education voted 7-1 to pass a budget totaling over $52 million that will raise taxes about $100 for the average homeowner.

The spending plan will result in 33 layoffs, and several sports programs are being eliminated, including all freshman sports, winter track, competition cheerleading, swimming, and fall weight training.  The district also cut summer school and the adult high school.

While newspaper accounts indicate teachers and staff in surrounding districts are taking pay freezes, the South Plainfield unions have not made similar concessions.  Nor have they indicated a willingness to discuss the option.

The budget would have raised taxes by about $140, but residents will benefit from an overbilling two years ago that reduces the increase by $40.  According to Superintendent Jose Negron, the money from the overbilling will be returned to taxpayers through an adjustment.

Board President Jim Giannakis called the tax hike "reasonable," especially given the budget constraints created by state aid reductions.  Facing an estimated $10 billion budget gap, the state cut aid to most school districts by about five percent of their budgets.  For South Plainfield that meant a $2.8 million cut.  The district made up for part of the cut by using $1.2 million of its surplus and $300,000 from its emergency reserve to offset the loss.

But not everyone favored the plan.  Board member Debbie Boyle criticized the lack of information from administrators and said she could not support a 4% tax increase when people were losing their jobs.  She also asked the Board's unions to agree to a wage freeze, saying she had made the same request a week earlier and that none had taken the offer.

Boyle also recommended an activity fee as an option to cutting sports programs.  She said the fee would allow the programs to continue, as would having players fundraise to offset the price of uniforms and other costs.

Board member Bob Jones, who cast the lone dissenting vote, said he agreed with Boyle's suggestions and asked for more cuts to administration.  Both he and Boyle said they had spent hours going over the budget for cost reductions that would not affect education.  Jones also criticized the decision not to include in the budget a $400,000 savings that results from a new law requiring employees to contribute 1.5% of their salaries to offset health-insurance costs.

Jones also said there would be a $200,000 savings by switching health insurance providers.  Board Vice President Pio Pennisi, however, called these savings "uncertain," saying they might be available at a later time but could not be counted on now.

Other members took a different  position.  Carol Byrne, who was re-elected to the Board last year, said the district was in a tough spot and the board was doing the best it could in a bad situation.  She said the board had been responsible.

While board members often disagreed, the tone was mostly civil, with the only major flash-point occurring when Negron said to applause that he would be willing to take a pay freeze.  Boyle, who chairs the Board's negotiations committee, questioned the sincerity of his offer, asking him whether he meant freezing his current contract's salary or freezing it as part of a renegotiated contract.  Negron responded by saying he would only be willing to negotiate the freeze as part of a new contract.

19 comments:

  1. I wonder what will happen... will SP residents support the budget? I shudder to think what a failed budget will do to our district. Do residents realize how important it is that this budget pass?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I hope none of the schools throw the teachers their "appreciation lunches" this year. Let them feed us; the un or under employed and soon to be foreclosed on. And the administrators should be serving it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Typical response; hurt the kids, take away programs, and raise taxes. What a shame that the teachers and administrators could not step up to the plate and accept a wage freeze and some givebacks. There are only two members of the BOE who get it, the rest do not have the best interests of the students in mind. After all, isn't it supposed to be all about the children? I will be voting this budget down. We've been "overbilled" for two years? How about we have been overbilled every year! It's time to give back.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It never ceases to amaze me, the amount of idiocy shown by some people. The money will be in their pockets from the overbilling by the county, It can't be shown in the budget. The 200K can't be shown until the district has a contract with the new insurer. The money from the 1.5% can't be shown yet because the union hasn't agreed to it yet. As to being "overbilled" every year, there are some who believe that even one cent of taxes is too much, get real people!

    ReplyDelete
  5. The 1.5% is a state law; the union does not have to "agree" to it. Everything else is being delayed so that after the budget vote they will "find" all sorts of money. Then what will happen? Will the board will give 4.5% raises to the teachers, like they gave them to the principals. In my opinion, the "idiocy" is giving out those types of raises. Who in their right mind in this economy negotiates that much of a raise?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Superintendent of Schools does not warrant a $180K pay scale. No wonder there is no funding for the education system. It is time to cut the fat. Wake up people it is time to cut your pay or lose your jobs. This is what has been done in the private sector.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The teachers won't take a pay freeze because their contract is up in June.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The Superintendent offered to take a pay freeze!? Well that's not hard since his contract is up. He could not get a contract during the "special budget" hearings in November and December and seems he's on his way out. With that being said I will vote yes for the budget because I feel it is the right thing to do.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Save money; hire someone new for less. At the budget meeting it was briefly talked about how South Plainfield is one of the lowest paying districts to non-central administrators (I.E. principals, asst., etc) by far, but for superintendents, he is near the top. They hired an inexperienced asst. super from north jersey at a rate more than they were paying the last one that had worked in the district for almost 20 years. Those last parts were conveniently out left out of the budget meetings. It does disgust me, but our schools are pretty good and safer then most. If this budget fails I fear we may be confused with our districts soon. I will vote yes, too.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ask the BOE how much is in the budget for teacher raises. I bet they won't tell you. Ask them how much is hidden in the budget so they won't have to do all the things they tried to scare us all with at the budget meeting. Ask them why the teachers won't give back anything at all. I'll vote NO.

    ReplyDelete
  11. As a member of the PTO, I see how short staffed my elementary school is. Cutting 33 staff members will already be a disaster. Voting YES for the budget is the only responsible thing to do for the safety and well being of the children of this town. One hundred dollars per household is not too much to ask for that.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The teachers will take a pay freeze. Their contract is up and they automatically get paid the same rate from the previous year. The 1.5% is law and they will pay it. I am not happy with all that goes on in town, but I do know if this budget fails, my house will be even more worthless than today. 33 positions is a lot to let go. In my simple opinion the district can't afford more than that. I will be voting yes on April 20. To spend a couple of hundred dollars more to save thousands, maybe tens of thousands of dollars on my home's value; Very, very worth it!!

    ReplyDelete
  13. The schools have more teachers now than ever. There is money hidden in the budget. Yet once again the BOE is crying wolf. They've been on a spending spree for two years. Ask Frank Mikorski--he's the board member who got pushed out because he tried to limit the unions. He knows the budget like the back of his hand and he's been pointing out how they've had a $3,000,000 surplus for the past two years. Parents, I know you want the best for your kids, but don't let these people fool you. The money is there and will magically appear after the budget election.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Frank Mikorski was never pushed out of any place he wanted to be. Why don't you ask him. Frank decided not to run on his own as far as I know. It would be beneficial if you got your facts straight before you made a statement like that.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sorry, Mrs. Byrne. The person who posted above you is correct. Frank Mikorski lost re-election when the union did everything it could to beat him. It was a real shame. That's the mistake the BOE makes when it hires people from town. They get to choose their own bosses, and anyone who tries to do what's right gets axed. Although I could be wrong, I think it happened to you two years ago

    ReplyDelete
  16. I love the mind games....pass the budget and let your taxes increase or your property value goes down. You realize that as your property values goes up...so do your taxes even more? Your house is worthless until you decide to sell. Who cares how much its worth while you live in it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Of course the BOE won't tell you how much is in the budget for teacher raises. What do you think the union would do with that kind of information? Say, oh gee, that;s nice to know, but even so, we'll take less then that! Be real about this. I think it's crazy that some of you think this is all a big conspiracy by the BOE. Have you read the papers? Listened to the news? Heard Christie? Almost every BOE in the state is faced with the same kind of thing our BOE is is faced with. The money was hijacked by the state and we are going to lose teachers because of it. There is no hidden well, no money tree out there. This stuff about "hidden surplus" is bogus too. The BOE has told anyone who asked where that money was and what they were doing with it. It was in 3 funds and they used it to put the new AC in the HS last year, fixed the kindergarten classrooms up for full day, repaved the HS/MS parking lots, and a lot of other things over the summer, or didn't you notice. They saved money because the state gave them 40% back on some of those projects. They put 1.5M into this year's budget from what was there. So, where were they hiding anything?

    ReplyDelete
  18. You hit the nail on the head. They have $1.5 million from this year's budget. Other schools don't have that kind of surplus to play with. You're the same people who said money wasn't hidden a few years ago when they were crying wolf.

    They are hiding the savings from the new law. That's not in the budget. I heard them say it. I called Barbara Buono's office and they said it should be in the budget to save the taxpayers. (Yes, I explained our exact situation-contract up in June, etc.).

    You watch. If the budget is accepted, there will not be the promised layoffs, and if the budget goes down, all sorts of money will be "found." You have a right to disagree. The proof will be when it happens.

    ReplyDelete
  19. No. The $1.6 was EXCESS surplus that was taken by Christie from the 2009-2010 budget. The government withheld that much in aide that was supposed to come to us therefore we were forced to use the EXCESS surplus to pay our bills. That money is gone. In the budget that will be voted on in a few weeks that contains the almost $3M LESS in regular state aid we would normally receive. That is where the breakage is for taxes to stay flat. That is why they are cutting things. What money are the hiding from what new law?? I do agree though that money will be found along the way next year to return teachers and staff.

    ReplyDelete

07080 reserves the right to delete comments for any reason. Be nice!