Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
New Milford board hears budget plan proposing staff reductions as health‑benefit costs surge
Summary
Superintendent presented a $50.21 million 2025–26 budget with an estimated $1.8 million shortfall driven largely by double‑digit health‑benefit increases; proposed actions include abolishing positions and reducing hours to avoid program cuts, while final adoption awaits NJDOE approval on a tax‑levy incentive.
The New Milford Board of Education on Thursday heard a budget presentation that administrators said would require difficult staffing decisions to close an estimated $1.8 million gap for the 2025–26 school year.
"The secret to budgeting is that it needs to be honest," Superintendent Mister Velasco told the board as he outlined a proposed $50,211,018 spending plan and a line‑by‑line effort to cut costs. He said rising health‑benefit expenses — a year‑over‑year double‑digit increase — are among the largest drivers of the shortfall.
Velasco and district finance staff described targeted reductions intended to minimize direct impacts on students. "All reductions were designed to have a minimal direct impact on our students," the superintendent said. Still, he acknowledged some direct effects: the district plans to abolish multiple positions and reduce hours in support roles, which officials said may increase some class sizes to about 28–30 in affected rooms.
Specific personnel reductions the administration listed included two administrative assistants, one custodian, three teachers, five instructional assistants, one specialist and two administrative positions; the district also proposed moving two custodians from full‑time to part‑time and reducing six administrative assistants from 0.8 to 0.75 FTE.
Administrators emphasized that they do not intend to cut core programs. "No programmatic cuts — sports stay whole, the arts, musical arts stay whole," a finance official said, adding the district planned to shuffle teacher assignments to preserve electives and extracurriculars.
Finance staff said the district has been using some fund balance to smooth budgets in recent years and will propose using about $1.5 million from prior years to offset next year’s expenses, but stressed that practice is not sustainable. They also identified capital needs, including replacement of single‑pane windows in the high‑school cafeteria, as part of the long‑range facilities plan.
The administration discussed a separate tax‑levy incentive application that would increase the local levy by roughly $108,484 with a small one‑time state aid portion (described in the presentation as about $5,424). District officials said the incentive — which requires approval from the New Jersey Department of Education — would be allocated to out‑of‑district tuition expenses if granted.
Board members thanked staff for the detailed analysis and asked questions about criteria for selecting positions to cut. Velasco said the district used a mix of contract obligations, certification status and operational needs to make decisions and that some non‑renewals were for "economy and efficiency" rather than performance reasons.
Next steps: the board conducted roll‑call motions to reapprove budget‑related resolutions and to advance personnel items; the administration said final adoption and some adjustments depend on NJDOE approval of the tax‑levy incentive and ongoing budget discussions.
Provenance: first presentation and budget overview begin in the superintendent’s remarks (SEG 435–SEG 638); personnel reduction details and class‑size impacts were discussed in SEG 639–SEG 741; tax‑levy incentive details appear in SEG 860–SEG 879.
Ending: The board advanced the budget measures for formal votes and will revisit final adoption pending NJDOE approval and any adjustments between now and the June meeting.
