001Roll call. Is that correct? Mr. Gregory Jackson. Here. I hear you. Sorry. Mr. Nguyen Kim. Present. Mr. Khan. Sparks. Here. Mr. Shapiro. Here. VP Hargrave. Present. And President Dr. Howard. I am present. >> [cough] [clears throat] >> This time, do I have a motion to go into public comments? Motion. Is there a second? Second. All in favor? I. I. Okay-dokey. Residents are requested to state their names, addresses, and subject matter. In the event it appears that the public comment portion of the meeting may exceed 15 minutes, the presiding officer may limit each statement made by a participant to 3 minutes in duration, and tonight we will hold to that 3 minutes in duration. Issues raised by members of the public may or may not be responded to by the board. All members All comments will
002be considered and a response will be forthcoming if and when appropriate. The board asks that members of the public be courteous and mindful of the rights of other individuals when speaking. Specifically, comments regarding students and employees of the board are discouraged and will not be responded to by the board. Students and employees have specific legal rights afforded by the laws of the state of New Jersey. The board bears no responsibility, nor will it be liable for any comments made by members of the public. Members of the public should consider their comments in light of legal rights of those affected or identified in their comments and be aware that they are legally responsible and liable for their comments. At this time, do we have any members of the community who would like to come to the
003microphone? Thank you. One moment. Miss Lawler, just give me 1 second. Would you, [clears throat] please? Again, in light of our last meeting where we did not hold everyone to the 3 minutes duration for public comments, we will enforce the 3 minutes then tonight. Um we gave everyone that ample chance last at our last meeting. Um but unfortunately, we don't want to belabor this, so I'm going to ask and if we have an extension, we will uh sort certainly extend public comment if need be. Miss Lawler, if you wouldn't. Thank you. Good evening. Angela Lawler, 54 Herndon Street. Um I wasn't able to be here last month, so I'm I would appreciate a little bit of grace. I'm looking at page six. Um for the preschool budget, there's an increase of $3,441,000. Um I'm curious
004as to where that's coming from. Can I ask all my questions and then maybe get an answer? Okay. Um on page three, I see there's a lot of um salaries listed on this page and I see a lot of increases. 370,000, 338,000, 180,000, 70,000, 90,000, 101,000, 96,000. And this is the general fund, if I'm not mistaken. 558,000, 116,000, 57,000. Now, I'm confused because if we're cutting staff, why are there all these increases on salary lines? Um it just doesn't make any sense to me. Because as we're telling people that they're no longer going to have jobs, but yet we're increasing the line items, it looks like mostly for salaries, whether it's for teachers or other professional staff or just the word salaries or administration. Um also I noticed that today um there was an advertisement
005that came out at the end of the day for student workers. Although I'm a big proponent of students working during the summer and I do understand that, I would like to know where the funding is coming for that. Because just as unfortunately ESP members are being told they don't have jobs, now it kind of looks kind of off that we're bringing students in to work in IT and custodial positions when you're getting rid of custodians. Um I know that this has been a normal practice of the district to bring students in and have them work over the summer. Um it just doesn't look right to me. Um so I wanted to understand where that was coming from and the funding for summer school as well. Because we're cutting teachers and we're cutting staff, yet we're
006still going to offer summer school grades 1 to 8. High school is understood because I know it's for credit and I know they need it to graduate. But in the elementary school they do not need it to graduate. And I know we like to push our kids forward that need the extra help, but it just doesn't make sense when we're telling people they no longer have a job. And we're cutting the we're cutting teachers, but you know it always hits the ESPs harder because we don't make the type of money that teachers make. So you're telling people that are basically living paycheck to paycheck, you no longer have a job, but I see all of this. So, that's my [music] time. Thank you. >> [sighs and snorts] >> Thank you for your questions. So, I
007guess I'll start with the pre-K budget. The increase in the So, first, just to make the distinction, the pre-K budget is separate from the general fund budget. So, they are independent funding sources. With that said, the majority of that 3 plus million dollar increase is carryover funds from the previous year. So, it's not like yes, it's carryover funds from the previous year that we that are that's a part of the budget. Cuz usually the what the budget is consists of is that you get a per pupil allocation. That's That's usually what the primary source of your funds are in the pre-K budget. Then, you get an allocation for your contracted provider. These are contracted providers little kids. So, you get an allocation for them. Then, there is a general fund transfer to the preschool budget
008to support that. Which basically what that does support is because preschool funds, you can't use them for special education students, but we know that we have, you know, like um um classes where there may be some special education support needed. So, in that case, you get you have to transfer money from the general fund to support that amount in the pre-K And then finally, it's made up of a carryover amount that you may have had that was unexpended in the previous year. A lot of money, 3 million dollars. >> No, it is a lot of money. Um it's it's a it's a lot of money, and to be honest, I don't know the full nature of why there was much in carryover. But, the carryover funds are not determined by myself. So, what happens is
009that during the audit, so right now we're although we're late we're undergoing our audit for 24-25 fiscal year. So, the carryover number is given to us by the auditor. So, he looks at the financials and then he tells us this is how much money you had and carryover preschool funds. May I ask a follow-up question to that? Sure. So, my follow-up question would be if the budget was 6 million last year for preschool or 3 million? No, it wasn't it wasn't 3 million. It was It was It was roughly around somewhere around there like 5 or >> 5 million. So, out of the 5 million we didn't spend 3 million. So, I I honestly No, I'm just >> to look at it. >> only because we didn't spend 3 million out of the five and
010now we're bumping it up to six. If we couldn't spend the five, how are we going to spend the 6.5? Well, It seems like it's always going to be a huge carryover which kind of And to that point, um the state discourages carryover. So, what they started implementing last year I believe is that when you have carryover funds, you get a 25% reduction in your overall budget. >> [clears throat] >> So, it's not it's not of interest to the district to carryover with such a large amount because by doing so, the budget is reduced by 25% because they started that last year. Before what would happen is that part of, you know, the logic in having carryover funds is you ensure that you have a buffer to support preschool in the following year. Now, that
011amount is unusually large. I will concede that. Definitely will concede that. You know, but as I said, the state is trying to discourage that. So, in our budget, we had a 25% reduction of, you know, our overall budget because of the carryover amount. >> Are we short-staffed at that building? No, as a matter of fact, what we did, um, this year for the budget as, um, since we you mentioned staffing, at least four of the staff at AP Morris was they were absorbed by the preschool budget. So, what they did was they opened up additional positions, you know, like, um, two positions was just classroom positions, but in terms of true vacancies, they opened up two positions they didn't have in the previous budget. So, they were able to create two new positions, absorb two
012teachers, and then they had two openings. And then absorb two teachers who would have otherwise been cut because they reduced the amount of their classrooms. It's just a huge carryover. >> You're right. Like I said, I'll definitely concede that. It is a huge carryover amount, and we've, you know, we've tried to, our best to allocate the expenditures accordingly, you know, and spend it as much as possible to the benefit of the students. And you said there was an increase in salaries, and you are right. There is an increase in salaries. Part of the If you notice that when you look at those lines that you were talking about, those lines are broken down by grade level bands. You have kindergarten through eighth grade, sixth grade, you know, things of that sort. Part of the reason
013for some of those increases, notice the amounts. 90,000, 70,000, 180,000. You can probably tie these amounts to one or two staff members because part of and had talked about before that we started with around 47 positions and through attrition, consolidation of positions, and transfers, we were able to get the cost to 21, which is why in some in some grade level bands, you'll see increases in salaries because we transferred both to those places. But if you notice that um while you see like some of the smaller level increases like that, you notice that you have two very large decreases in your 6 to 8 grade level band and the 9 to 12 grade level band, which would outnumber the cost of, you know, movement because if you look at both of those um combined, that's
0141.2 plus dollars with that decrease in overall salaries. So, that's that part. You want to go over the 558 for administration? Give me 1 second. Yeah, um that's a good point. You know, and then um a good point that was just made is that, you know, some part of this is going to be a natural increase, you know, just due to the contractual obligations of the CBA. You know, in the CBA, prior to doing any budget cuts, we were looking at like a contractual increase of nearly 1.5 million dollars. So, now of course, it's going to be less than that because we have cuts, but just that in general, it's going to also contribute to the increase in um in salaries. So, on paper, it looks like we have more staff, but in reality, the
015salary increases are due to movement and obligations of the CPA for contractual level increases. So that's the part. You mentioned summer Did you mention summer school at the end? Yes, okay. So what we made the point of, you know, last meeting was to say with summer school summer school goes along with our district programming, you know, like as well as curricular program and anything of that nature. What we Our approach to this budget was to try to minimize as much as possible the impact to programming, to student programming. And so that was the reason why we tried our best to maintain summer school. And even with that and and and from your position it's a fair question. You know, even with trying to maintain summer school you know, we still had to have reductions in
016what was offered. I believe in the past it was 5 weeks, maybe 5 days you know, with 5 weeks. This time around we offered 4 weeks and 4 days a week as well as I believe 4 hours a day, which in the past it had been 5 hours a day. So we tried to reduce that, you know, overall. And then extended school year we're obligated to Right, so with extended school year what we tried to do is so it wouldn't impact the general fund we tried to incorporate um extended school year and um our title funds so it wouldn't have, you know, any impact. This Was Was that it? Oh, did I miss one? >> The student workers for the summer. Oh. Let me speak to that. She has an additional question. Yeah, oh, it's
017the student workers. Yeah, um again like student workers, you know, fall in line with our approach to programming. You know, while on the surface it does seem like, well, yeah, we've got all these student workers. You know, what about our staff? I mean, you know, these individuals are hourly. The total amount of individuals is less than 20. And we're talking about a period of about 5 weeks. So, even if you take that, you know, combined and you combine all of them, you know, um What is the cap on that? What's their budget for student workers? Yeah, we actually had to reduce their budget. So, you're still talking for student workers, you're still talking about under 150,000, I believe. So, in that it's not like I don't want to minimize the amount because $150,000 can be,
018you know, it could be a teacher with benefits. It could be, you know, um and you're right to raise the point. But, you know, right or wrong, um our philosophical approach to the budget, and you're right to question it, was we wanted to try to maintain um student programming. You know, in in all forms, and that's what we did. Yeah, and you know, with that, with the staff, what we tried our best to do with those cuts, our approach was trying to look at where we may have had surplus. You know, which is why most of our at least most of our cuts, as we discussed with you, were non-tenured employees. And we looked at course section offerings, as well, to see like, especially at the high school and at the middle school. That's why
019if you look at the salary lines, you see the largest reductions in the high school and middle school areas, because that's where we saw the biggest opportunities to consolidate, you know, basically collapse classes. That if you have an English class with you know, 10 students, you have another English class with, you know, eight students here in the high school, you know, you see it, that there was an opportunity where we could collapse section and possibly, you know, not bring back, you know, a teacher. So. Okay. No problem. Do we have any other members of the public who like to address the community? Any more public comments? Good afternoon. Latasha Wilson, 217 Williams Avenue. I'm sorry, ma'am. What's your name? Latasha Wilson. Latasha. Um can you hear me? Yes, ma'am. I'm not sure if this already
020been addressed as I'm walking in, so I apologize if you already >> Of course. No problem. Um so, the governor cut our budget by 1.35 million or 1.2 million. It's very close, yeah. But I know that you can still request the money back. I was just cuz inquiring if that's been done. Um I don't know specifically what avenue you can request a cut today. So, I work for a non-profit. Okay. And I attended a meeting where the mayors were all there. Amongst It was like a budget meeting. It was at NJIT. And you basically sit before the panel and basically, I don't want to say beg, but state your claim as to why you're in need of the money. And I know for my non-profit, we got if not all of it, most of it
021back. Well, no, I would think that Well, let me ask you this. As a non-profit, are you funded by a grant? Yes. Okay. So, with that said, your funding source would be different. While it both comes from the state, your funding source would be different, you know, than than ours, you know, like um cuz our state aid is not necessarily comprised of a of a grant like it would be for a non-profit. We do have grant funds in our budget, but it's mostly um federal grants that are, you know, disseminated by the state. And that would basically be like our title funds, you know, and you can even say our preschool um funds as well. But, for our general operating budget, um 80% of that budget, you know, almost split equally comes from state aid
022and um the tax levy. Okay. Yeah. So, you know, with that said, I think maybe the different funding sources, you know, make makes that, you know, difficult. I know for the last meeting you said enrollment was low. So, if enrollment should increase, what would happen to the budget then? Well, if we have a significant increase in enrollment, uh I can't necessarily predict the future, but what what I can say is that enrollment drives state aid because it's based on per pupil allocation. So, if we have a significant increase in enrollment, then the expectation, you know, would be that we would have an increase in state aid. So, with the de- decrease in enrollment over the past 2 years, that's the reason why our state aid, you know, has, you know, yeah. But, you know, at
023least the in terms of decrease in state aid, uh we had at least, you know, a $2.3 million reduction over those past, you know, 2 years, you know, be- because over the past 2 years and she just said three. But, at least two of those years we've been, you know, hit with that reduction in state aid, to reflect Is the reduction and consecutive, yes, thank you. Is the reduction in enrollment due to school performance or the kids are just like age down and growing out of Hillside? >> That's a good question. Um Yeah, it could definitely be a myriad of things. One thing that we do see visibly it is part of our part of at least part of our reduction, you know, is due to out-of-district placements. You know, um we have an increase
024in out-of-district placements, we have an increase of charter school enrollment, you know, over consecutive years. You know, it's a charter schools like, you know, you know, like KIPP, North Star, and a couple of others. But, you know, and while it's a myriad of things, you know, we can at least point to that as a contributing factor. Thank you. Sure, no problem. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any more public comments? There being none, do I have a motion to close public comments? >> Motion. Is there a second? Second. All in favor? I. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen, for your comments and your concerns. Actually, just ladies, um as this is a special meeting, I do want to give equal time to the board members as I did in the last meeting because
025as I said before, and I do want to lead with this to each and every one of you tonight, we are also learning here as you are, and at the end of the day, we are not just your elected board members, we are your neighbors, we are residents, and this affects us, too. So, that said, each and every one of our board members, you do have a right and a I would say there's an obligation to speak your mind here and now because I know there are a host of questions and concerns you have either, so I'll open the floor. I do want to lead with this and then I'm going to open the floor to my colleagues. Um we find ourselves in a very difficult position, ladies and gentlemen, tonight because this does not
026come easy. Many of us have toiled with this since our last meeting, particularly when it comes to cuts and recisions because there are some of you we've gotten to know, and people who've done the job and done it well and contributed to this district. People who have created outcomes. These numbers are tied to human beings, and that's not lost on us. And we find ourselves in the unenviable position of trying to decide on what was, what is, and the potential of what will be. So, I'd ask that you give us a little bit of grace and consideration as we try to navigate these waters just as you are. That said, to my colleagues, any comments or questions? I have a question. >> This is Warden Gibbons. I know that um when last week, when we
027discussed the um reductions um to get us to the 6% tax increase, where did we start? Where were we at um before you got us down to that 6%? Like what was the 12%? Oh, yeah. We were at 10%. 10%? Yes. And what other than potential risks, reduction in staff, um in program, and I believe you said just because I don't know if this group was able to experience hearing that as well. Um that went into the reductions to get us down to that 6%. And I'll ask one more question. Um I know that you also mentioned that you could potentially and you can correct me if I'm wrong, potentially get us to 4%. Is that as a result of the charter school not being included or is that even with the charter school being
028included that 4 million? >> Okay, I'll answer that question. Okay, that one's fresh on my mind. So, that would be without the charter school. Cuz the charter school by itself represents a 4.37 million dollar hit against the budget. And we've tried and this budget does include the charter school whether or not they're here or not, we have to include them. And you know, so to get us down, you know, to where we were, you know, previously, that's [clears throat] what went into this. So, with the myriad of cuts that we had to do, we were Yeah, so that that's the So, to answer your question, that's that's what it is. So, with the 4% that I was saying, while it would still be challenging to our budget, if there were no charter school, because we
029have a structural deficit of four of four plus million dollars, it's at least, you know, cons- conceivable that it's possible to reduce the levy without the charter school, but with the charter school, it makes it nearly impossible. Because, I mean, we've you know, at that at that point, you know, the Well, let me say it this way. It makes it impossible with the approach that we've taken to draft the budget. And the approach that we've taken to draft the budget is the least amount of impact on student programming, you know, that was one of the approaches, you know, that we've taken. And the other approach was to not close schools. So, we That was something that we try our hardest to do, and even with the cuts, we targeted some of the grade levels that
030the charter school would potentially be drawing from, you know? So, that went into our philosophy to as I said, to not, you know, cut any schools, cuz we um we believe that in any community that you have, you know, um a last resort is cutting schools because of the impact that it has, you know, on the families, on the students, and on the community overall. I believe that last week, um my colleague, board member, um Beth asked the question and and this may not have been the question, but I I believe she did ask, um relative to um I think I lost the question. Um Worst case scenario, if right now we have not received notification relative to that charter school. Um so at this point we have to make sure that we're including it's
031mandatory that we include that $4 million within our budget, correct? >> It is mandatory, yes. Yep. If it wasn't mandatory, I would not have included it. But it is in fact mandatory. We didn't include that in our budget and past the budget, our budget would not have been approved at the county level. And if we received, and this is a redundant question as well from last week, but just for the purpose of our um our community here, Sure. um if we do receive notification that the charter school has not been approved, um we still have to move There's no changes that we can make to this budget. Once we put it in and send to the state, that's it. It has to remain intact, right? You see the part of the challenge is is timing,
032you know, because right now today is the 13th. We're supposed to all these changes that we have in the resolution, we have to upload this into the budget software by the 14th. The reason why is because um at that point, that's when the township is supposed to certify the tax levy. Now, how they go about doing that, if they do it exactly on the 14th, I that part I really have I have no idea about. You know, so you know, once they once they certify, you know, the tax levy, if we get to June and let's say that there is no charter school, now with that, there's a couple things. One, if there's no charter school by the time we get to the 30th, and they've already certified the tax levy. At that point, that
033money is ours as a district. That 4 plus million dollars, we don't have to disseminate that to the charter school. Now, with respect to let's say our budget and things that we didn't include in our budget, you know, like programming that we had to cut or something, you know, it's possible to bring some of those things back. The issue that's unknown that I don't know is how that works with the tax levy. That's the part I don't know. I do know that if there is no approval um by, you know, June 30th, I mean that if they're denied, then that money, you know, cuz the township, you know, like they did, you know, they dispersed that money to us. So, it's And then with the charter schools, the way that works is we pay on
034a schedule throughout the year. So, we give them bi-monthly payments over the course of an entire year. So, because we would already know before June 30th, at that point, there is no payment we'd have to make to that new charter school. So, then yeah, that money is ours and we can, you know, do things with the budget. But like the like the tax levy questions that you asked about, about the like six to four, I honestly don't know like how that part would be addressed. Is this something that we could inquire inquire about? Um we could certainly, you know, maybe maybe it's a question for the um for the tax assessor. It's probably a question at the at the municipal level, I guess. You know, and we certainly can inquire about it. Yeah, I think
035If I can tag team really quick just from on Ms. Courtney Givens' point, you mentioned that there's a deadline of tomorrow, the 14th. How much wiggle room do we have precisely? Let's just say for argument's sake, we are at impasse tonight. How much wiggle room do we have from the 14th given the fact that you said that there's a 30th deadline? We don't um because it's it's that's a deadline that's given to us. Like that's not like something that we have like a target date for. So, we we we don't. Like I think the wiggle room was in last week. Um when the budget didn't approve and then it came to this week, that was our wiggle room. You know, so from today until tomorrow when we have to upload the budget, yeah, we we
036don't have the wiggle room on that part. Because if let's say there's hypothetically a denial of the budget, if there's a denial of the budget, then there is no budget to upload. So, at the So, at the county level, the budget software will not be uploaded. We can't make the changes and then that will set in motion a chain of events where then the state get involved. So, that So, to that question, the wiggle room that we had is gone. We don't really have it. Unfortunately. Going back to this one again this week. But to your point, yeah, and then with that, you know, with if the state does decide to come in, there are two things that could happen, you know, um cuz I did mention that there could be a state monitor that
037they would send and that would be a six a six-figure salary that would be at the expense of the district. Money that we don't have. That's the first thing. So, that's an option that they could The other option I actually just learned today when I spoke with the county BA about it is that the other thing that could be done in in lieu of a state monitor, the state can just unilaterally just um you know like the levy that's already there, just approve the budget with that. They could do that also if they don't send in a state monitor. Levy meaning what? Could you clarify? >> levy. At what percentage? Could you clarify? >> No, no, that whatever in the budget. Like what's like Yeah, they they Yeah. That's your proposed expenditure. Yeah, they Yeah,
038so it's more about in that instance it's more about the proposed budget. Like they wouldn't, you know, yeah, that it's more about the proposed budget at that point. You know, whether it's 4%, whether it's 6%, whatever is in that budget, they could unilaterally just approve it as is without sending in a state monitor. So, that's the other option. This will give you something to think And I'm sorry. One more and then I'll I'll let you go. Sorry. Um so, to your point relative to sending in a state monitor, I believe that um our board attorney also consulted us and you can correct me if I'm wrong relative to this last week, that if we do not pass the budget tonight, they could potentially Yeah, that's >> send in a um Right. And that you know,
039it like I said, if you get to that level where they could just unilaterally just approve the budget as it is. But yes, those options, you know, would be on the table and I'm presenting them as options because I can't say definitively what the state will do. You know, I'm only speaking to what was communicated to me by the county BA of the options that the state has at their disposal. Okay. Thank you. Sure. Ms. Best. Good evening. Good evening. Um two questions. I think last week you stated that we they they were at stage two or the stage three with the >> Stage two. So, is that still the same? You still haven't heard anything further? >> We still haven't heard anything further. Um, they're at stage two in in the application process. And
040by the 30th of June >> That's the latest. It could be before the 30th of June, but that is the the deadline that the state has to give a decision by it. Hopefully, they won't drag it out to the 30th of June, but you know, they've been dragging their feet already, so we have to prepare for the possibility. Okay. Um, my next question is So, what happens next year budget year if these cuts and potential tax increases are approved will the current deficit that we are currently in, will that be gone? And what are the chances of us falling into this again? And I ask because every year you know they state that you can do up to what is it? Like 2% Right. and we have not done that in the past and I've
041been on the board seven years now, whatever, and I know that there's been a lot of 0% and I'm asking because if we do this this year, like if it's approved, these tax cuts Yes. and then and tax increases Yeah, tax increases. Yes. and then next year comes and we don't do the 2% or what whatever that max is. I mean, wouldn't we fall back into kind of what where we are right now? I mean, I'm just asking because I know there are a lot of different districts that, you know, it sounds great. 0% 0% but then the state doesn't necessarily see it is something beneficial. And I'm not saying that that I want I live here. I pay taxes. We all do. We all are dealing with the same thing. But, we have to
042really figure out what's going to work down the line because we can't just keep putting like band-aids over this every 2 3 4 years. No, and then we come with a big 6 8 10% tax So, I'm just asking right now with this $4 million dollars that's on the way. If these things are approved, where will we be next year? That's a good question. How do we keep stay stable? Right. To that part. So, with regard to the the 2% Um and you mentioned, you know, kind of what's happened in the past without, you know, having, you know, the the the having 0% levy in your budget increase in your budget. So, next year um the How can I put this? It's not optional. If that makes sense. So, I know in the past there
043have been budgets presented where I guess this is maybe been presented to you as a board and to you as a community that we can do an increase this year and maybe do an increase not do an increase next year. Um that's not physically responsible. You know, to that point in my position as the business administrator, it would be physically irresponsible for me to present a budget without the 2% levy. So, I can tell you right now that yes, at minimum next year's budget will have a levy at minimum. Because you also spoke to a point of stability, you know, which is and I'm glad you brought that up because as we talked about during the last presentation, think about it. Our you know, our um increase on the taxes and while I don't minimize
044it, 2% on the levy that we have is roughly plus hundred thousand dollars, right? So, if you take increases with respect to health care costs, by itself it's a million dollars. That already just that alone already exceeds what we get from the levy. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. We talk about, as I mentioned to Miss Dollar earlier when we talked about the salary increases. You know, talking another million plus dollars, you know, out of cost tuition increases. You know, and there were decisions made with regard to building modular units at two schools. You know, and those payments combined for those two buildings, one will be a final payment and the other will be in the second year. Those two payments combined are um a million plus. So, the point that I'm trying
045and I can I can go on and on with the list of increases, but they dwarf the 2% yeah, levy that we get. So, to that point, you know, like there's there's no way that you reach stability by saying that there that we're not going to apply the 2% levy and I know it may sound rough, but you know, as a you know, in my position as well as your position as board members, you know, we have a responsibility, you know, to our, you know, constituents, you know, to the community at large, to the students, to ensure that we put forth our best effort to put a budget that ensures stability. So, we don't end up, as you kind of alluded to, in the papers where we have, you know, where we're, you know, in
046the hole for I read something about Mark Twain $20 million. Hasbrouck Heights, um, no, Hasbrouck Heights, um, forgive forgive me. Yeah, yeah, like they're like 20 25 million dollars and, you know, it's like and and we can go on and on with where Yeah, no, I understand. I just wanted >> Yeah. to And I'm doing this just because not to make you us look bad, but I want people to really understand the severity of this and what happens when certain things don't occur. And I think that from last week's presentation and just the conversations that we've had that you, acting superintendent, um, both are like looking at all aspects of what we need, what we can utilize, and how we can compound them so that we still can have a good education to our students.
047And unfortunately, that doesn't that that means that cuts will happen and and it it's horrible. No one wants to go through this, but I I think that the way that you all are looking at it is the fairest that you can you can do at this point with what we have to work with. So, I that's all. I just wanted I'm not trying to put you on the spot. >> Oh, no, I figured that's where you were going with it. I appreciate you. >> it up for everybody to understand what we're doing. Yes. >> we can be better and maintain. And I appreciate you for bringing out that question so the the public have a better understanding. I may to that point. Sure. Let me say what he had to do that to miss best
048point. I don't want to simplify this as well because we're hitting on some things but they are also we need to make it very clear to the public there there are myriad of mitigating factors. One of the things that I think was not addressed fully in our last presentation and I and you can quote me if I got if I got you wrong is evaluations in this township have been less than 1% Yes, I did say that. Yes. Of course of how many years? I did I only did the evaluation from the prior year to this year because that was based on what we get from the tax assessor. So just from to our point from go ahead sure. I have to answer that answer that. Yes, so I think that what Dr. Howard is
049bringing up with the evaluations in the community of homes collectively that part of the reason why the community feels this a little bit more at the individual level than maybe in another community is because evaluation valuations of all of the homes and residences in the community typically increase anywhere from 2 to 4% on average and year over year and Hillside that increase was less than 1% which means that that is significantly below the valuation increase so that valuation went up from about 912 million I'm sorry. Yeah, 912 million to um 950 million. And the issue with that, why he brings that up as a point, is because what that does is it one illustrates that there's not a lot of development that's occurring in the town. The And two, the benefit of the development is
050that the tax burden is shared across the community, across the town. But instead, you're getting increases not just from the district, but from the township, where you feel it more because this it's spread it's still only concentrated like among the same people. There's there's no new development that's occurring where you're spreading that tax levy increase. You're going to feel the impact of this more, you know, which is the reason why when we broke down like how much this costs at an individual level, you know, on an average home, we said that probably be you know, roughly about a thousand plus a year, you know, that we didn't try to insult anyone's intelligence to say that and break it down by the day and say, "Oh, this is the equivalent of a cup of coffee." And
051try to make it light because it's it's concrete numbers and you feel this all the same. Secondly, you said that we have not heard from the state. It seems that there's some type of There's an inverse relationship that they have until the 30th to tell to determine whether it's going to be a charter school, but yet we have to make a decision with a gun to our heads. Yes. So, at what juncture do we speak out? Do we speak out to our legislators? And if we have need to do that, why have we not done so before now? Now it's the 11th hour and we're all under the gun. Why Can we speak to that? Um sure. I can speak only to what I know of and what I do know of is that, you
052know, and I include you in this as well, that our board president, our superintendent, other members of the community, you know, have tried as best as they can the channels that they believe that they have access to to speak to whatever politicians that they may have access to to try to get answers and have been met with roadblocks. On my part, the most logical person that I can speak to is the county business administrator >> [clears throat] >> that person would be the one that would have access to the state officials. You know, and I and I think that there have been, like I said, there have been, you know, a lot of people on our board, our superintendent, members of the community that have been trying to get answers. So, it's not like I
053don't want to paint a narrative that no one has been trying to get answers, but they have been. And unfortunately, they've just been, you know, met with roadblocks, bureaucracy, and whatever else that may be preventing us from you know, getting these answers. Because it is it is unfair and it and your analogy is spot on. Like, it does feel like that where we have to do something under duress and under a certain degree of, you know, um, force. Thirdly, could you explain to the public you discussed it and briefly in best terms if can just simplistic terms the concept of the bankcap and where the surplus is and has gone. Yeah, so and just to clarify that, cuz I did clarify that at the last meeting, that with our we do have bankcap. We did
054not use it in this budget, but I will explain what bankcap is and I will explain what we did use in the budget to contribute to the tax increase. So, what bankcap is is Miss Bess had mentioned that there were years when the district you know, attempted to forego not increasing the taxes the tax levy by 2%. So, what the state does is the state says, "Well, we think you're going to need this money. We'll hold it for you." This is the concept of bankcap. So, we have expiring bankcap of really $1.5 million that expired this year and another million dollars next year. Those well, we were at liberty to use that in the budget without a vote from the township. We did not use that in our budget. We originally had it stated in
055our budget, at least a year of it, but what ended up happening is that the state um made the decision to what they do is they pri- there are certain waivers that they prioritize over others. So, the waiver that they prioritize, based on our health insurance increase, was the healthcare waiver. That healthcare waiver same thing in terms of what it allows you to do with the tax levy, it allows you to raise the tax levy without you know, additional voter approval. So, that increase, that waiver, was about a 1.2 plus million dollar increase. You take that plus the 6% of 600 plus and you get to roughly um 1.9 plus million, which represents a 6% increase in the overall tax levy. So, that's how we that's how we um got here. Last question, then I'll
056I'll defer to Miss Egwuatu. Can you give me a scenario what it would respond uh what it would look like should we reduce the proposed tax levy to 4% keeping charter school in the model in the win, so to speak? What would that look like? Well, okay, just to be clear, as I said before, uh Sorry, just to be clear, as I said before, with the charter school without closing school or additional cuts, there's no 4% option. Now, there is no charter school and >> [clears throat] >> if there is no charter school and we did have to go 4% then at that point, what we'd be talking about is instead of a thousand plus per year annually we would be looking more at about nearly $700 annually. So, the that would be the difference
057of 4%. So, monthly basis, as I mentioned before, the reduction in tax levy means different things to the community versus what it means to the district. So, for the community, what it means is that on average, each percentage increase is probably a reduction of about $15 per month and the increase is in your taxes. So, at 6% if you're at about a monthly of nearly $90 and you know, you reduce that by another 30, now you're at almost $60 a month, which results in the nearly $700 annually. Now, in the school district for us, that 2% is $600,000. That's what that is to us. So, you know, and obviously it's less for the taxpayers because it's spread across a large amount of people. You know, I'm not saying that I'm not making light of going
058from 6 to 4% and trying to say that oh, it's only you know, a possibly a $300 difference in your taxes annually because annually that's a that'd be a 30% reduction in the amount of tax increase. But, on the school district's end, like I said, that's $600,000 plus. You know, and when you're talking those numbers, hundreds of thousands of dollars, you're talking multiple staff members. You're talking programs. You know, that's what that's what's at stake for us with that reduction. I just wanted to make that clear to give both sides of it. Thank you for the question. Mr. Secretary. Mr. Shapiro. Yeah, thank you very much. I My question is probably more for a clarification. Um, the last meeting we had, there was a mention of a 2% every year as an alternative part to
059getting us off the deficit because you had mentioned that um, if we're going to go 2% every year, every year, that eventually we'll get out of the deficit. Do you know how long this will take to get out of it. We went 2% that is without the charter school. Okay, so without the charter school. Because because you had mentioned I made a note in the conversation. You had mentioned the 2% every year moving forward as an alternative part that we could go with without the charter school of course. Yes, without the charter school. >> Yes. Yeah, so in in that scenario it would it's it's difficult to try to forecast that. And the the reason why is because if I'm just looking at it like okay, this is a structural budget deficit of this amount.
060This is the amount that we get on the tax levy over X amount of years, right? The challenge with looking at it that way, even if I did it in a linear fashion where I modeled this and we said that over the next let's say 6 years at the 2% levy would probably roughly around $4 million, which is about the equivalent of our structural budget deficit. The problem is that our expenses rise by more than 2% annually. And that's the challenge with trying to put together that forecast. So in order to do it, it would be in addition to the increase in the tax levy we would probably be, you know, looking at um what are some of the things that you know, potentially that we can cut. You know, like are there maybe additional
061routes on transportation that maybe we can do without? Like are we you know, maybe it's courtesy bussing on the table now. You know, like what would be the additional expenditures that could be removed, you know, from the budget. And that's that's the challenge, you know, with that. So, to try to do the model that you were that you're suggesting But there's a model that you had suggested. >> Well, well, I mean, yeah, like it would be it would be yes, it'd be a best guess. Best guess. Can I say it with certainty? Probably not, but it would be a best guess. You know, but like you like I said, you would have to include all of the different obligations that we have and how they increase over time. But either way, you know, with that
062I still would say that that is responsible path to that we don't take off any years of, you know, just applying a normal what increase. Because when you take off years doing that, now you're now we're here. You know, I think And cuz eventually you know, kind of comes to a head where no increase, no increase, no increase, and now you have all of these obligations you have to meet. Now we have to make cuts. So, So, from what you're saying now, you just mentioned that um the 2% uh does not cover your personal cost or whatever and there might be increases. So, are you saying that um there will be more riffing? You already did a whole bunch of riffing. So, is there going to be another wave? I mean, what's the I mean,
063like in next like in some 20 years. You're saying? >> [snorts] >> You know, um there's you know, could be could be. I could be it's something that we we really have to look at because it's the thing is is that to put it simply you either have to raise revenue or you have to cut expenditures. Or you have to do a combination of both. This budget we did a combination of both. So, that's the simplest way that I can put it with respect to the math that if our revenue only increases 2% and everything else around us increases more than 2%, then we need more money. And we need less expenses. That's the most honest answer I can give. One more let my last question for you. And my question would be that um
064according to the president, we have like a time a clock ticking that we need to do some kind of submission. So, my question is now you did mention that we have 6% if we don't if the budget does not go through the the concern is someone with the the the is it the state could do it for us and go with what we already have as a tentative budget as 6%. So, will would will it be smart to reduce the percentage now because you never know where it's going to fall because we are shooting for 6%, 6%, 6%. But I'm just saying. Sure. Fair question. And the answer to that is no. Um and the reason why the answer to is no, is because at this point in order to we've made all the cuts
065that we believe that we can make. You know, we've already cut a fair amount of staff. At this point, if we're talking more reduction, you know, to the levy, now we're getting to the point where we have to try to find more programs to cut or more curriculum to cut. Like we were careful not to cut any curricular programs. You know, like the Right. Like I feel like ELA, like, you know, whatever curricular programs we have to ELA, math, social studies, science, we were careful to make sure that there were no cuts to those programs cuz we we believe that when you're The budget is the fiscal translation of the district's strategic priorities. Priorities, the priority of district has to be students first. Has to be. The moment we start cutting curricular programs, we're going
066back on that. We're saying that we're not putting students first. Right or wrong? It's best Um, this should be a fairly quick question. We discussed the modular um, units at Hurdle Looker. And Deanna Taylor, yes. >> Which Deanna Taylor that's complete. Um, we have one Sorry, it's it's You're right, it is complete, but we have one more payment. But Hurdle Looker Hurdle Looker hasn't started. So, if we're saying there's a decrease in enrollment, is it is that just generally the district or is it specifically a school? Because what I'm asking is where's that money coming from? Are the funds coming for that? And if >> [snorts] >> I can say, you know, I'm sorry. If we're cutting staff, wouldn't Yeah. you know, have we talked have we thought about that and how Yeah, I mean,
067it's great question, you know. Heardin' Looker, I I don't know uh how we arrived at doing this modular unit considering that of all the elementary schools, Heardin' Looker is the least populated. So, I don't I'm sorry. Tiana Taylor is the least populated. So, I I don't know how district arrived at a decision to build modular units for the least popular school. Are we too deep into that that we can't Yeah, Heardin' Looker we're in the final payment of Heardin' Looker. I'm I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Let's wait. Let's wait. Tiana Taylor, we're in the final payment of Tiana Taylor this year um next budget year. And we're in the second payment of Heardin' Looker this coming budget year. So, in terms of walking them back, if let's just say this, if that was something that
068we could get out of that contractual obligation, then that probably Yeah. Yeah, that would have probably been first thing on the table. Okay. Just making sure cuz I I that people are thinking Yeah, like like how we do that? I mean just want us to Yeah, absolutely right. Like how we how we building more space if enrollment is decreasing? I mean I get it. We're kind of packed with that, you know, just wanted that to be out there, but thank you. Mr. Piro. Good evening. Thank you again, Mr. McNeal and to the acting superintendent. For as well for all the work that you've done. Greatly appreciate it. Um a couple of questions. This one I think I'm a little embarrassed to ask cuz I it's somewhat elementary. On Friday, May 8th, we received a public
069agenda notice that appeared different public agenda notice that has been circulated here tonight. What exactly are we voting on tonight? Two items or one item? The finance The finance agenda is the same. So, that hasn't I think what's changed is the labor component. Can you clarify that then before we No, yeah. I mean Right, what was circulated on Friday had two components. What was circulated just now has one component. So, what's the what? And they're inextricably linked as well, right? >> They are inextricably linked. budget and whatever doing in labor. They are inextricably linked. You are correct. >> [clears throat] >> Oh, I thought you was about to tell me something. Oh, does Mr. Piro have anything further? Has he answered that? Is he using the wait for the response? I asked one question. Yeah,
070that's one question. What's the other question? He didn't get a response. Not that I'm aware. No, I could have missed it. No, the um labor The difference is that the the labor agenda was removed. So we're not voting on the labor agenda? Or we are voting on a labor agenda tonight? We are voting on a labor agenda tonight. Yes. When might we or the humans here We will clarify that in executive session. Yeah, should we do that and then resume any other conversation out here? I would do that if there's nothing further yet. Yeah, there's a lot of things further, but I don't even know what what I would have to say about anything if I don't know what we're doing here tonight. I mean, I'm maybe everybody else does, but I don't. I can't
071speak for everybody. I walked into this thinking that the labor agenda that was circulated on Friday was the agenda we were voting on. Apparently, that's not the case, which may be fine, but I don't know what else I might consider important to discuss here with regards to the budget if I don't know what its other half is, right? Because the two are inextricably linked, right? The budget for next year and the rips or not rips or however that works or whatever our labor agenda is, I I understood them to be go hand in hand. So, maybe there are other questions I don't know yet. I I thought that was the elementary question. I didn't realize I was stepping on something. No, actually that's a valid question. It's a valid question. And to that point, Mr.
072Shapiro, I think it wise at this juncture for us to explain the the overarching reason why we are all here and why we've had to reconvene. Um I don't want to step on this as the and I won't just get into the nuts and bolts of this, but I'm going I'm going Mr. Would would explaining exactly why we had to return in terms of the voting process? Yeah, first of all, my understanding is the the labor agenda is is the exact same as it was last week. Right? There are individuals that may be subject to arrest. There are non-tenures that would be subject to non-renewals. Non-renewals are within the purview of the superintendent, acting superintendent, chief administrator. They don't require board action, but they are contained within the budget. So, because the vote didn't pass
073for the budget, it was requested to reconvene today so that you have an opportunity to reconsider the budget because the budget contains essentially the positions that are the subject of the non-renewals as well as the subject of the reductions in force. I I'm sorry. I That part I understood. What I don't understand is the agendas we were handed are not the same? That was your question? Same. They they just didn't give you the labor agenda this evening. But, it's the same agenda. Yes, that is correct. So, the labor agenda that we're voting on is what was circulated on Friday, May 8th? Is it yes or no? It's the same resolution [clears throat] from last week. >> Yeah, it's the same resolution. Those haven't changed. They have it. They just forgot to provide it to you
074today, but they have it. It's the same agenda. But, we do have it. It's right here. It's right here. It's right here. What's all the sketching is about? It's not. I think it to be in all transparency, Mr. Shapiro, I think there was a faux pas on somebody's part in that thing. >> That's right. That's okay, but we just made it into a 10-minute thing that just All we had to say was, "Oh, no, it's right here and we're handing it out." It was all this cloak and dagger. We're going to talk about it in executive session. We're going to do this. We're going to do that. Changes, there's not changes. There's probably still a I just asked the question about paper's not here. If the paper's not here, and it is now here, then
075that's fine. And it's the same as what was originally It's the same as what was originally >> And nothing has changed. Nothing has changed. Okay, so that leads to my second question. Last week we met, and the budget didn't pass. Yeah. And now we're meeting again, and nothing has changed. But we're expecting the votes to change. Is that Is that what this reconvening was about? I just want to say again, last week we met. Mhm. We were here for till almost 11:00 p.m. The budget didn't pass. Yes. And even the labor part, I believe, didn't get a majority of It did not. Yes. And what we just established is that nothing changed. That is correct. >> Okay, but we expecting the people to have changed their votes. Well, to be clear, not every board member
076voted. Every No, no, I understand the the difference between abstention and and voting yes and voting no. That I understand. I also understand that one member wasn't here, who is currently present. Another member wasn't here, and he's currently absent as well. My question just is is is that what we were expecting? Were those positions as they were or did they not change? Because the substance hasn't, correct? So, when you voted last week, the reason why it didn't pass is because it didn't have a majority vote of the full board membership. There were five votes, you know, needed either to pass it or if you want to have five votes to deny it. But either way, we didn't have the requisite votes of the full membership. Correct. Which was five votes. So, tonight, whether you pass
077the budget or not, this is the opportunity for the board to have the requisite votes to demonstrate the full So, we're looking at the position, not the position of the substance here. Oh, I can't say what we're looking for. I can only say that >> But nothing has changed. Nothing has changed. That's the only thing that I can say. Nothing has changed. >> We haven't tried to do something else to Nope. Nothing has changed. Yes. That non-attendance say nothing. That's precisely what >> it could be abstentions also. That's part of the system. Um all right. Can I make a comment? Absolutely. It's kind of rough in here. Um so, anyway, um I just wanted to thank you guys publicly um for doing the presentation and being very transparent um and being transparent with the community,
078students, staff, whatever the case may be. Um just going back to um I think this is a sick opportunity for us to vote on the budget per se, what you're trying to say. Um it's counting down being blend as possible, but also having a state coming in and still So, I think, you know, being more fiscally responsible when it comes to the budget, um but also hounding down on the 6%. I it is going to go up on everyone's taxes per se. Imagine working in high rent and being level funded for five years. You don't want that. But also, if you don't get the charter school, what you're saying is the money is coming to us and we're able to put it in different things that we want to put in for the district. Of
079course, our students first, but also, let's say, possibly bringing back some people, correct? And you never Right, you never want to send the state back money. Because if you send the state back money, you will not get money from the state. You will not see that money again, right? So, I get the whole 4%, I get the 5%, I get the 6%, right? But I feel like I think everyone is Not everyone, but I feel like you know, a lot of people have their own personal opinions, their feelings about that. I think in the forefront, the students should come first. And basically me coming from this district as a student, the programs that they have now, I didn't have it going to high school, going to middle school, right? So, keeping the students first, like
080I understand it's hard out here, jobs, insurance, but I think that just being more responsible like you are trying to do, per se. I'm not blaming past administration. I'm not blaming six years ago cuz I wasn't here. Right? Or in college. But what I'm saying is is that I think people should be open-minded per se to certain things and I get we don't want to make cuts, but we're not the district that is closing three to four schools. We're not the district that's in $20 million in debt. We're not the district that's on the news right now. I think we don't need that. Now, right? So, I could be wrong. I'm probably voicing my personal opinion. I'm not being biased at anyone's opinion at all, but I feel like we're losing the train of thought
081in the people here. Thank you, Ms. Parks. >> Thank you, Ms. Parks. Do we have any other board members before we Yeah, I just had another question. Is Is what's contained in this resolution a complete budget? These lines that you're looking at >> No. What's What you're looking at in the resolution is that I explained this um at the last Right, it's just the changes. The the budget that was submitted That budget is You can't post the final budget online until we actually have a final budget approved, which is the reason why there is no final budget online and there's no final budget presentation online that I presented last week because we don't have an approved budget. last week in the slides wasn't the full budget. That was the full budget. I'm saying it was
082a top line summary. It was a summary. It wasn't an end to end budget. The budget probably this big. Oh, if you mean the budget itself, the line by line item budget Then yeah. But Yeah. That's the question. Yeah, yeah, right. So no one here has actually seen that, correct? Meaning the members of this board. Have seen that actual budget. We've seen the top line summary. That was presented to the public. I just want to make clear Yes, sir. We have a lot We have the line by line item budget here. I understand. have not yet had access to that, correct? We haven't reviewed it. Yeah, that's correct. Yeah, we haven't discussed that in committee or anything. Correct? That is correct. Just so that when I present it to the public, they understand. Sure. Do
083you have any additional questions? How many? Well, it has been It's probably the time to ask if you I do. I do. Um why don't we have it? Cuz we question. Uh Before we get to that What? Does that line by line item include staff like personal information personal information? No, it doesn't include personal information. It's a line by line budget, which which is a because generally to give you a line by line item budget um is not as useful than providing the top level analysis of the budget. If you're going to look at the lines and say, "Okay, well, you know, you're looking at it." hundreds of lines in a budget. This [clears throat] budget is, like you said, this thick. And if that's what you want to make a decision that probably in
084and of itself without the top level analysis of the budget probably doesn't work. Because the truth is, like you know, what would you what would you be looking at without the top level analysis of it? I think that's the reason why we have Like when you have presentations generally in a budget presentation um I don't think you go to a budget presentation and someone puts a 40-page budget on the screen. That's generally not how that works. I don't think I've ever seen that in a school district because no one would understand that. But what they do understand is they understand the amount of revenues that are associated with the budget. They understand the amount of expenditures that are associated with the budget. And that top level analysis, that's why that's generally shown in a presentation.
085I would take caution with that though because I don't want to underestimate what the public would understand. Um No, I didn't mean any disrespect. Yeah, I didn't mean any disrespect. Um This is just kind of like like what you're what you're asking. It's kind of if you look in the a ledger um that's something I think this is what you're kind of alluding to, Mr. Shapiro? Would Would I be off base if I said that? You and I discussed the absence of information. We've discussed it multiple times. Mhm. And I And I'm just going to add to that. We Not only did we ask for a line by line, ask for the top level analysis. So, I think that they would complement each other. Whether whether it's perceived that we we understand it or not.
086I think the mere fact that we asked for it And fair enough. and didn't get a response that that was what you were considering. Um is you know, I think that's where my concern is. Um you have to be able to provide us with information so we can make informed decisions. It's our responsibility to be able to do that. And quite honestly, last week I'm not very happy with the decision that I I made. Um for whatever reason, we have the opportunity to come back now and make a decision. But without having all of the facts, it is unacceptable for us as board members to be asked to make decisions without having the pertinent information. Let us decide. That's fair. Let us decide if it's too much or not enough. Right? And then we can
087But don't decide for us. Because that is our right. And I will say that the last five years um six that I've been on the board, that has And I know that you haven't been here all of those years, that has been a consistent theme. I'd like for us to change it. That's what >> for us to change it. Because we deserve to have of information so that we can make better decisions. It's about our scholars. It's about our community. We are a part of the community. A 6% increase is not only going to affect impact those that are in the audience, those that are on, you know, social media watching. It will also impact myself. I live here. I pay almost $15,000 in taxes. So, I know I know. Um and I I I
088want to be able to have the information so that I can make better decisions, right, wrong, or indifferent. That's fair. Thank you. >> And I appreciate your comment. Thank you, Ms. Horton Gibbons. And um I I think that kind of brings us distinctly to the point if we go back and just look at last week's meeting. Um my colleagues have all spoken well and just looking directly to where we were going with that. The reason why we asked that is because this stuff is what? It's public information. And We are the public. And again, it's not a knock I guess this is all nuance. It's a learning process, but going forward uh we definitely need to take this as a learning opportunity. When you know better, you do better. But uh we're in the trenches
089of this now, so we're going to have to operate with what we have in hand and I think that's where some of the reticence is coming in is that all of us are making a 100% decision based on 70% of information. And that's a difficult thing to do. Um that said, if there's nothing further, I don't want to belabor this process or the evening. So, do I If there's nothing further, do I have a motion to go into executive session? Motion. Second. All in favor? Be it resolved pursuant to the open public meetings act that the Board of Education meeting executive close executive session at this time to discuss matters relating to, but not limited to, personnel, pending or anticipated litigation, labor negotiations, Oh, excuse me, Lord. Contract negotiations, particular student-attorney-client privilege. The board will
090reconvene in public session at the conclude conclusion of the closed session. The matters discussed in closed session will be disclosed to the public as soon as the need for confidentiality no longer exists. Thank you for your patience. Hopefully, we'll be back to you quickly. If you need a bio break or water break, now's a good time.