We Got What We Voted For

Another Embarrassing Process And Budget

Was this year’s tentative budget meeting better than last year’s?

In short, yes.

We had 3 Board members asking insightful and important questions. Deliberation and discussion are healthy, and how a successful Board should always operate.

The issue, however, is the process.

The Administration and the Board continue to fail to recognize that the more exclusive they are about the business of the District, the greater the divide they create with the stakeholders.

Perhaps the night’s biggest disappointment was Angela Penna being irritated that someone on the Board had read through the 100+ page excel spreadsheet and had comments and concerns about several items. Dr. Foregger has a Ph.D. in Mathematics; if we want anyone to question the Budget, it is him!

Another disappointment is Pamela Stanley attempting (and failing) to make Board members with questions look bad, offering up a staged question about Ms. Kot being available to “walk through” the Budget with anyone who needed it. Maybe Pam needs her NJSBA training again, but the Board meets in public so that the stakeholders can witness the business of the Board; secrecy in a governing body doesn’t work well for anyone, not to mention it’s highly unethical. Additionally, the Board received the Budget 72 business hours (not counting the weekend) to review the 100+ page budget before the meeting.

Thanks again to Dr. Foregger, Mrs. Khanna, and Mrs. Bradford for speaking up and disagreeing with the Administration.

Unfortunately for Mrs. Bradford (and as Ms. Akiri pointed out), the Board could have tabled the tentative Budget to address some serious concerns and issues, but Ms. Kot made it clear that the vote “had” to happen that night. Consequently, the Bernards Township Board meeting was the same night as ours, and due to the overwhelming amount of questions surrounding the Budget, the decision to vote on the tentative Budget was tabled to 3/20/23.

We heard “equity” and “fairness” during the meeting related to bussing but not when discussing laying off non-tenured teaching staff. And, sidetone: why are we sending Admin to job fairs when we are on the cusp of teacher layoffs – can anyone explain that?

We also didn’t discuss equity and fairness regarding class size; as Dr. Varley stated, our schools would be using the state maximum recommendations for our k-5 students. Anyone who has been in an elementary school knows that 21-23 students in a class are too much!

The Administration evaded questions related to Administrative cuts and salaries. We also need insight into the layoffs of Administrative staff.

The Athletics Director has been tasked with making $150,000 worth of cuts.

Is it equitable to have Class 3 officers in some, but not all, of our schools? Why did Dr. Varley only propose hiring two more officers instead of 4 (having an officer at each school)?

Most interesting was the need for more clarity regarding legal fees, which has been a big secret for too long.

Who knows when the public will see the actual Budget? Ms. Kot’s presentation was nice, but it lacked the substance and comparison stakeholders were looking for.

Email I sent to the Board with my feedback:

Related Content:

HOW TO BE A BOE MEMBER DURING A PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE BUDGET.

NOTES ON THE TENTATIVE 2023 BERKELEY HEIGHTS PUBLIC SCHOOL BUDGET

QUICK HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE FIRST 2023 BUDGET MEETING

SHAUNA EXPLAINS HER COMMENTS TO THE BOARD ON THE BUDGET

THE PENNA MAGIC SHOW CONTINUES

BERKELEY HEIGHTS PUBLIC SCHOOL BUDGET: ALL (MAYBE MOST OF) THE ARTICLES