Lacey Township board adopts amended tentative budget application amid warnings of deep cuts

Acting Superintendent Mr. Zelensky presented an amended tentative budget to the Lacey Township Board of Education and urged the board to authorize submission of an application for tax-incentive aid to stabilize district finances and "retain local control of the Lacey Township School District." He described the proposal as "not ideal. It is a compromise, not a solution, and certainly not the budget I would recommend under normal circumstances."

The budget the administration presented would raise the district—onsumer tax levy by a 7.57 percent net increase if approved as final, and the district says the package is intended to avoid a possible state takeover. The administration said the plan is driven in part by state aid decisions: officials said state aid was capped at 6 percent and that the district thinks the state still owes about $1.6 million in aid. The superintendent repeatedly called the measure a "stopgap" to keep the district bove water and urged the board to submit the application "not because it's the best option but because it's the best option we have at this moment to protect our district's future."

Nut graf: The proposal would preserve local control but requires program and staff reductions the administration says are necessary to close a budget gap. The administration presented a combination of staff cuts, grade reassignments across elementary buildings, suspended salary increases, use of one-time fund balances and delayed capital spending; parents, teachers, students and union leaders said those actions would harm classroom instruction, special education services and extracurricular programs. The board voted to adopt the amended tentative budget and submit the application; the county office must review the submission before the district schedules a final budget hearing.

Most important details: the administration said the operating budget shown to the public is about $1.4 million more than last year, with a proposed overall levy that totals roughly $59 million when debt service and waivers are included. The presentation listed a 7.57 percent net tax increase and estimated the increase on an average assessed home at about $616; a $500,000 assessed home would see a roughly $1,000 increase in school taxes under the district's estimate. The superintendent said the district would seek statutory waivers (including a health waiver and a bank cap allowance) as part of the application.

Planned program and personnel changes presented to the board included: reassigning elementary grade configurations (Cedar Creek to host a first-grade autism program; Fork River to host second- and third-grade and ERI programming; Lenoka to host fourth- and fifth-grade and MD programming), class sizes of 33 to 35 in grades 1-5, and deeper cuts at the secondary level that could push some high school classes to "exceed 38" students in some sections. The superintendent said the tentative plan would require about 10 elementary certificated staff reductions and one administrator; at secondary levels he cited roughly 15 certificated staff reductions as a projection and said some advanced-placement and elective classes could be eliminated if staff cannot be assigned to those master schedules. The presentation also listed 73 certificated staff positions cut over the past eight years.

Union and community reactions: dozens of residents, staff and students spoke during public comment. Jessica Cellini, president of the Lacey Township Administrators and Supervisors Association, urged the board to prioritize reducing class sizes and to "continue[] funding of all extracurricular activities for all students in the upcoming budget." Jen Bentley, vice president of the LTA and a teacher at Linoco Harbor School, urged the board to "vote yes on the proposed budget presented before you. It is critical for a yes vote to push forth this budget in order to apply for the state budget application relief."

Special-education staff spoke about caseloads and service impacts. Jess Fransen, president of the LTCSTA and a school social worker, said, "Special education is not a luxury. It is a legal and moral obligation," and described the Child Study Team as a 14-member team that case-manages about 901 special-education students, producing an average caseload she described as roughly 80 to 100 students per case manager, which she said is about double the state average. She warned cuts to paraprofessionals and specialized staff would erode legally required services and supports.

Students and parents described broader consequences. A student speaker, Alyssa Hick, said, "With these cuts, Lacey's mission will not succeed," referencing the high school's mission statement and arguing that extracurriculars and smaller classes support student engagement and college preparedness. Other commenters raised logistics concerns about the proposed elementary realignment (siblings in different buildings, longer bus rides for working parents) and safety concerns about requiring more students to walk within the district esignated walking zone. Several speakers urged the district to press the state and legislators for restored aid rather than rely on repeated local tax increases.

Board debate and vote: board members expressed a range of views in a long discussion. Board member Armano repeatedly objected to raising the levy and urged the board to stand by an earlier vote opposing a tax increase; several other board members said turning the district over to the state posed greater risks. Board member Conner said he sought a middle ground and wanted to keep local control. The board moved to adopt the amended tentative budget and to submit the application for additional expenditures and tax-incentive aid; a roll-call on the motion recorded Yes votes from "Mister Peters," "Mister Bell," "Missus Walker," and "Mister Conaty" and a No from "Missus Armato." The motion passed and the administration said the submission would go to the county office for review and that a final budget hearing would follow (the administration said it expected to return in one to two weeks for a final hearing).

What is not decided or specified: the presentation and the board's tentative adoption do not finalize the 2025-26 budget. Officials characterized the action as a preliminary step to secure potential state incentives and to avoid a state takeover; the final adopted budget and exact tax figures will depend on county review, potential additional state action on aid, and later board decisions. Specific mover/second names for the motion were not recorded in the publicly available transcript.

Ending: the district will submit the amended tentative budget and the tax-incentive application to the county office; the county must review the submission before a final public hearing and vote. Board and community members said the budget debate will continue in Trenton and in future board meetings as the district seeks restored state aid and explores local alternatives to reduce recurring levy increases.