The Princeton Board of Education’s primary focus was the presentation by an architect on the potential expansion and renovation plans for various schools in the district. Two options for the renovation of Princeton Middle School were laid out. The first option involved a two-story addition, while the second was a more comprehensive wraparound two-story addition, which included a new main office and entrance. The board engaged in a detailed debate about the suitability of the location and the flexibility of the proposed designs. The architect explained the reasoning behind the selected locations, emphasizing the designs’ ability to accommodate future needs.

While discussing these plans, the board expressed concerns about the constraints and condition of the middle school, highlighting the need for parity and equal facilities across the district. The conversation also touched upon natural light in classrooms, the size of kindergarten rooms, and state requirements. A significant concern was raised about the lack of windows in small group rooms at Little Brook Elementary School. Flooding on the field at Little Brook was also brought up, with plans to investigate remediation as part of the site improvements.

The board’s deliberations on the middle school options revealed a difference of approximately $7 million between the two. The more expensive option included a new science lab, which would contribute to a better flow and flexibility for future educational needs. The potential schedule for these projects led to a discussion on the timing of a referendum, with a potential date set for December 2024. Members debated the strategic timing of the referendum, considering the impact of a presidential election on voters’ mindsets and the community’s support for the project’s scope.

The budget for the 2024-2025 school year was another significant topic. The board outlined strategic planning goals, including a focus on early years, wellness, inclusion, and preparation for life beyond Princeton Public Schools. Emphasizing a Zero-Based Budgeting process, the board aimed for a rigorous review of every dollar spent, taking into account the unique aspects of Princeton Public Schools, such as its relationship with a world-class university, small class sizes, and a high percentage of students navigating poverty.

The budget discussions also included a focus on the budget calendar and the process of gathering information from budget managers. Superintendent Carol Kelley and other officials met with principals and budget managers to discuss concerns and analyze top-level expenses, particularly personnel costs. The board provided a breakdown of the percentage allocation to schools, county, municipal taxes, and open space, with the Debt Service Levy and state aid received for debt service underlined.

The intricacies of the general fund tax levy were dissected, with attention on maintaining a healthy fund balance and efficient resource allocation. Enrollment trends and their impact on tax levies were examined, alongside the management of challenges related to tax cap waivers and health care costs. Projections for tax levy rates were discussed, with the utilization of waivers considered for upcoming years.

The district’s revenue sources were reviewed, with a considerable portion coming from the Princeton tax levy and other local sources. The board noted the difficulties posed by state aid fluctuations and its distribution to charter schools. This segued into a analysis of expenses, with salaries, benefits, and charter school costs taking center stage. The board stressed the need for managing budgetary constraints while ensuring efficient resource utilization.

During the meeting, the significant increase in insurance costs was attributed to global factors, with Superintendent Kelley acknowledging the difficulty in controlling student services tuitions. Michele Tuck-Ponder highlighted the need to optimize resource allocation, mentioning the aim to work with the town on parking solutions to save taxpayer money. Technology infrastructure was also discussed, with the board considering the current strategy’s effectiveness and looking at potential future approaches.