| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The issue is this - 1701 limits our district on how much we can raise in taxes. It does absolutely nothing to curtail the rising costs of the things we don't control. Those things cost our taxpayers $1.2mm more over the past 4 years.
[This letter was written in reaction to a Channel 4 [NBC] story on S1701
boradcast Feburary 17, 2005.]
I am the Board of Education President for the Verona, NJ school
district. Thank you for your coverage of 1701 and its impact that aired
on tonight's news. I want to share a basic argument about this bill's
impact, and why Senator Bryant's comments are so incorrect.
In Verona, as in all NJ schools, our budget is made up of the following
basic catgories - Salaries, Staff Medical Benefits, Mandated Special
Education, Insurance/Utilities and Discretionary spending. That last
one, discretionary spending, includes all books, supplies, staff
development, athletics, etc.
-
Salaries and discretionary spending are in our control and total
about $15mm per year. -
Benefits, Special Ed, and Insurance/utility costs are not in our
control, and total about $5mm per year. -
Total budget = $20mm per year.
From 2000-2004, here is what's happened:
Salaries & Discretionary spending is up a total of $825k over the 4
years. That's 1.3% annually, or 5.5% over the period.
Benefits, Mandated Special Ed, Insurance & utilities is up over $1.2mm
over the 4 years. That's almost 7% annually, or almost 27% over the
period.
The issue is this - 1701 limits our district on how much we can raise in
taxes. It does absolutely nothing to curtail the rising costs of the
things we don't control. Those things cost our taxpayers $1.2mm more
over the past 4 years. The impact of 1701? Well, those costs will
continue to rise - there is nothing to stop or slow them down - and in
order to not exceed the total increase 1701 allows, it is obvious we
will have to cut salaries (that's cutting programs) or discretionary
spending.
Moreover, there is a falicy with 1701 - that it will lessen tax
increases. Not true. See, in order to keep schools from going "broke",
the state gives us annual "waivers" for some costs that are outside of
our control. For example, rising enrollment. What's a waiver? It
allows us to EXCEED that cap - raise taxes - to pay for those increasing
costs. Senator Bryant and company have passed laws that "will reduce
your taxes" and that "will raise your taxes" all at that same time.
This is pure insanity.
I am all for curtailing spending - that's the only way to lessen tax
impact. What we need is NOT 1701 as it stands today. We need sensible
limits on these other increases. Then, for school districts who have
spending over a given limit, caps can be implemented. But do not cap a
district who has increases of 1.3% annually. In speaking to other BOE
members and administrators all over, we are not unique.
John Quattrocchi
Board of Education President, Verona NJ
