| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 7:50 am EDT Post subject: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
 |
|
http://www.cranburytownship.org/school_final_budget_letter.pdf
To Our Community,
When taxpayers vote on the Cranbury Township School District budget on Tuesday, they will be asked to approve a spending plan that is $1.2 million lower than last year.
In order to offset a 100 percent loss of state aid, the $16.7 million budget proposed to voters includes drastic cuts to staff, programs and services. Under state law, school budgets that are defeated are sent to the municipal governing body for review.
It is important for voters in Cranbury to know that rejecting the school district budget cannot result in further cuts in teacher’s salaries. It can result in further cuts to instructional programs and services. The reason is simple: Neither the Board of Education, the Township Committee or the Governor himself has the authority to force a wage freeze on a union that has a legally-binding contract. The Cranbury Education Association contract expires in 2011.
Still, when Governor Christie announced the last-minute elimination of our state aid last month, it took mere hours for the Cranbury Education Association to approach the Board of Education and offer some concessions. Rather than an across-the-board salary freeze, the union made concessions worth $135,000 that included salary reductions, the elimination of tuition reimbursement for continuing college credits and professional development funding.
We encourage our community members to make an informed vote on our budget and invite any questions or comments.
Members of the Board of Education will hold an informational session on Monday, April 19 at 7 p.m. in the Cranbury School Large Group Room to discuss the budget and answer any questions that the public may have.
Respectfully,
The Cranbury Board of Education
Joan Weidner, President
Lynne Schwarz, Vice President
Jennifer Cooke
Kevin Fox
Julie Hardaker
Wendi Patella
Nicole Pormilli
Austin Schraudenbach
Evelyn Spann |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 8:36 am EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Rather than an across-the-board salary freeze, the union made concessions worth $135,000 that included salary reductions, |
At the school budget presentation, it was announced that the teachers would get a 2% raise instead of 4% increase that was in the contract for next year. The administrators also were getting at 2% increase. What are the salary reductions the this letter states was done? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 9:24 am EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| I heard that no cuts in staff...maybe staff time, but no jobs lost. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 9:24 am EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| The reduction is from 4% to 2%. The teacher's contracts were for a 4% increase, they offered to lower it to 2% instead, so they gave up 2% of their raise, plus tuition reimbursement and professional development funds. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 9:31 am EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| Why are the administrators getting a raise? Shouldn't they set the example and take a one year pay freeze? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Budget Info
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 9:46 am EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
I did a google search and found this site on the NJ School Board Association website. Some interesting information for education:
http://www.njsba.org/sb_notes/20090401/images/faq.pdf
I found the comment in bold interesting as there was discussion about a peer review by the TC. It appears a peer review is possible- i.e. a review and no cuts or even the BOE can choose not to make the cuts the TC advises as long as they adhere to the new tax levy if the budget is voted down.
Q. Our school budget will not increase the tax levy. Yet in
this economy, I’m concerned that voters will reject it.
What happens if the budget is defeated?
A. Defeated school budgets are reviewed by the municipal governing
body in consultation with the board of education. Generally,
the municipality may—but is not required to—reduce the size
of the school tax levy requested by the board. If it makes a cut,
the municipality must back up its decision by identifying corresponding
reductions in school expenditures. The school board
is not bound by these particular spending cuts, but it must live
with the tax levy certified by the municipal governing body.
Under the School Funding Reform Act, a municipality may
not reduce the tax levy below the district’s minimum tax levy.
Therefore, when voters reject a budget with a tax levy no higher
than the state-required local share, the municipality cannot
make any reductions. This scenario occurred in a handful of
school districts last year.
School boards may apply to the state Department of Education’s
Division of Finance for restoration of reductions made by the
municipality. Last year, no district filed an application. The school
funding act provides the following bases for such applications:
• A school district with a proposed budget above adequacy
may apply for restoration only on the grounds that the
municipality’s reductions would negatively affect the district’s
long-term financial stability.
• A school district with a proposed budget at or below adequacy
may apply on the grounds that the municipality’s action
would negatively affect its long-term financial stability and/or
would prevent it from providing a thorough and efficient
education. The municipality must document “by clear and
convincing evidence” that each proposed line-item reduction
would not have an adverse impact on the district. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 10:08 am EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| STILL MORE FAT TO TRIM VOTE NO |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 10:10 am EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest wrote: | | Rather than an across-the-board salary freeze, the union made concessions worth $135,000 that included salary reductions, |
At the school budget presentation, it was announced that the teachers would get a 2% raise instead of 4% increase that was in the contract for next year. The administrators also were getting at 2% increase. What are the salary reductions the this letter states was done? |
That's just semantics. If they are legally guaranteed a 4% raise, then cutting 2% of that is effectively a reduction. It's also a raise if seen against previous income. If you are angry they are getting any raise, no matter the circumstances, you will see it as a lie. If you aren't angry about it, you will take it the way it was intended. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 10:13 am EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | I heard that no cuts in staff...maybe staff time, but no jobs lost. |
A couple dozen people had to accept a change to part-time status varying from I believe 60% to 90%. I guess it remains to be seen if they leve to find full-time jobs instead and they have to find replacements. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 11:11 am EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | STILL MORE FAT TO TRIM VOTE NO |
Can you be more specific? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest 2
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 3:21 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| Budget Info wrote: | I did a google search and found this site on the NJ School Board Association website. Some interesting information for education:
http://www.njsba.org/sb_notes/20090401/images/faq.pdf
I found the comment in bold interesting as there was discussion about a peer review by the TC. It appears a peer review is possible- i.e. a review and no cuts or even the BOE can choose not to make the cuts the TC advises as long as they adhere to the new tax levy if the budget is voted down.
Q. Our school budget will not increase the tax levy. Yet in
this economy, I’m concerned that voters will reject it.
What happens if the budget is defeated?
A. Defeated school budgets are reviewed by the municipal governing
body in consultation with the board of education. Generally,
the municipality may—but is not required to—reduce the size
of the school tax levy requested by the board. If it makes a cut,
the municipality must back up its decision by identifying corresponding
reductions in school expenditures. The school board
is not bound by these particular spending cuts, but it must live
with the tax levy certified by the municipal governing body.
Under the School Funding Reform Act, a municipality may
not reduce the tax levy below the district’s minimum tax levy.
Therefore, when voters reject a budget with a tax levy no higher
than the state-required local share, the municipality cannot
make any reductions. This scenario occurred in a handful of
school districts last year.
School boards may apply to the state Department of Education’s
Division of Finance for restoration of reductions made by the
municipality. Last year, no district filed an application. The school
funding act provides the following bases for such applications:
• A school district with a proposed budget above adequacy
may apply for restoration only on the grounds that the
municipality’s reductions would negatively affect the district’s
long-term financial stability.
• A school district with a proposed budget at or below adequacy
may apply on the grounds that the municipality’s action
would negatively affect its long-term financial stability and/or
would prevent it from providing a thorough and efficient
education. The municipality must document “by clear and
convincing evidence” that each proposed line-item reduction
would not have an adverse impact on the district. |
Yes, the TC has to review the rejected budget, that is the procedure. They then certify the final amount. How the school chooses to spend that final amount is still up to them. The TC can say - cut x or y or z -- but in the end they only certify the final amount.
This review is just that a "review". Not a "peer" review. The TC are not "peers" with the BOE. They are two different bodies, with two different tasks. Why anyone thinks the TC has any hidden expertise to be able to review the budget any better than the BOE or the residents is beyond me. You elected representatives (fellow residents we know and trust, they are called the BOE) to review and make recommendations on a budget, have the decency to say "yes" or "no" on the merit of the proposed budget. Don't view the TC review as some "magical" extra step.
Also - a "no" vote brings in the State DOE. They too have to certify the final amount and THEY can make adjustments. Frankly, I don't trust the State DOE AT ALL. They have an agenda, and it does not include educating our children -- it includes breaking the NJEA. I don't like the idea that our state government is using our children as a pawn in this battle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest 2
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 3:30 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest wrote: | | Rather than an across-the-board salary freeze, the union made concessions worth $135,000 that included salary reductions, |
At the school budget presentation, it was announced that the teachers would get a 2% raise instead of 4% increase that was in the contract for next year. The administrators also were getting at 2% increase. What are the salary reductions the this letter states was done? |
The union concession includes 2% of their raise (half of the contracted amount), their tuition reimbursement and their professional development. Note that the tuition reimbursement parts is MORE than their raises. Remember the raises are not a big number. Frankly, nothing compared to the total amount cut by the state.
The staff reductions were taken by not replacing two retirees and reducing many staff members to .9
This is a 10% reduction in their salaries. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Apr 15 2010, 4:17 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| Guest 2 wrote: | | Budget Info wrote: | I did a google search and found this site on the NJ School Board Association website. Some interesting information for education:
http://www.njsba.org/sb_notes/20090401/images/faq.pdf
I found the comment in bold interesting as there was discussion about a peer review by the TC. It appears a peer review is possible- i.e. a review and no cuts or even the BOE can choose not to make the cuts the TC advises as long as they adhere to the new tax levy if the budget is voted down.
Q. Our school budget will not increase the tax levy. Yet in
this economy, I’m concerned that voters will reject it.
What happens if the budget is defeated?
A. Defeated school budgets are reviewed by the municipal governing
body in consultation with the board of education. Generally,
the municipality may—but is not required to—reduce the size
of the school tax levy requested by the board. If it makes a cut,
the municipality must back up its decision by identifying corresponding
reductions in school expenditures. The school board
is not bound by these particular spending cuts, but it must live
with the tax levy certified by the municipal governing body.
Under the School Funding Reform Act, a municipality may
not reduce the tax levy below the district’s minimum tax levy.
Therefore, when voters reject a budget with a tax levy no higher
than the state-required local share, the municipality cannot
make any reductions. This scenario occurred in a handful of
school districts last year.
School boards may apply to the state Department of Education’s
Division of Finance for restoration of reductions made by the
municipality. Last year, no district filed an application. The school
funding act provides the following bases for such applications:
• A school district with a proposed budget above adequacy
may apply for restoration only on the grounds that the
municipality’s reductions would negatively affect the district’s
long-term financial stability.
• A school district with a proposed budget at or below adequacy
may apply on the grounds that the municipality’s action
would negatively affect its long-term financial stability and/or
would prevent it from providing a thorough and efficient
education. The municipality must document “by clear and
convincing evidence” that each proposed line-item reduction
would not have an adverse impact on the district. |
Yes, the TC has to review the rejected budget, that is the procedure. They then certify the final amount. How the school chooses to spend that final amount is still up to them. The TC can say - cut x or y or z -- but in the end they only certify the final amount.
This review is just that a "review". Not a "peer" review. The TC are not "peers" with the BOE. They are two different bodies, with two different tasks. Why anyone thinks the TC has any hidden expertise to be able to review the budget any better than the BOE or the residents is beyond me. You elected representatives (fellow residents we know and trust, they are called the BOE) to review and make recommendations on a budget, have the decency to say "yes" or "no" on the merit of the proposed budget. Don't view the TC review as some "magical" extra step.
Also - a "no" vote brings in the State DOE. They too have to certify the final amount and THEY can make adjustments. Frankly, I don't trust the State DOE AT ALL. They have an agenda, and it does not include educating our children -- it includes breaking the NJEA. I don't like the idea that our state government is using our children as a pawn in this battle. |
You're ignoring the "in consultation with the BOE". Do you really think the TC will not consider the views of the BOE if the budget is voted down? They could sit here and say hey, you know what the BOE did their best the budget is fine let it stand. They have the option to do that. They also have the option to say to the BOE, let's discuss this and this and we don't think it makes sense. The BOE can then say yes it does, so we'll cut this or that. Either way the BOE remains fully involved in the process through out. If my taxes are going up, then I am voting No. I am going to ask for another party to do a review. I feel a lot better knowing another party is reviewing the budget in detail and working in conjunction with the BOE. That is my opinion. I am not excluding the BOE and neither is the law. I think the TC has expertise because we have finance people on the TC.
You are fine with the BOE and the budget so vote yes. I am not supporting anyone vote yes or no. I am stating my view that I like a review to occur. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri, Apr 16 2010, 10:05 am EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest 2 wrote: | | Budget Info wrote: | I did a google search and found this site on the NJ School Board Association website. Some interesting information for education:
http://www.njsba.org/sb_notes/20090401/images/faq.pdf
I found the comment in bold interesting as there was discussion about a peer review by the TC. It appears a peer review is possible- i.e. a review and no cuts or even the BOE can choose not to make the cuts the TC advises as long as they adhere to the new tax levy if the budget is voted down.
Q. Our school budget will not increase the tax levy. Yet in
this economy, I’m concerned that voters will reject it.
What happens if the budget is defeated?
A. Defeated school budgets are reviewed by the municipal governing
body in consultation with the board of education. Generally,
the municipality may—but is not required to—reduce the size
of the school tax levy requested by the board. If it makes a cut,
the municipality must back up its decision by identifying corresponding
reductions in school expenditures. The school board
is not bound by these particular spending cuts, but it must live
with the tax levy certified by the municipal governing body.
Under the School Funding Reform Act, a municipality may
not reduce the tax levy below the district’s minimum tax levy.
Therefore, when voters reject a budget with a tax levy no higher
than the state-required local share, the municipality cannot
make any reductions. This scenario occurred in a handful of
school districts last year.
School boards may apply to the state Department of Education’s
Division of Finance for restoration of reductions made by the
municipality. Last year, no district filed an application. The school
funding act provides the following bases for such applications:
• A school district with a proposed budget above adequacy
may apply for restoration only on the grounds that the
municipality’s reductions would negatively affect the district’s
long-term financial stability.
• A school district with a proposed budget at or below adequacy
may apply on the grounds that the municipality’s action
would negatively affect its long-term financial stability and/or
would prevent it from providing a thorough and efficient
education. The municipality must document “by clear and
convincing evidence” that each proposed line-item reduction
would not have an adverse impact on the district. |
Yes, the TC has to review the rejected budget, that is the procedure. They then certify the final amount. How the school chooses to spend that final amount is still up to them. The TC can say - cut x or y or z -- but in the end they only certify the final amount.
This review is just that a "review". Not a "peer" review. The TC are not "peers" with the BOE. They are two different bodies, with two different tasks. Why anyone thinks the TC has any hidden expertise to be able to review the budget any better than the BOE or the residents is beyond me. You elected representatives (fellow residents we know and trust, they are called the BOE) to review and make recommendations on a budget, have the decency to say "yes" or "no" on the merit of the proposed budget. Don't view the TC review as some "magical" extra step.
Also - a "no" vote brings in the State DOE. They too have to certify the final amount and THEY can make adjustments. Frankly, I don't trust the State DOE AT ALL. They have an agenda, and it does not include educating our children -- it includes breaking the NJEA. I don't like the idea that our state government is using our children as a pawn in this battle. |
You're ignoring the "in consultation with the BOE". Do you really think the TC will not consider the views of the BOE if the budget is voted down? They could sit here and say hey, you know what the BOE did their best the budget is fine let it stand. They have the option to do that. They also have the option to say to the BOE, let's discuss this and this and we don't think it makes sense. The BOE can then say yes it does, so we'll cut this or that. Either way the BOE remains fully involved in the process through out. If my taxes are going up, then I am voting No. I am going to ask for another party to do a review. I feel a lot better knowing another party is reviewing the budget in detail and working in conjunction with the BOE. That is my opinion. I am not excluding the BOE and neither is the law. I think the TC has expertise because we have finance people on the TC.
You are fine with the BOE and the budget so vote yes. I am not supporting anyone vote yes or no. I am stating my view that I like a review to occur. |
Remember however, that most people would view a "no" vote as "make cuts". Even if the TC agrees with the BOE they may feel that the "no" vote DEMANDS that they make more cuts, and they may then act AGAINST the recommendation of the BOE. So be careful - also remember - a NO vote triggers a review by the STATE and I DON"T TRUST THEM! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 21 2010, 3:54 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
How would you like to have a pay freeze in this economy when cost of living is getting higher and higher? Better yet maybe you should just be laid off. Good luck paying a mortgage and feeding your family after that
| Guest wrote: | | Why are the administrators getting a raise? Shouldn't they set the example and take a one year pay freeze? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 21 2010, 4:14 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury Township School District Budget Letter |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | How would you like to have a pay freeze in this economy when cost of living is getting higher and higher? Better yet maybe you should just be laid off. Good luck paying a mortgage and feeding your family after that
| Guest wrote: | | Why are the administrators getting a raise? Shouldn't they set the example and take a one year pay freeze? |
|
There is a big difference between a lay off and not getting a raise. There is a big difference between one keeping a job and not getting a raise and being laid off. Many people have not had raises. Why shouldn't we evaluate whether raises are deserved for all? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
