2019 2020 propos ed budget
play

2019 2020 PROPOS ED BUDGET Board of Education Meeting March 18, - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

2019 2020 PROPOS ED BUDGET Board of Education Meeting March 18, 2019 What Guides Budget Development? Respect | Hard Work | Integrity | Diversity | Communication | Excellence Three-Year District Goals To continue to provide a


  1. 2019 – 2020 PROPOS ED BUDGET Board of Education Meeting March 18, 2019

  2. What Guides Budget Development? Respect | Hard Work | Integrity | Diversity | Communication | Excellence Three-Year District Goals  To continue to provide a safe, healthy environment for students and staff  To continue to enhance instructional practice and increase student achievement in accordance with research and experience in best practices and in alignment with the New Jersey S tudent Learning S tandards  To continue to upgrade infrastructure and equipment to operate efficiently and effectively  To continue to enhance school district – stakeholder relationships  To complete a detailed study of the current school configuration, attendance zones, and facility use (no impact on the 2019-2020 school year or budget)

  3. What Guides Budget Development? Respect | Hard Work | Integrity | Diversity | Communication | Excellence  S tudent Academic, S ocial/ Emotional, Behavioral, and Physical Needs  Instructional and Non-instruction Assessment and Evaluation  Federal and S tate Mandates  Budget Review and Analysis  S takeholder Input Where Children and Learning Come First

  4. Budget Process and Key Factors

  5. Quick Overview  Two main revenue  Favorable efficiency sources: rat ings compared t o S t at e averages for:  Local Tax Levy-53%  S pending on a  S t at e Aid-41% per st udent basis  Fund Balance-5%  S t aff rat ios  Two main expendit ures:  S alaries-58%  Benefit s-23%  Transport at ion-7%

  6. NJDOE Budget Efficiencies Matrix (S ource: NJDOE mid-year budget review) Efficiency S tandards: On a Efficiency S tandards: S taff per student basis, the ratios compared to state district spends: average:   Administrative Costs Education S upport staff to students  $354 less than state average  Above by 4.9 st udents  Operations of Plant and Maintenance  Administrative personnel to students  $335 less than state average  Above by 51.1 st udent s  Legal services  Administrative personnel to faculty  $35 less than state average  Above by 5 facult y members  S upport S ervices Note: Above the state average on these standards is a favorable  $390 less than state average rating. Note: Less than the state average on these standards is a favorable rating.

  7. The Budget Process to Date  Created initial memos and held individual and administrative team meetings  Reviewed / updated salary, benefits, insurance costs, etc. Presented information at February 25 th and March 11 th  public meetings  Completed a comprehensive review and identified initial reductions and made adj ustments after receiving state aid on March 7 th through comprehensive review  Made contacts with DOE and other business officials  Conducted Board of Education small group/ committee budget meetings  Worked in the DOE Budget S oftware  S ome revenues and appropriat ions are set by t he S t at e Note: Currently in negotiations with GTEA

  8. Budget Basics  Enrollment remained  Total tax levy 2% cap = $32,557,191 stable  General fund budgetary increase at  Ratables (net valuation 2% = $651,144* taxable) increased by approximately  *=1.06% of General Operat ing Budget $18,453,100  Banked cap available = $324,940  S tate Aid increased from 18-19 to 19-20  Last year $276,455 expired “ equalization aid”  Health care cost adj ustment  $751, 277* available = $485,350  *Not e t hat t his increase affect s t he st at e aid percent age of revenue less t han 1%

  9. History of Ratables 2010-Present $3,900,000,000 2010, $3,686,976,888 $3,700,000,000 $3,500,000,000 $3,300,000,000 $3,100,000,000 $2,900,000,000 2019, $2,713,819,800 $2,700,000,000 $2,500,000,000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

  10. 19-20 S tate Aid Increase FY 19 FY 20 Change Fund 10 - General Fund Equalization Aid $ 20,783,756.00 $ 21,535,033.00 $ 751,277.00 Special Ed Aid $ 1,996,732.00 $ 1,996,732.00 $ - Security Aid $ 739,882.00 $ 739,882.00 $ - Transportation Aid $ 1,088,704.00 $ 1,088,704.00 $ - Total $ 24,609,074.00 $ 25,360,351.00 $ 751,277.00 State Aid at Fully Funded $ 29,119,506.00 $ 30,388,126.00 Underfunded Total $ (4,510,432.00) $ (5,027,775.00) General Fund - State Aid Increase by Year Year 1 17-18 $ 252,255.00 Year 2 18-19 $ 600,221.00 Year 3 19-20 $ 751,277.00 Total $ 1,603,753.00 Fund 20 - Special Revenue Fund PEA/PEG/PEEA - PEA $ 1,840,220.00 $ 2,222,920.00 $ 382,700.00 Total $ 1,840,220.00 $ 2,222,920.00 $ 382,700.00 Total Preschool Students to be served 196 267 71 Total Preschool Funding Per Pupil $ 9,388.88 $ 8,325.54 $ (1,063.33) Fund 40 - Debt Service Fund Debt Service Aid $ 84,767.00 $ 81,634.00 $ (3,133.00) Total $ 84,767.00 $ 81,634.00 $ (3,133.00)

  11. A look at 19-20 Equalization Aid “ increase” …  The S t at e recognized t hat it cost  Adequacy Budget = $566 more per pupil t o provide  S t at e Aid + Levy/ Local Fair S hare NJ public school children an adequat e public educat ion for  Tot al Equalizat ion aid at Chapt er 19-20 67 “ fully funded” = $24,371,748  NJ has approx. 1.375 million  Equalizat ion aid received = children enrolled in public $21,535,033 schools  Underfunded equalizat ion aid =  Est imat ing t he increase cost of $2,836,715 educat ing NJ public school  In addit ion… children:  The multiplier rate for Equalized  $566 per pupil increase x Valuations increased on the local 1.375 million = $778 million fair share side  FY 20 Governor’s Budget  This increase shifts the burden of Address report ed an adequacy cost from the S tate to addit ional $206 million t o the taxpayer significantly reducing public school funding eligibility for equalization aid.   That means t he S t at e shift ed $1,861,680 is the additional increase we would have received in $572 million of t he increased 19-20 if the rates remained cost t o local school dist rict s unchanged.

  12. Ongoing Cost S avings

  13. Energy Management S avings  41.7% cost avoidance  Carbon footprint shows an energy reduction impact of:  190,816 MMBTU’s  2,447 Passenger cars not being driven for one year  301,205 Tree seedlings grown for 10 years  S avings since start of program in May 2007  $6.3 million +

  14. Cost Savings Measures Previously Presented… and Continued  In-House Work  Reductions-in-Force (positions never returned):   Maint enance 1 less PE/ Health teacher  2 fewer world language teachers  Technical S ervices  1 less art and 1 less music teacher  Print ing  5 fewer counselors  Professional Development  5 fewer TLFs (may be 4 based on budget request)  Administ rat ors serve mult iple roles  4 fewer secretaries  S hared S ervices – Cafeteria  2 fewer nurses  Closing / razing of schools  No Assistant S uperintendent  Purchasing cooperat ives  Elementary Library secretaries reduced to part-  Eliminat ed t he maj orit y of court esy time busing  Portion of intervention teachers are part-time  Reduced act ivit y buses  Changed one facilities manager position to an  assistant manager Ut ilized grant funds where allowable and available

  15. Cost Savings Measures Four-Year Period through FY20  Joined the ACCAS BOJIF for significant savings to general and liability insurances  Re-negotiated printing contract  Implemented secured printing to copiers  Used reserves for facility needs and required maintenance proj ects  Used lease purchase for technology and facilities equipment  Negotiated change in benefits package for all employees  Assessed and re-designed aspects of special education  Added or expanded programs  Decreased full-t ime LLD classes and added pull-out resource  Decreased number of out -of-dist rict t uit ion st udent s  Increased number of t uit ion-in st udent s  Further reduced secretaries  eliminat ed part -t ime library secret ary posit ions at element ary schools  reduced 1 MS secret ary posit ion t o part -t ime  Reviewed (annually) number of classroom teachers  9 fewer classroom t eachers st art ing in 2015-2016  2016-2017 ret urned 2 element ary t eacher posit ions  2017-2018 reduced 3 element ary t eacher posit ions  2018-2019 proj ect ion – reduce 1 element ary t eacher posit ion  2019-2020 – same number of element ary t eachers  Net result : 11 fewer posit ions in 19-20 t han 14-15

  16. A look at the 2019-2020 budget

Recommend


More recommend