Council considers school cuts
By ROBERT LINNEHAN
The Cherry Hill Sun
5/15/2010

After a three-and-a-half hour public hearing Thursday in front of hundreds of concerned citizens, Council suggested reducing the school district’s $166.76 million budget by an additional $2.5 million.

Each Council member said it was the duty of Council to maintain the quality of education for Cherry Hill students, but to also heed the call of the voters in the 2010 Board of Education elections who defeated the budget by more than 500 votes.

Council suggested $800,000 be reduced from administration costs, a section of the budget that many members of Council and Mayor Bernie Platt criticized for being bloated.

“But, even as good as those teachers are, they are overshadowed by the cost of the administration in our school district. I got the emails, letters and phone calls complaining about the number of assistant principals, the salaries of the administration, and the amount of non-teacher support staff,” Platt said. “Our superintendent makes almost $100,000 more than the governor of this state.”

Council also suggested reducing budgeted salary increases by $800,000, the Blueprint curriculum initiative by $400,000, and $500,000 out of breakage to be returned to the taxpayers of Cherry Hill.

These most likely will not affect the quality of education for Cherry Hill students, Board President David Fleisher said. These are hard times in the township, he said, and Council had to take into consideration the majority who defeated the budget.

Superintendent David Campbell defended the number of administrators in the school district. He pointed to the comments he made at the start of the public hearing, where he stated that Cherry Hill spends below the state average in total comparative cost per pupil and administrative cost per pupil.

Cherry Hill also has fewer administrators than the state average, he said. The district already eliminated all department heads and facilitators, five assistant principals since 2006, and two additional assistant principals from the 2010-2011 budget.

At the central office since 2005, the district reduced an assistant superintendent, an assistant to the superintendent, director of capital outlay, and a director of research and assessment. Going unfilled is a director of special education and a facilities administrator. The district will also not replace a director of transportation or an assistant superintendent position, both of whom will retire within a year, Campbell said.

“The process continues. We have our work cut out for us,” Campbell said after the meeting.

The majority of the meeting consisted of residents voicing their concerns to Council. Most defended the school district’s budget and urged Council to not cut any additional funding from the already bare budget.

Additionally, Gov. Christie was lucky he didn’t attend the public hearing, or he likely would have endured hours of criticism. Many speakers believed he unfairly cast a bad light over state teachers and has yet to provide any real tools for state school districts to deal with his cuts in funding.

Cherry Hill lost more than $12.7 million in state aid this past budget season, according to District Business Administrator Jim Devereaux.

Pat McCargo, a Cherry Hill resident who had four children go through the school district, warned the Council of the effect a budget cut would have on Cherry Hill education.

“There was an ire out there created by governor of this state. He doesn’t give a darn about public education, neither does his commissioner,” she said. “Not one of you can unequivocally say that if you cut this budget it won’t hurt education in this township.”

Several residents offered solutions to the district for possible savings. Ellen Cohen suggested district parents should self-fund extracurricular activities.

Jan Apple, mother of one daughter in the district, urged Council to save programs at the high school level, such as theater and freshman sports.

“It’s critical for the mental and physical health of our students to have these important outlets in their lives,” Apple said.

The Board of Education took in the suggestions of township residents and Council. The Board ultimately has the final say in where the $2.5 million will be reduced. It can also appeal the suggested reduction if it feels the number is too high.