What Berkeley Heights Residents Should Know About the Tentative Budget Presentation

Let’s start with the positives:

-Joy Young who is on the Finance Committee suggested an additional BOE Meeting to discuss the Budget. While not the same as a Public Finance Committee Meeting (which would be a more helpful compliment in my opinion) that’s a step in the right direction.

-The snickering and condescension present last year was largely reduced and, for the most part, members of the BOE with questions and suggestions were treated with more respect.

-Instead of Two BOE Members asking questions, there were three. While I found Ms. Bradford’s suggestion that the District increase taxes more (pricing out working class and middle class families even more from our District) appallingly tone deaf, 95% of what she asked and suggested was solid. Dr. Foregger and Ms. Khanna were, as always, on point.

The Downsides:

-The Business Administrator indicated that the tentative budget had to be voted on that night otherwise the county would take over- that’s NOT true.

-The Business Administrator cited litigation that should be covered by the District’s insurance plans as a justification for a portion of the increase in legal spending.

-Questions connected to the Administrative Salaries were not answered leaving some to believe that increases in those salaries were being masked while the District was seeking to cut critical positions.

-The public did not receive any assurances that the full public budget would be made available.

-It was implied, through questions BOE Members already knew the answers to, that BOE Members with questions should have followed up with the Business Office to ask questions privately. This robs the public of some of the unsound logic used in coming up with the numbers in the budget and justification for cutting on the ground staff.

Further information on the budget from Sai Akiri who posted in the BHCW Private Group (sans hashtags):

“Some key takeaways from the Tentative budget presented for 2023-24.

1. Restructuring administrative team.- No clear picture on what this actually means based on the presentation and responses received.

2. Reduce athletics budget – Dr. Varley has asked the athletics director Ms. Clifton to look into cost savings by suggesting the district has a high number of assistant coaches but as Mr. Sincaglia pointed out reducing them won’t bring in the expected cost savings.

3. Reduce secretarial staff – 3.3 FTE

4. Reduce elementary HELP staff – 12 to 8

5. Reduce non tenured teaching staff (5 FTE elementary, 5FTE middle school & high school)

But we are adding 2 SLEO III officers! If our districts focus is on needs especially coming out a pandemic with learning loss, should the superintendent be recommending cutting teaching staff?

Do we actually need SRO officers in elementary schools? Will they be addressing the learning loss or teachers? “

To Be Continued…..

Related Content:

THE PENNA MAGIC SHOW CONTINUES

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

John Migueis