.

South Brunswick BOE Considering 5-Cent Tax Rate Increase

The other option would hold the tax rate at its current level by cutting nearly 40 staff members.

The South Brunswick Board of Education is discussing a spending plan that would increase the school tax rate by about 1.7 percent, but maintain staffing at current levels.

The proposed 4.9-cent increase would result in a 2012 tax rate of about $2.85 per $100 of assessed valuation. The owner of a township home with an assessed value of $190,000 would see their school taxes go up by about $100 if the board approves the spending plan.

During last night's meeting, preliminary discussions began for the public with two options presented for next year's school budget: A tax-rate increase without any staff cuts, or keeping the tax rate at its current level, which would require cutting over 30 staff members.

As has been the trend throughout the state, the loss of tax ratables continues to have a significant impact on the school budget. South Brunswick experienced another decline in ratables of about $5.4 million (2.3 percent) last year, according to Business Administrator Anthony Tonzini.

"Before we even began the (budget process), we were looking at a deficit of $5.4 million, or a 7-cent tax increase," Tonzini said during last night's meeting. 

. Over the last seven years, South Brunswick's ratable base has decreased by $180 million. The drop in assessed value has a greater impact on the school tax rate than any other factor, according to township officials.

"Every time somebody gets their assessment reduced, think of that as a swimming pool with a leak," said Superintendent Gary McCartney. "Five of the last seven years, we sprung a leak."

Dr. McCartney noted during that time frame, the district asked for a tax increase only during years when ratables declined.

"The last time we didn't have a decrease in ratables, we didn't ask for a (school) tax increase," Dr. McCartney said. "In 2009-10, we had no loss of ratables and we had no tax increase. So if we didn't have a ratable decline this year then we wouldn't have a tax increase. We're asking for no more than what we lost."

The other option the board is considering would be to hold the tax rate firm at about $2.80 per $100 of assessed valuation by cutting $2.7 million, or about one-half of the money lost due to the ratable decrease.

This option would require eliminating 38.5 full time equivalent positions. The district has cut 212.7 full time equivalent employees since 2005-06. Teacher-student ratios for grades K-1 have increased to 1:23, for grades 2-5 increased to 1:25 and for grades 6-12 increased to 1:28.

Last year, voters approved a $95 million general fund levy that carried a 12.2-cent tax rate increase. A township home with an assessed value of $200,000 saw an increase of about $244 in school taxes and a home assessed at $300,000 saw an increase of about $366. The budget maintained the tax levy at the same level for the third consecutive year in South Brunswick.

Over the last six years, the school tax levy has increased by about $300,000.

"The only answer to a ratable decline is some sort of fix," McCartney said. "When you lose ratables, you increase the tax rate to regain the lost ratables. We're only asking for an increase to get the levy back to what it was."

The district received $20.1 million in state aid last year, which represented an increase of $1.26 million, but is still short of the $6.3 million in aid that was cut in 2010-11. 

South Brunswick has a per pupil cost that's $2,035 below the state average, which qualified the district for the increased aid, according to McCartney. The district also saved about $1.5 million for next year through bond refinancing.

"That's called being prudent fiscally," McCartney added.

Unlike previous years, residents will not get to vote on the school budget next month. . Officials estimated the move could save the district $36,000 on the cost of running the April election.

Moving the election eliminates a budget vote entirely for spending that falls within the 2 percent tax cap. Only if the district presents a budget that goes above the 2 percent cap would it be required to put the budget before voters. 

Under the 2 percent cap, the board could've raised the tax rate to about $2.87 per $100 of assessed valuation. 

The Board of Education will hold a public hearing on the school budget at its next meeting on March 26.

What are your thoughts on the budget? Should the board maintain the tax rate and cut staff or should they increase the tax rate? Tell us in the comments.

Let's Think March 15, 2012 at 02:10 AM
Seems it would be helpful if people stayed with the facts. The facts are that we have a wonderful school district. The fact is that we have more children every year taking AP classes, which saves families when there children are headed towards college. The fact is that our teachers have never been the highest paid teachers in the state or even the county, in fact is one of the lowest paid staff in the area. The fact is our district consistently highlighted for excellence. The fact is also... excellence costs money.
Jack Wagon March 15, 2012 at 02:39 AM
Agree! I thought I might have read it wrong before I voted.
Jack Wagon March 15, 2012 at 11:45 AM
I would argue the fact that the rising Asian demographic in SB every year is boosting the overall academic excellence annually and most of the Asian students are on cruise control at the HS. The fact is, the Asian population gets their rigorous academic training outside of the HS and the HS teachers, who in my opinion are getting paid very fairly for their positions and the privilege to work with such a great community of students and parents, are merely proctoring most of the well trained Asian population at the HS. I, for one, would be up in arms if SB teachers were even close to the highest paid in the state or country for obvious reasons. Excellence doesn't cost money, tutoring, which leads to excellence, costs money. Charging families money for AP classes, sports, clubs, and other extra curricular activities (pay to play, but have no say) is only one of the Board's solutions to offset spending.
Jack Wagon March 15, 2012 at 12:15 PM
Joe R, be nice to all those millionaires or they'll take their chips and leave this forsaken state. Then who will you get to pay for the budget? If that happens, then you'll be complaining about Christie not being able to generate jobs and money. The real fact is, the rich pay their fair share already, actually about 10% more than their fair share, hence the proposed cut. Most of those crying about the rich are living well beyond their means because of their false sense of liberal entitlement that they seem to have. They want the rich to foot the bill. Socialism at it's best. It's the rich who provide jobs and money in this country, not police, firefighters, and teachers, and it's the rich that make it possible to even maintain our current spending problems or budgets. Unions needed to get put in their place during this economic crisis and Christie had the guts to do it. Kudos to him!
Marty Abschutz March 19, 2012 at 02:19 PM
Just me, The school district proposal requests fewer total dollars than they asked for in the current year. The ratables going down are the cause of the proposed rate increase.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »