Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Leonia board approves application to increase tax levy after state labels district "under adequacy"
Summary
The Leonia Board of Education voted to submit an application to the New Jersey Department of Education asking to increase the district's allowable tax levy to address a state "under adequacy" finding; the administration seeks roughly $750,000 in additional expenditures, subject to state review.
Superintendent Dr. Karamanos said the New Jersey Department of Education designated the district as "under adequacy," and the board voted to submit an application asking to increase expenditures so the district can seek additional state-authorized tax levy capacity.
The designation means, Dr. Karamanos said, "according to the state formula, the state funding formula, our district is currently spending less than what is determined to be necessary to provide a thorough and efficient education." She added that the finding "does not reflect the quality of teaching" in Leonia but highlights a structural funding gap the district must address.
Board members and administrators told the meeting that the state calculated an "under adequacy" gap of roughly $1,740,000 and that the administration is proposing to add $750,000 in expenditures to next year's budget, of which about $714,000 would be an increase in the tax levy if the state approves the application. Mr. Tomasiewicz, a district staff member, explained the state's calculation ties adequacy to enrollment, the equalized value of the town and income metrics.
A board member who serves on the finance and planning committee summarized the committee's review and the board's reasoning for moving forward. The member said the administration worked to stretch resources and that the board is pursuing only a portion of the state's identified gap because accepting the full allowance would have produced a larger tax increase. "That 7% ... when combining it with what we were already proposing, it comes out to a total of about 11% increase," the board member said, and added the committee settled on a smaller, more sustainable increase.
Administrators said the district had already prepared a tentative budget compliant with statutory caps (including the 2% cap) and that the application is a separate step the state must review. Mr. Tomasiewicz said that if the state approves only part of the requested items, the tentative budget will be adjusted accordingly before the public hearing scheduled for May 6.
Board members asked about what was cut from the tentative budget and what would be restored if the application is approved. Administrators said the preliminary budget had already reduced discretionary supplies, instructional technology subscriptions, curricular programs, professional development and nonessential maintenance; the proposed additions focus on curriculum programs, instructional technology and staffing aligned to the district's strategic goals.
The board took a formal motion to authorize the application. The motion, made by Mister Groul and seconded by Mister Park, carried; the meeting record states, "Motion carries on finance 3.1." The application will be filed with the state for review; requested changes will be reflected at the May 6 public hearing only if the state approves them.
The meeting moved on to public comment and then closed session. Administrators emphasized the state review is discretionary: the state may approve, partially approve, or deny requested increases and may direct how approved funds may be allocated.
