Garwood School Board Approves Budget, Shuts Washington School

April 12, 2010

Calling the proposed budget the best that could be developed with significant state aid reductions and under a tight timeline, the Garwood Board of Education approved the introduction of the s chool budget which including reducing teaching positions and shuttering Washington School with a split vote on April 1.

Before an audience of about 60 people, the board presented an $8.2 million budget that would increase taxes on a home assessed at the borough average of $100,000 by $125.

Superintendent of Schools Teresa Quigley said that decisions to close one of the district’s two schools and cut back on some programs were out of necessity.

The board agreed upon a preliminary budget on March 16 which included trimming the technology budget, reducing one teaching position, reducing a child study team position, cutting the supply budget, and charging tuition for the pre-K program to handle the impending drop in state aid that was predicted as anywhere from 5 to 15%.

However, that changed just a day later when district officials learned that 5% of the general fund had been cut leaving Garwood with $410,000 less in state aid, a 60% drop.

The budget as presented will eliminate a total of three teaching positions, one child study team position, one member of the office staff, and two custodial positions. The budget also calls for reducing administrative responsibilities and cuts costs by reducing the utility budget and eliminating the need for a nurse, supplies, and technology spending for Washington School.

Quigley did not name what specific positions were being eliminated, though she did add that some teachers were considering moving to a part time basis which would trim costs.

In deciding to officially take Washington School offline, a possibility the board first discussed near the end of the 2008-2009 school year, Business Administrator William Muzzio stood to save $176,000 in costs.

Explaining that the district planned to form an ad hoc committee to explore starting a district-run early childhood center at Washington School, Board President Adele Lewis said that Garwood would close the school for a year with plans on reopening it to house tuition-based programs that would generate funds for the district.

Still residents expressed their reservations about closing the school, especially if all the students would fit in Lincoln School and if the school could accommodate younger children.
According to district officials, the Lincoln School has already been evaluated and approved for use for a pre-kindergarten program.

Speaking about the budget and the cuts required, Quigley candidly told residents that while the district had dealt with low state aid over time, the cuts for the 2010-2011 budget were beyond what she had anticipated.

“Never did I ever believe the governor would take $410,000 (in aid). Never did I ever imagine he would take 5% of our budget,” Quigley said.

Raising their concerns about the budget, some residents asked why the public had not been allowed to vote on the decision to close Washington School, while others had harsh words for the board.

“A fundamental change like this really should be left up to the people,” resident Bruce Paterson said about closing Washington School.

Residents Jared Cumming and Jim Matthews both took issue with statements by board members that the year was expected to be difficult but the district was still left to make hard, last minute decisions.

While there were repeated suggestions that Washington School’s fate be decided by a public vote, Muzzio explained that such a move is not allowed under ballot restrictions that require a public question to be about a specific program, not about a facility.

Countering with another suggestion, board Vice-President John Sullivan suggested that the board introduce a budget with enough funding to keep Washington School open. If the budget were to fail the board would know that residents were willing to close the school to keep taxes at a lower rate, he reasoned.

However, Lewis and other board members said that such a suggestion requires a large assumption by the board on residents’ reasons for voting on the budget.

“It would have been lovely to keep Washington School online. We can’t do it. We can’t afford it,” Lewis told the audience.

“A ‘no’ vote (on the budget) does not save Washington School. It makes a bad situation worse,” she added.

Ultimately, Sullivan and board member Susan Groening were the only two members of the board to vote against the introduction of the budget.

Residents will have their chance to vote on the budget on Tuesday, April 20.