Little Egg Harbor board approves 2% tax-levy budget amid public concerns over buses, staffing and benefits

The Little Egg Harbor Township Board of Education approved the district’s 2025–26 budget on a roll‑call vote after a two‑hour public hearing punctuated by residents’ objections to what they called an opaque presentation and to planned operational changes.

The budget the board approved includes a 2% local tax‑levy increase; the presenter said the levy combined with debt service produces a total tax levy figure and estimated impacts such as an annual increase of about $31.20 for a $28,000 assessed home. The presenter also disclosed a debt‑service burden of $1,131,390 per year and said the district expects federal and state aid to decline, noting about a $700,000 drop in state aid year‑over‑year.

Why it matters: Board and public discussion focused on whether the budget’s savings plans — notably a move to an in‑house transportation operation and a shift toward part‑time paraprofessionals — have been adequately justified and documented. Several speakers said those changes could reduce instructional capacity or conflict with IEP obligations if staffing falls short.

What was said: The budget presenter summarized revenue and spending, saying in part, “With the 2% increase, a $28,000 assessed value shows $1,816 … your annual increase would be $31.20.” The presenter warned of sharp health‑insurance cost increases, saying the district faced a 32.7% rise this year and “slightly over 50%” across two years, and described the district’s decision to budget federal program funds at 70% of current allocations because future awards are uncertain.

Public reaction centered on transparency and the transportation change. One public commenter said, “This budget doesn’t show exactly what the money is being spent on … it is not transparent,” and multiple residents asked for detailed line‑item materials and a chance to ask staff questions after the presentation. Several parents and employees asked whether the district had fully modeled the costs of buying or leasing buses, parking and maintenance, and whether the projected $500,000 in annual savings from an in‑house fleet is realistic.

Board action and dissent: The board voted to approve finance items A–H (the budget). The motion carried; two board members recorded abstentions on a specified item (item H) citing insufficient information. The board also passed facilities and administrative business items during the same meeting.

What’s next: Administrators said the full presentation will be posted on the district website the morning after the hearing and that the superintendent’s office is available to answer follow‑up questions. Board members agreed to provide additional information on class‑size projections, the transportation lease and health‑benefit analyses at forthcoming work sessions and, where appropriate, in executive session for personnel or legal advice.

Votes at a glance: The board approved the 2025–26 budget and associated finance items; the motion carried with two abstentions noted on one item. Facilities item A and business‑administrator non‑personnel items A–H passed. Several personnel items, including specific substitute and ESY driver pay adjustments, were tabled for further review.

The board will return to live meetings and work sessions to review the supplemental materials residents and some board members requested before taking further personnel or structural decisions.