Millburn Superintendent Weighs in on District Budget
Dr. James Crisfield uses letter to the editor to explain administration's philosophy on the 2013-14 budget.
During the course of the deliberations concerning the Millburn Schools’ 2013-14 budget, some questions have come up regarding the budgeting philosophy we deploy when constructing the annual school budget.
What we attempt to do in the budget is predict how much money we’ll need in each of the 900+ budget accounts so that our schools continue to operate at peak performance. I feel it is important to come right out and say this: We do not set out to cut as many things or as much money as possible. We do look to save money and capture efficiencies wherever possible, but the overriding priority is to ensure excellence from one year to the next.
We include contingencies in many of the budget accounts, hoping we won’t need to spend them but making them available just in case. Not every account needs contingency allowances, but prudent budget management would suggest that a budget’s big areas anyway (in our case, such lines as out-of-district tuition, health benefits, salaries and utilities) have some allowance for the unknown. We are, after all, putting together a budget that doesn’t start for almost a year after the initial budget requests are submitted.
There is much talk about how much money is unspent at the end of every year. The fact that there is money unspent at the end of a year is a good thing — the possible costly developments that were driving the need for contingency funds didn’t materialize! Also, it is an indication that our budget managers do not spend money just because it is there. Rather, they responsibly look at their needs and draw from their accounts accordingly.
It is our hope that the perfect storm of contingency needs doesn’t hit in any given year, so that we have about $2M of unspent funds from the 900+ accounts at the end of the budget year. That is not an unreasonable amount, given the budget is in excess of $85M. It’s like having $20 leftover from a home improvement project estimated to cost $850.
The unspent $2M is used (per state law) as revenue in the next year’s budget. One popular misconception is that it accumulates and is hidden away in some top-secret surplus account somewhere. That is just not true. If in a given year we have more than $2M unspent (which, again, it is important to remember is a good outcome in that more of the contingencies that might have cost the district money did not materialize), the goal is to earmark the amount over $2M for future capital projects. This is a key point of our budgeting philosophy. It enables the district to replenish the Capital Reserve Account, which is now more critical than ever given that all but $132K of capital projects have been cut out of the budget this year. The good news is we are able to get much-needed capital projects done, preserving the community’s investment in its school buildings, by funding them with Capital Reserve monies (i.e., not with annual budget monies).
Why did we cut out almost all of the capital projects from the annual budget? We did so in order to enable us to hire 11 new staff members, including five teachers and three aides. Those 11 new employees are costing (salary only) roughly $550,000. Combine that figure with the $990,000 required to pay existing employees their negotiated 2% raise and the grand total of new funds needed for personnel in 2013-14 is $1,540,000. The proposed tax increase of 2% generates approximately $1,440,000 of new revenue, so costs for new and existing personnel are consuming all of the additional tax revenue plus an additional $100,000. I hope this puts to rest the misconception out there that this budget emphasizes physical capital over human capital. Nothing could be further from the truth. Total amount budgeted for salaries in 2013-14 is $51,066,000. Total amount budgeted for capital projects is $132,000.
All of us who live in New Jersey know it is not easy to pay the annual property tax bill. This state has chosen to fund its public schools primarily through the local property tax, and that is a burden on residents, especially in communities such as ours where the state aid amounts are such a small portion of the overall revenue pie. But it is also not easy budgeting in an environment where cost pressures are everywhere while at the same time restrictive revenue caps are in place. The proposed tax increase of 2% enables the schools to keep pace with annual inflationary pressures (1.5% in the economy in general, and 2% locally with negotiated salary increases) and annual enrollment growth (roughly 1% on average of late). In other words, it enables the district to keep operating at the high level it does now without losing ground to cost increases. Millburn’s schools are important to the residents here, indeed a source of pride, and this budget is the road map for continuing the commitment to excellence that the community expects of its schools.
From: James A. Crisfield, Ed.D. Superintendent
Millburn Township Public Schools
twitter:@millburncsa
Sophie
10:50 am on Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Hi Dr. Crisfield,
I know that you're a very busy person with your role as treasurer at the Garden State Coalition of Schools and your statewide leadership position beating back the threat of charter schools in the state -- all of which is greatly appreciated and has made us all very proud. I also read your tweet about "Sucking the Life out of School Leadership" and can understand the pressure that you must be under as the leader of our district (@MillburnCSA: This is a very real phenomenon our society should address. "Sucking the Life out of School Leadership" http://t.co/cnLy7xH7Gj) But what has taken you so long to explain your POV to the community?
I was told at the board meeting that I attended that the budget process started about a year ago. Why wasn't this article posted a year ago so that we could better understand your thinking and plans for the district instead of at the end of the budget process? Maybe you have too much on your plate and have taken on too much with these statewide responsibilities?
Rohan Haudry
10:50 am on Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Dr. Crisfield has not said anything about what he and the board have done to reduce the exhorbitant cost base in this district. What efficiencies has he brought in to the district? The administrative staff (and legal and consults fees) are how much larger? Millburn's cost base is unaffordable and unsustainable in the long run. This budget only compounds this problem and kicks the can down the road (for the next superintendent and new boards to deal with). It's easy to keep spending money; it's a lot harder to do more with less.
Dazed not Confused
12:43 pm on Tuesday, March 19, 2013
"We do look to save money and capture efficiencies wherever possible" Glad to hear that but many of us remain unconvinced. Mrs. Chapman and others have raised questions on areas where it seems the district is being wasteful. You and the rest of the Board have not provided answers. If the district were a corporation your shareholders would be screaming about this. Please tell us specifically how the district is identifying and mitigating wasteful practices.
M OKeef
4:04 pm on Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Dr Crisfield: You indicate the District is hiring 11 new staff -- 5 teachers and 3 aides. What are the other 3 positions being hired? And to which grades are the aides being assigned?
bill
5:25 pm on Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Dr C,
Are you still planning on getting rid of an eighth grade team, leading to huge class sizes? Rumor is that some accelerated classes where the teachers are supposed to cover a lot of material in depth may have 28-30 students or more. Is this true, and if so why are you doing this? Do you believe that class size matters?
M OKeef
7:02 am on Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Dr Crisfield, Also are you still planning to eliminate the computer labs? If yes, can you please explain how this will work and what that move accomplishes? Is it that you want to turn each computer room into a regular classroom to alleviate class sizes?
sms
8:49 am on Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Why are you dismantling computer labs when other districts like Livingston are installing them? Why not use the music rooms first to alleviate over-crowding? Deerfield and Glenwood's labs are not even big enough to be regular classrooms.
What are the current actual class sizes in the 8th grade regular ed content area classes? Averages that include smaller study skills and content studies/replacement classes skew the average.
How is Rosetta Stone actually working? What were the other piloted programs and in which schools were they piloted? Why was Rosetta Stone chosen? What follow-up analysis have you done on the program?
Noreen Brunini
8:49 am on Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Dr Crisfield, in my opinion, left 2 important messages out of his newsletter: 1) How many are aware that the "Public Hearing on the Budget is this coming "SUNDAY, March 24, 2013 PLEASE NOTE: THIS MEETING IS ON A SUNDAY DUE TO PASSOVER ON MONDAY" (info in quotes cut and pasted from District website, capitals not my emphasis) and 2) the Budget District Newsletter is posted on the District website. I understand it is not being mailed to every resident to save mailing fees but how are residents without children supposed to know this type of information is there if you don't tell them? Not having children in the schools anymore, I found this accidentally when I checked the website to see if the questions above were answered in any of the budget documents posted on the website. Some, but not all, of the above questions are addressed in the posted Newsletter.
Rohan Haudry
10:48 am on Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Some other questions were not answered as well:
Please share the technology plan if there is such a plan that has been approved by the board. Millions are being spent annually and there is not published plan to refer to other than something from 2010 that looks like an inventory of computers, nothing more.
Please share the 5 year financial plan that is required under NJ statute.
Please share the assessment for the K-5 World Language program, also required under NJ statute.
Please answer the question that has not been answered on the website Q&A regarding legal fees and legal settlements and judgements. The total amount paid out year to date compared to last year and other previous years would be very much appreciated.
Rohan Haudry
10:48 am on Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Noreen- Appreciate your diplomatic approach, but if the community outside of enrolled students' parents is not on the "distribution list" and all communications likely to reach those outside the schools has been stopped, what does that tell you?