Could Woodbridge school district afford to trim a bit more off the top?
With just days left before Woodbridge voters decide on the school district's $182.5 million proposed budget, Superintendent John Crowe is fighting back against criticism that the district is too top-heavy and that not enough administrators have been cut.
While the 2010-2011 spending plan calls for more than $12 million in program and job cuts, just seven of the 280 employees expected to lose their jobs are administrators. The rest are teachers, guidance counselors, secretaries, cafeteria workers and custodians.
That has led one of the six candidates seeking three seats on the Board of Education to oppose Tuesday's budget question, which seeks to raise the school tax rate by 4 percent, or by an average of $156.
“I haven't seen enough cuts in the administration,” said Tom Maras, who told parents during candidates night this month that he supported the budget, but changed his mind a few days later. “There are so many questions that to say 'yes' does not make sense to me.”
Other candidates, on record as supporting the budget, didn't return calls for comment Thursday.
Crowe says the district has cut administration continually over the years. If it doesn't appear that many administrators will be eliminated next year, that's because the district is already short-staffed, he said.
“A district our size has quite many fewer administrators than do districts that are very similar to us,” he said.
A glance at the annual New Jersey School Report Card, however, shows Woodbridge's student-to-administrator ratio is not as conservative as other nearby large districts like Edison, Piscataway, Old Bridge and Perth Amboy. In 2008, Woodbridge had 192.8 students per administrator; the state average was 159.2 students per administrator.
But Crowe says those numbers hide the fact that Woodbridge's 16 elementary schools don't have vice principals, whereas other districts do. Woodbridge's four middle schools have one vice principal.
In the proposed budget, Colonia and Woodbridge high schools will lose one of their three vice principals. John F. Kennedy High School already has just two. The savings from reducing the two non-tenured administrators would be $237,000.
“If anyone thinks that a high school the high size of ours doesn't need at least two vice principals needs to rethink what goes on in a high school,” Crowe said.
WOODBRIDGE BUDGET FACTS
• Proposed budget for 2010-11 including debt service: $182.5 million
• Current budget for 2009-10 including debt service: $184.5 million
• Proposed number of eliminated jobs: 280
• Proposed tax levy for 2010-11: $158 million
• Current tax levy for 2009-10: $152.3 million
• Proposed tax rate per $100 of assessed value: $4.67
MORE ON THE BUDGET: Woodbridge.InJersey.com/Election
The district also wants to eliminate three department heads to save $199,000 and two supervisors, which would save $150,000.
“Department heads at the high schools supervise specialized areas and they also teach,” Crowe said. District supervisors are required by state law to ensure that "curriculum is being implemented in a unified manner" throughout the district, he said.
The school district employs about 1,900 people. About 5 percent of those employees earn more than $90,000 a year, according to the DataUniverse database at MyCentralJersey.com.
Crowe said that eliminating an administrative position does not necessarily translate to savings because, depending on job history, an administrator may be "bumped" back into a teaching position at the top of the pay scale.
Crowe, who earns $187,000, said he'll forgo a 4 percent contractual raise next year. It is still not known if other administrators, who have year-to-year contracts with the district, will do the same.













FedUpinWoodbridge 11:40 am on April 16, 2010 Permalink
Let’s get a grip folks . . . what Maras says may make a good sound bite but here are the facts . . . of the 43 K-12 districts in NJ with more than 3501 students Woodbridge spends less per student than all but one. That’s right LESS – the average amount spent per student for districts of a similar size and type of district to Woodbridge is $13,192 and we are spending only $11,326.
As for the number of administrators per student -we rank 24th – right in the middle – right where we should be – and that doesn’t take into accounts the cuts to administration in the proposed budgets next year.
If you think we can afford any more cuts in department heads or vice principles think again! There are gangs, drugs and violence in Woodbridge schools just like there are in schools all over the country. You don’t hear about them because the same people you want to see cut are ensuring the safety of our children. Next year there will be no police in the middle or high schools – there will be three less department heads – there will be two less vice principles – but who I ask you will be filling the void left behind.
If you don’t believe me check out the numbers for yourself – Comparative Spending Guide 2010 http://www.state.nj.us/education/guide/2010/k-12.pdf
FedUpinWoodbridge 11:45 am on April 16, 2010 Permalink
And by the way if you want to know here your money goes, 97.2% of the total cost for instruction in Woodbridge goes to salaries and benefits.
http://www.state.nj.us/education/guide/2010/k-12.pdf
WoodbridgeNJ 5:28 pm on April 16, 2010 Permalink
“Woodbridge spends…” is not relevant. What is important is what WOODBRIDGE TAXPAYERS PAY. The astute reader will recognize the difference. For those requiring further explanation, read on.
Woodbridge Township wants to spend $183 million for the 2010 school year. Where does that money come from, you ask? Well, some of it comes from the Woodbridge taxpayers, some from the Federal government and some from the State government.
Here’s a fun fact….
83% of the Woodbridge Township school budget is paid for by the Woodbridge taxpayers. Go ahead, click on the link the original poster provided. The data is all there.
Now you ask, “how does that compare to other school systems in Middlesex County?”
% of school budget paid by that town’s taxpayers:
CARTERET – 42%
EAST BRUNSWICK – 79%
EDISON TWP – 87%
MONROE TWP – 79%
NEW BRUNSWICK – 16%
NORTH BRUNSWICK – 78%
OLD BRIDGE TWP – 61%
PERTH AMBOY – 12%
PISCATAWAY – 76%
SAYREVILLE – 65%
SOUTH BRUNSWICK – 75%
It is the responsibility of the Township’s administration to get more funding from outside the Township. The taxpayers would vote yes to a $200 million budget if they were only on the hook for 75% of it.
Until that happens, the voting taxpayers will do the only thing they can do to lower their tax bills and that means voting NO on April 20th.
I understand you’re “FedUpinWoodbridge” but I believe your frustration is improperly aimed.
FedUpinWoodbridge 7:02 pm on April 16, 2010 Permalink
We don’t get our fair share from Trenton because Woodbridge doesn’t VOTE! The folks in Trenton are only concerned with getting reelected and if we don’t vote they don’t listen. It’s not the administration that doesn’t seek funding – it’s WOODBRIDGE ITSELF!
WoodbridgeNJ 12:16 pm on April 17, 2010 Permalink
So, local tax revenues cover a smaller percentage of the school budgets in Carteret, East Brunswick, Monroe, New Brunswick, North Brunswick, Old Bridge, Perth Amboy, Piscataway, Sayreville and South Brunswick because the taxpayers in those towns vote?
Christie received the majority of Woodbridge’s votes because we don’t want the State’s financial hole dug any deeper. Fortunately, we elected a man who is actually following through and doing what he was elected to do.
“It is the responsibility of the Township’s administration to get more funding from outside the Township.” OUTSIDE THE TOWNSHIP. The taxpayers do not care if that comes from the State, the Fed or the private sector.