Unacceptable

Trenton’s School Board passed its budget last night, totaling $299 Million Dollars. According to the account by Cristina Rojas in this morning’s Trenton Times, the financial numbers add up to a gap of $5.9 Million of expenses over revenue. As a result, the School Board approved a plan that will unfortunately lead to the layoff of a net 164 jobs. Ms. Rojas explains that “The eliminated positions — about a tenth of the district’s full-time employees — include 92 paraprofessionals, 43 teachers, 23 secretaries, four administrators and four business and technical employees.” In addition, a preschool will also be closed. Last night’s action taken by the Board comes one year after similar action was approved as the result of the previous budget adoption. Facing a shortfall of $17.3 Million, Trenton’s schools lost 226 positions.

It’s hard times for Trenton’s schools, their teachers and staff, and most of all, their students.

Last week, Trenton’s City Council adopted its $207.7 Million Dollar budget for the City’s operations. The numbers included in the City’s adopted budget did not require the kind of massive layoffs experienced by the school district, although the City’s always-fragile finances mean such actions will not be required in the future. The budget did, however, raise property taxes for Trenton’s overburdened property owners by 1.5%, for a total increase of $1.7 Million. Trenton’s tax rate of $3.95 per every $100 of assessed value is by far the highest for municipalities in Mercer County, around 3 times the rate of next highest Ewing Township, and around 10 times that of the lowest Hopewell Township.

Here’s the thing: Trenton’s School Board approved the budget for its upcoming fiscal year of 2016-2017, beginning July 1. City Council approved its budget for the current year we are in – nearly 9 months gone! – ending June 30.

Trenton’s Schools was able to forecast the year ahead, saw the unfavorable numbers, and used its budget as a management tool to take action now to put a workable plan in place, months before the beginning of the year.

Trenton’s City government adopted its budget after nearly 75% of the calendar has passed- and 75% of the money spent. Any adverse circumstances faced at this late date in the year as recognized in the City’s financial plan – such as, strictly hypothetically speaking, a theft of $5,000,000 in payroll money – doesn’t leave any time or ability to respond other than with drastic action.

To quickly review the process that Council concluded only last week, Ms. Rojas wrote, “The fiscal year began July 1. In late October, the administration introduced a $216.4 million budget, which has been in council’s hands ever since. The budget committee held a series of hearings and slashed an additional $8.6 million… The state Department of Community Affairs gave council the go-ahead on March 1.”

For City Council President Zachary Chester, this is just the way it is. As reported in the Times, he said at the March 17 meeting,

“To those critics who talk about why our budget is so late … we can’t do it without the state’s approval. We work hard on this budget, but at some point, we can’t move forward until we get this examination by the state. Every transitional community has to go through the same process.”

To put this in some historical context, for many years before Transitional Aid was created as a vehicle for state financial aid to Trenton and other towns around New Jersey, Trenton’s budget cycle repeatedly concluded 8 or 9 months into the financial year. But, for now, let’s take Mr. Chester’s statement at face value, and accept his contention that other Aid communities in NJ work with the same calendar.

My question to Mr. Chester, to City Council, to the Administration, to the NJ Department of Community Affairs, to our state legislative representatives, and to Governor Christie is simply this: How is this acceptable?

How is it that a city’s school district prepare its annual budget, vet it with the state, offer it for public review and comment, revise it and adopt it three months before the beginning of the fiscal year; while the City in which that district is located cannot do so until three months before the end of the year?

Both the City and the District operate in the same State, do they not? How can the state Department of Education be more efficient in its practices – almost an entire year in its budget processing – than the Department of Community Affairs?

Is it possibly, that, statewide, NJ lawmakers and parents would find it unacceptable for their children to be educated by schools with uncertain fiscal environments? Is it somehow unremarkable and routine that budget processing for Transitional Aid communities to be delayed, benignly neglected? Why is no one upset about this? Why is no one – in the City, in the State Administration, in the Legislature – working to fix this?

I honestly do not know the answer to this. But, rather than accept that this is just the way things work, as Mr. Chester does, this needs to be fixed. If a school district can get its fiscal act together with the State 3 months before the beginning of the fiscal year, it should be pretty damn well possible for a City to do the same.

This is the same place we end up nearly every doggone year, at nearly the same exact time of year.

Last year, for instance, Council did not give its approval to its 2014/2015 budget until March 24, 2015. At that Council session, a few residents spoke to complain about the process. Outspoken Trenton resident Dan Dodson and I both told Council that there were serious problems with the whole process. Along with it happening so late in the fiscal year, there was also minimal transparency, detail and narrative description of what the budget was intended to accomplish.

Last year’s Trenton Times report concluded by saying,

Council President Zachary Chester has previously said he hopes to move the along budget process faster next year. He also said McEwen told him he hopes to start compiling information for the 2016 budget in the next few months.

City Attorney David Minchello explained Tuesday that the city couldn’t take any action on a budget until the new fiscal year begins, although planning for the new year may occur.  [Emphasis mine – KM]

Well, we know how those good intentions played out for 2016. This year’s budget was approved 51 weeks after last year’s, and with only 105 days before the end of the budget year. To update what Mr. Dodson and I said last March:

• “There is STILL no information or narrative available that details what has been amended since the budget was introduced in November.”
• “We are STILL way behind the ball.”
• “It is STILL embarrassing and irresponsible.”

Any wagers on how next year’s budget process will proceed?

How is this acceptable?