Friend's SMS: Spending Transparency, Middle School Upgrades, Magnet and Mental Health

 A friend asked me this in an SMS exchange:

    What positions are you running on for the board?  I know I've heard people complain about spending transparency in regards to the new HS. I also was disappointed more money wasnt given to the middle school for upgrades. I think we are a bit concerned about magnet and other services provided to students that excel in school being given less funding due to DEI guidance. I'm also concerned about student mental health and what the board could do there.

My Response:

    As a board member, I would like to make sure that constituents can get a clear understanding of what has transpired in NJSD that has led to certain spending decisions.  While board members do have influence over deciding whether to take something to referendum, there is a story behind what has led the board to make that decision.  And all constituents should have a reliable, forthright and good faith source of facts to debate upon.

    I have much to educate myself about, and one of those key things is getting familiar with the details, laws and processes which result in our school funding decisions.  A video like the one below helps to give an overview of one issue-- revenue limits-- that current members of our board have pointed me to:

 My thoughts about my friend's message:

• "people complain about spending transparency in regards to the HS"
• This isn't the 1st time I've heard people voice concerns about how the money was spent, or how the money got approved, for the building of the high school.  Looking back on school board meetings, it seems like there was quite an effort to inform the public through listening sessions and surveys as well as address, in detail, misinformation that was confusing the debate.  I'd like to bring transparency to spending processes, budget constraints and clarity for constituents to the 'why' behind certain decisions being made versus others.
• I'm not eager to relitigate old decisions like that of the funding of the completed high school.  Rather, I would like to take the learnings from those events to carry forward into the challenges ahead.  As a board member, I intend to take a clear-eyed and good faith attitude into understanding and addressing funding issues.  
• "disappointed more money wasnt given to the middle school for upgrades"
• I can't say that I know exactly what priorities were elevated beyond those of the middle school, or other specific schools, which resulted in funding being allocated one way or the other.  It seems that the former superintendent was intent on renovating the middle school once the new high school's construction was complete stating that "Once the new high school is built, what we would do is renovate this building, the current high school so it would become a 5-6 intermediate school and a 7-8 middle school, already really two buildings connected by a link so it's perfect."   
• I'm curious what specific upgrades would be desirable at the middle school.  Along with asking my friend, a parent of a current middle schooler, I'll make it a point to ask principals what upgrades they think their school ought to have.
• Concern for "services for students that excel in school being given less funding due to DEI guidance"
• I think I understand two things here:
• 1) A concern for decreased funding for services aimed at exceptional students in school
• 2) An attributed reason for the reduction in funding, specifically that reason being "DEI guidance"
• The concern for decreased funding is one I share; I want to ensure that our most talented students are receiving an academically rigorous experience that maximizes their potential coming out of NJSD.  Simultaneously, I want to make sure that all students are receiving a quality education that serves their needs.  Public school is particularly challenging in that all students of an age are required, by law, to be taught by the public schools.  We want to keep funding robust for all of the students.
• The attributed reason for reduction in funding is one I would keep an open mind about.  Budgetary challenges for any organization are usually multi-faceted issues stemming from many different forces.  I am doubtful that we can draw a direct connection from "DEI guidance" to reductions in TAG (Talented & Gifted) student program funding when there are so many other moving parts in a school district's budget.
• "concerned about student mental health"
• I am also concerned with student mental health.  It seems like NJSD has a HOPE Healthy Outcomes through Positive Engagement program.  Is it enough?  Are students and parents aware of this program, and are they using it?  These are questions I would be interested in having answered for myself as a board member.