Deep cuts in the Cherry Hill school district budget will require eliminating an estimated 72 full-time-equivalent positions and still imposing nearly a 7% property tax increase, according to the administration's presentation of the tentative 2026-27 budget on Tuesday night.
The Cherry Hill Board of Education and administration were harshly criticized by the public for not disclosing details of how the $6.5 million in personnel reductions would be made and specifics about $8 million in non-personnel cutting. Nearly 300 people were online participating through Zoom.
"I was hoping to see more of the budget tonight," resident Kim Gallagher told the board members. She said the presentation did not inform the public of the plans behind the cutting.
Saying she was "really insulted" by the board and the administration, resident Anne Einhorn said: "You haven't given us any details into what you're cutting and, as the taxpayers that are going to be funding this increase, that is not fair." Â
Several parents said they were concerned that special education would be hurt. Others said the growing free pre-Kindergarten program and its busing costs should be cut before teachers are removed from K-12 classrooms.
"Time to stop it. ...Just stop it," resident Jeff Podowitz said of the pre-Kindergarten program. "Vote 'no' and cut preschool expansion," he added.
Laurie Neary, noting the district had problems increasing revenue, told the board:Â "The taxpayer's income isn't increasing either."
Board members voted unanimously to accept the tentative budget. The proposed budget goes to the state Department of Education for review and then is sent back to the district. A public hearing on the final budget and its adoption by the board is scheduled for April 28.
Superintendent Kwame R. Morton acknowledged the district was unable at the meeting to provide the level of detail requested by residents.
Morton said the district has 1,780 staff members and all positions are being reviewed and cuts would not necessarily be made only in teaching positions. Some layoffs would be avoided because the administration has been holding positions open as staff members retire or quit, Morton said. But not all of the reductions would be accomplished through attrition, he added.
"We are in a dire situation. ...We need to level the ship," Morton said.
Amounts are after reductions in the proposed budget.
Sharply higher medical and prescription insurance costs would allow the district to tax beyond the state's 2% limit, or cap.Â
After negotiating with the district's insurance carriers, the medical insurance increase was reduced to 19.9%, amounting to a $7 million increase. The prescription drug premium went up 27%, or a $3 million increase. Busing costs also are increasing by $1.3 million.
The roughly 7% tax levy increase would mean that the property taxpayer owning a home with the average township assessment of $227,000 would pay about $421 more a year. The tax levy accounts for 83% of the district's general fund revenue.
District Business Administrator Jason Schimpf told the board in his presentation that he required administrators and department heads to build the budget on a zero-based approach — meaning spending in every line item in the current budget was under scrutiny and not automatically accepted.
During budget preparation there was "something that became very clear within the process even before our revenues were finalized was that we were dealing with a structural budgetary problem," Schimpf said in his presentation.
He said the district's fixed costs far exceed any growth in district revenue.
Board President Gina Winters is scheduled to testify before the state Assembly on Wednesday about rising school costs and state aid with a statement approved by board members.Â
They cut our special education state aid by more than $4 million, Winters said. Special education state aid totaled $19.43 million this school year and will fall to $15.15 million in the proposed budget, according to Schimpf's presentation.
Previous 70and73.com coverage:
Amounts are after reductions in the proposed budget.
Amounts are after reductions in the proposed budget.
Amounts are after reductions in the proposed budget.
