Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cherry Hill board confronts $29 million shortfall, weighs classroom additions, class-size increases and staff cuts
Summary
Faced with a $29 million budget gap, the Cherry Hill Board of Education debated using one‑time bond interest for classroom additions at Barton and Rosa, trade‑offs between operating costs and capital work, and whether rebalancing or redistricting could reduce transportation and staffing pressure. A vote on the final budget is scheduled for April 28.
The Cherry Hill Board of Education spent much of its April meeting confronting a projected $29 million shortfall and weighing how to balance near‑term cuts with longer‑term capacity needs.
Superintendent Dr. Morton told the board that the district’s projected deficit “is $29 million,” and that administrators had drafted a budget that includes position reductions and other savings while attempting to prioritize services that are statutorily required. He asked the community and board to pursue coordinated advocacy with state legislators to press for supplemental aid.
Board members and administration repeatedly warned against using bond principal to cover operating needs — but discussed a narrower option: tapping interest and investment earnings on previously sold bond proceeds to fund one‑time classroom construction that would address overcrowding without asking voters for a new referendum. Board Secretary Mr. Schimp summarized the legal and practical limits: “We are not, by law, allowed to use bond funds to balance our operating budget,” and said the district would not use principal intended for other bond projects to fill recurring operating shortfalls; however, interest earned on held proceeds was being examined as a source for one‑time capital work tied to capacity needs.
The board’s enrollment rebalancing committee reiterated the superintendent’s recommendation to add classrooms at Barton Elementary and Rosa Middle School to resolve current and forecasted overcrowding driven by local development. Committee chair Mr. Fain urged clarity on scope and justification: the board needs “specifics on how many classrooms” are planned and the evidence supporting those numbers, and he warned that the board must decide by August to meet bid and construction timelines for the 2028–29 school year.
Administration described two constraints that shaped the choices before the board: (1) transportation and special‑education guardrails that limit savings from redistricting, and (2) the prospect that adding classrooms creates recurring operating costs (teachers, aides, transportation) even when construction is funded with one‑time dollars. Mr. Schimp noted there was about $23 million in bond interest and earnings available (net of federal arbitrage liability as of mid‑2025) but cautioned that using one‑time funds to cover recurring expenses would only postpone the underlying problem.
Next steps: the board has scheduled a final budget adoption vote for April 28 and signaled an August deadline to finalize any decisions tied to classroom additions if they are to be bid and built for the 2028–29 school year.
Votes and motions: at this meeting the board approved bundled curriculum, facilities and human‑resources consent items by roll call and recorded a handful of abstentions/recusals on specific vendor payments; none of those consent approvals changed the district’s projected deficit.
Why this matters: The choices the board makes will affect class sizes, staffing levels and program availability across Cherry Hill schools; adding permanent classroom capacity can address a structural enrollment problem but creates ongoing personnel and transportation costs that must be funded in future budgets.
