Nutley board finalizes tax-levy numbers, advances budget that trims programs and restructures paraprofessionals

The Nutley Public School District on Monday advanced final tax-levy figures and a package of routine resolutions after a budget hearing in which administrators outlined reductions needed to close a roughly $5.7 million shortfall.

Board President opened the meeting by saying the board "do[es] not support cuts to student programs, including sports and extracurricular activities," and urged the administration to seek alternatives, but the budget presentation from Business Administrator Mike DeVita laid out why cuts are proposed. "The total annual budget has increased by a little over $2,800,000 or 3.12%," DeVita told the board, while forecasting a $1.6 million rise in operating revenue driven largely by the local tax levy and several one-time grant increases.

Why it matters: District leaders said they face rising fixed costs — particularly health insurance and special-education expenditures — while state aid declined. Administrators said a prior corrective action plan and other efficiency measures are in place but insufficient to close the gap without program reductions or additional local revenue.

What the budget presentation said - State aid: DeVita said the district received a 3% reduction in state aid for the upcoming year, about $374,641. - Revenue mix: The operating fund centers on local property taxes (about 81% of operating revenue), state aid (roughly 14.6%), extraordinary aid (about 3%), and other minor sources. The district’s total operating budget was presented at roughly $82 million (including special revenues and debt service). - Special education: Administrators reported a projected special-education budget near $18.6 million and showed state reimbursements (labeled as x-aid in the presentation) of about $6,797,703 plus projected extraordinary aid of $2,456,057. - Household impact: DeVita presented an estimated tax impact for the average assessed home ($493,362) of $228.14 for the year under the preliminary levy.

Proposed reductions and staffing changes Superintendent and administration staff described a combination of one-time savings, attrition and program reductions that underlie the $5.7 million plan. Key proposals discussed publicly include: - Restructuring the district’s paraprofessional positions into several defined categories (for example, 1-to-1 paras, preschool paras, class-based paras), with some positions converted to part-time (25 hours/week) and a posted hiring process so current paras may apply for the new roles. Administrators said sick-day accrual and step longevity will carry over for those rehired. - Reductions to athletics and co-curricular budgets, including removal of eight assistant/coaching stipends identified in the administration’s memo. The district said the cuts were spread across school levels "for consistency and equity." The move prompted repeated public appeals to preserve JV/freshman sports. - Reductions in summer hours, school supplies, some technology subscriptions (cited example: Schoology), and certain special-education and transportation contingencies.

Discussion, public comment and reaction The meeting included more than an hour of public comment, much of it from parents, coaches, paraprofessionals and special-education advocates. Speakers described the proposed changes as likely to harm vulnerable students, reduce class offerings and eliminate opportunities for many students.

Coach and resident Michelle Puzio said: "Cutting coaches means the possibility of cutting multiple lower-level sports or individual programs altogether. This means taking away opportunities for our student athletes ... You're not just cutting games or practices, you're cutting off lifelines for many students."

Several parents and para staff described immediate effects they said they were already seeing — for example, a kindergarten ABA class that did not go outside for recess on some days because of staff shortages — and demanded that the board pursue every alternative before reducing para benefits or hours. A number of speakers noted prior board action on April 10: "the board voted down the proposed tax levy 7 to 2," a fact raised repeatedly during public comment as background for the current discussion.

Board action and votes at the meeting The board approved routine committee resolutions presented at the meeting: academic resolutions 1–3, administration 1–3, finance 1–23, policy items and personnel items. Roll-call votes were recorded for each slate; each block passed on voice/roll call during the meeting (see “Votes at a glance” below for details).

Exploratory committee on voter levy questions Board members moved to create an exploratory committee to investigate mechanisms for placing budget questions that exceed the statutory 2% tax levy cap before voters. The president said the motion was intended to gather legal and operational details so the board — or the community — can consider a public vote in the future. The board appointed the ad hoc committee by majority vote; the committee will report back at a later meeting.

Administration clarifications and next steps Administrators emphasized that the preliminary budget is a working document and that district staffing and program decisions are subject to further review. The administration said they will post final job descriptions for the paraprofessional categories, open the positions on Aplitrack, and attempt to match employees to positions based on seniority and qualifications. The business office said certain capital and maintenance reserve funds have been identified for facility projects (e.g., temporary middle-school classroom planning), but spending is subject to further approvals and bids.

What wasn’t decided No final program eliminations were announced at the meeting; many of the program-level impacts described by speakers reflect budget proposals or administrative staffing choices under consideration. Several board members said they remain committed to seeking options to restore extracurricular and para staffing where feasible.

Ending note The board advanced the preliminary levy and routine resolutions at the meeting, and the administration will continue developing and refining staffing maps and program implications as the district finalizes its 2025–26 budget. Community members asked the board to prioritize transparency, clear timelines for rehires, and guarantees for students covered by IEPs.