Eliza Schleifstein is a 20-year resident and taxpayer of Randolph, NJ.

April showers don’t just bring May flowers.  They also bring the annual school budget presentations, the groans of citizens about the size of the upcoming property tax bite, and the cries of poverty from our Boards of Education, Superintendents and Business Administrators.  Across the State, Board of Education meetings will be filled with the threats to deprive our children of everything from beloved teachers to sports, extra-curriculars, and even course offerings, which could all be cut if taxes are not increased for the following year.  

Now some of this is valid.  Our school districts have had financial challenges over the past six years due to State-aid cuts from S-2 and rising healthcare costs due to Chapter 44.  But under what circumstances do the “wants” of our school administrators justify the need to exceed the 2% tax cap, utilizing every waiver, adjustment and loophole to do so in order to avoid a community budget vote?  Is there “fat” in our school budgets, to use the word a Board of Education member used in my town during the tentative budget meeting, when questioning our Business Administrator about why my district must exceed the 2% tax cap?  

In my town, Randolph, NJ, this is the second year in a row that our tax increase for the schools, if approved at the final Board vote in late April, will exceed the 2% cap without a community vote.  How many times can a school district use every trick in the book to exceed the 2% cap with no say from the people, whose pockets these extra funds ultimately come?

Last year it was unsettling.  This time, it sent up red flags.  Those red flags came not just from members of the community, but also from two Board of Education members, who questioned the use of these loopholes and the need for additional funds.  Last year, the district told the community at the tentative budget meeting that an additional $1.1 million from the community for feared increases in healthcare costs was needed.  But by the time of the final budget vote, that need had shrunk to only $200,000 based on intervening events, yet no changes were made to the budget before the final vote to reduce the tax bite and the full additional  $1.1 million became part of the tax levy to be collected.

To make matters worse, however, community members with their eyes on the monthly financial reports watched as portions of the $1.1 million increase, originally allotted to healthcare, were re-appropriated throughout this fiscal year to dozens of different line items, including an increase in the appropriation for the Business Administrator’s salary above his current contract, funding of vacation payouts (ironically at the same time as the Business Administrator’s resignation), architects’ fees, and Business Office travel.  We also saw a transfer of $7 million in December from the General Fund to the restricted use Capital Reserve Fund.  While part of the $7 million transfer was supposedly the return of an unused 2022-23 Capital Reserve Fund withdrawal, the Board reports show no record of any withdrawal that year.  Coincidentally, the $7 million transfer took place only days after our staff was allegedly told that all budgets were frozen and that there was no more money to spend this budget year, despite it being December and the fiscal year ending on June 30.  So where did that surplus $7 million in a budget that we were told was so tight come from?  It wasn’t in the budget appropriations we all saw the previous April.  How was that large sum of money available to be transferred mid-fiscal year?  Was it “fat” or were our children and teachers being deprived of things they needed?

Simply asking questions and getting complete answers should eliminate these red flags.  But when two Board members -– professionals with decades of finance experience and both former chairs of our Finance, Facilities, and Transportation Committee -–questioned the Business Administrator and Superintendent at the tentative budget meeting about the supposedly urgent need for more money that another high property tax rate hike would bring, they were admonished for doing so by the Superintendent and Business Administrator in a deplorable and highly disrespectful manner.  The Business Administrator even accused one Board member of lying to the public during the meeting, after which the rest of the Board and members of the public in attendance had to lift their jaws off the floor.  Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

But not getting straight answers to fair questions about how our tax dollars are being spent has become the norm in my town.  It all started during the pandemic, when a $100,000 redecoration of the Central Office building took place, $60,0000 of professional camera equipment was purchased for the sole use of the director of communications to take pictures of our children (who were not in our school buildings) for marketing purposes, federal and state pandemic rescue funds were spent on new parking lots instead of on learning loss and reopening our school buildings quickly, and the Board approved two $30,000-plus salary increases in under four years for our Business Administrator.  This led to often rude and condescending responses to questions by the stunned public that have not exactly endeared our Business Administrator to the community and select Board members. 

So, what is a citizen to do when there is a trust issue about how their hard-earned dollars, which are paid to the school district in the form of property taxes, are being spent and you will be digging deeper into your pockets next year because once again the district is exceeding the 2% cap?  Sit on our hands for fears of retaliation against our children for speaking up? Shut up and pay up because our children’s education is being held hostage, the budget is the equivalent of a ransom note and if we protest it, our children’s education will be hurt?  No.  

By state law (N.J.A.C. 6A:23A-8.2), it is every citizen’s right to review the full budget submission to the State and all supporting documents (which is about a 2- inch document, and not the paltry couple of summary pages we get in my town attached to the Board agenda).  It is our legal right to do so following the submission of the tentative budget to the Executive County Superintendent (required by March 20 this year) and before the public budget hearing (required to take place in all districts between April 24 and May 7 this year) so that we can ask questions and express concerns. 

Many school districts keep a copy of the full budget and all of its attachments available at the reception desk in the Board Office or at the town library for anyone to review at their convenience. But, if a copy of the full budget is not made so easily accessible in your community, don’t allow hurdles that the district places on public review of the budget stop you from fully understanding how your tax dollars will be spent.  Don’t stand for what goes on in my town, where instances of intimidation by the Business Administrator, such as demanding appointments at his convenience and making threats of law enforcement involvement for showing up without an appointment, have left several residents questioning the motives behind such secrecy and asking, “what is in the budget that you don’t want the taxpayer to see?”

Exercising your legal right to review the full budget to see how your tax dollars will be spent is one of the most important ways beyond the voting booth that citizens can hold school administrators and boards accountable to be fiscally responsible.  But if you don’t take advantage of your right to do so and speak up when you see something that leaves you scratching your head, the only person you have to blame when that property tax bill arrives with a huge increase just for the schools is yourself.  

My town’s School Business Administrator will be leaving to haunt another school district four days after the public budget hearing.  Hopefully, the other seven members of our Board, who asked no questions at the tentative budget presentation and seemingly rubber-stamped it with their “Yes” vote, won’t do the same at the public budget hearing.  Since that Board meeting, they have heard from citizens about the large sums of excess monies that were squirreled away in rainy day Capital Reserve Fund or other accounts and not spent on our children, and the alarming spending and fund appropriation practices that, clearly, they all missed on the monthly financial reports, but which citizens did not.  If they again simply rubber-stamp the budget at the final budget hearing and ignore the concerns of their constituents, they will not be “good stewards,” as one Board member opposed to the tentative budget stated.

You don’t have to accept the rising school tax bill as a fait accompli just because your Board tells you so.  A fresh pair of eyes may see something that they did not or may pull the veil of secrecy off of financial practices that should not pass muster when spending the taxpayer’s money.  Only through active participation can taxpayers ensure that every dollar is prioritized for the education of their children, rather than wasted on unnecessary expenditures.