Strong schools and transparency

Health insurance

How can Upper Saddle River control school health insurance costs?

Health insurance drove this year's budget gap. The district's budget FAQ says the state's general health rate rose 37.9%, and that the district's own costs were expected to rise by more than 30%.¹ In April the Board raised its own projection from 30% to 35%, "based on guidance from our brokers and New Jersey state actuarial data."⁵ The final budget closed a $2.6 million gap with a 3.83% levy increase, which includes $478,941 in health benefit waivers, and 35 position cuts.^1,5

Upper Saddle River buys coverage through the state's School Employees' Health Benefits Program (SEHBP). For 2027, the state's actuary has recommended a further 34.4% increase for active employees.² The commission that sets those rates had not approved it as of late September.

The FAQ says districts in the state plan "accept those rates and have no ability to negotiate or opt out," and that the district's claims history "prevented our district from securing lower-cost options."¹ Districts can leave the state plan, and many have. The largest alternative, the Schools Health Insurance Fund (SHIF), covers 125 school districts and reports a five-year average rate increase of 6.04%.⁶

Ramapo Indian Hills, the regional high school district next door, is a SHIF member.⁶ For 2026–27 it budgeted health renewals approaching 20%, against a 37.2% increase in the state plan. Its 2.72% levy increase covered about half of its health increase; the other half came from attrition, operating savings and more state aid.³ It did not lay off any staff.

Leaving the state plan is not a new idea. New Jersey law has allowed school boards to form joint insurance funds since 1983,¹¹ and SHIF has offered health coverage to school districts since 2016.⁶ The state plan has been shrinking for years. Enrollment of active school employees fell 5% in 2024, 8% in 2025 and 18% in 2026 as employers left, and the state's actuary has added 4.75% to 2027 rates to account for lower-cost groups leaving the plan.² Districts that stay pay more because others have gone.

We found no discussion of leaving the state plan in the Board's minutes from September 2025 through August 2026, and on June 15, 2026 the Board voted to continue in it for another year.⁵ This summer, after receiving updated claims data, the district began working with an independent broker to explore alternatives.⁸ At its September 14 meeting the Board said it is exploring options, including SHIF. It has not made a decision. We welcome that work. It should have started years ago, when districts around the state began leaving the plan, and certainly before a budget that cut 35 positions.

The district already pools its property and liability insurance with other Bergen County districts through the Northeast Bergen County School Board Insurance Group, and renewed that membership through 2028. It shares a police officer with the Borough and a curriculum office with Allendale, Ho-Ho-Kus and Northern Highlands.⁵ We found no record of any of those partners being asked about health coverage.

Classroom staffing

How would we protect classroom staff?

The 2026–27 budget eliminated 35 positions. Eleven were classroom teachers, out of 130, and seven were paraprofessionals, out of 51: 18 of 181 classroom positions, or 9.9%. Administration lost one position out of ten.¹ Three staff members first identified for reduction were later placed into existing vacancies,⁵ and the Board says many others affected by the cuts were offered positions as colleagues retired or left.⁸ Attrition, which Ramapo Indian Hills relied on from the start,³ ended up doing part of the work anyway.

The district's audited financial reports show how the gap built up. Enrollment fell from 1,223 students in 2015–16 to 1,075 in 2024–25, a drop of 12%. Over the same years the district's staff grew from 211 to 229 full-time equivalent positions, up 8.5%.¹⁰ Most of the enrollment drop came by 2018–19. Since then enrollment has held fairly level, while staff grew from 214 to 229.¹⁰ Small adjustments each year, as enrollment changed, would have avoided one large cut.

We think the order should have been reversed. In May the Board replaced the separate PreK–2 and grades 3–5 principals and a dean of students with one PreK–5 principal and one assistant principal, and sought a state waiver so a single principal could serve both Reynolds and Bogert.⁵ This year the two buildings operate as one PreK–5 school.⁸ Three leadership posts became two. Combining two schools' leadership should have produced larger savings at that level before cuts reached the classroom.

Paraprofessionals help every child in the room. A second adult lets a teacher give extra help to a student who is behind and more challenge to one who is ahead. That personal attention is a large part of why Upper Saddle River students do well at Northern Highlands and beyond. The district cut paraprofessional positions wherever its review found that "current coverage exceeded IEP requirements."¹ That brings support down to what students' IEPs require, and every other child in those rooms loses the second adult.

Families have told us they are now seeking IEP or 504 plans for children who previously did well with classroom aide support. If that continues, special education enrollment will rise over the next year or two, and the district may end up rehiring many of the same positions at a higher cost.

The district's FAQ says "no academic programs have been eliminated."¹ The enrichment program did survive, with a third of its teachers. In May the Board abolished the three enrichment teacher positions, one each for grades K–2, grades 3–5 and the middle school, and created a single K–8 enrichment position in their place.⁵ The FAQ also confirms that some extracurricular activities were reduced and participation fees introduced.¹

Transparency

What does transparency mean for the Board of Education?

Transparency is the second half of our platform. This is how the 2026 budget unfolded, largely in the district's own words.

1. September 2025 The district was told of an "unprecedented health insurance increase."¹
2. Sept 19, 2025 "Health benefits" was on the agenda of the Board's retreat.⁵
3. Sept 2025 to Feb 2026 The Board's public minutes record no discussion of the health increase or the size of the budget gap.⁵ The FAQ says discretionary spending was "cut and frozen" during the year.¹
4. December 2025 The first bills arrived, and the district learned the actual dollar impact.¹
5. Jan to Feb 2026 The administration ran impact analyses and prepared options for the Board.¹
6. March 12, 2026 State aid figures were finalized.¹
7. March 23, 2026 The tentative budget, with a 2.75% levy increase and staff reductions, was presented and approved, one week before spring recess. Residents asked why the Board "hadn't told the town about this sooner" and asked it to "give the town more time."⁵
8. April 21, 2026 The district published a budget FAQ setting out the three options it had considered.¹
9. April 27, 2026 At the public hearing, the Board announced that the levy increase had risen from 2.75% to 3.83%, and adopted the budget the same night.⁵
10. June 15, 2026 The Board voted to stay in the state health plan for 2026–27.⁵
11. Summer 2026 After receiving updated claims data, the district began working with an independent broker to explore alternatives to the state plan.⁸
12. Sept 14, 2026 The Board's agenda included a "Health Insurance Update."⁵ The Board said it is exploring alternatives to the state plan, including SHIF, and has made no decision.

The FAQ explains the wait: sharing estimates in September "risks creating more alarm than clarity," so the district held back until it had real numbers.¹ We understand the concern. We think residents would rather see an honest early estimate, clearly labeled as one, than learn about staff cuts in the spring. We are not suggesting the timing was deliberate. Either way, it left families little chance to respond before the vote.

The FAQ shows three options: a 2% levy increase, about 2.75%, and about 6%, using $0, $195,344 and $1.5 million of waivers and banked cap.¹ The Board president said on March 23 that the Board had considered "multiple tax levy options at several points across the range."⁵ Residents were shown three of them. The budget the Board finally adopted, at 3.83%, was not one of those three. We understand the wish to keep waivers in reserve for next year, which will bring similar pressures. We think every option the Board weighed should have been costed and shown to residents before the vote.

Nobody expected residents to raise $2 million, but private fundraising and donations could have narrowed the gap. With earlier notice, the community would at least have had the chance to try.

The Board will always need some private discussion, and the flexibility to make hard decisions. We believe much more of the process can happen in public, and that better decisions come from it.

The Board's own back-to-school letter says it has "heard the community's call for greater communication and transparency" and is "acting on it, beginning with letters like this one."⁸ We are glad to see it. Intentional transparency means building that into every budget from the start.

Taxes and the budget

What is our position on school taxes?

Some residents have described our position as raising taxes and cutting no one. We propose balancing the budget over time, with planning that starts earlier and more tools to work with:

• lower health insurance costs through a self-insured pool
• controls on energy use and costs
• paid programs that bring in revenue
• private fundraising and donations
• volunteers from the community

The school tax levy has risen every year since at least 2018: an average of 2.29% a year across the eight budgets from 2018–19 through 2025–26, then 3.83% this year.⁷ No Board can promise to freeze taxes. Our aim is to keep increases predictable and to protect academic programs while doing it.

Where an Upper Saddle River tax dollar goes

Every property tax bill in town is split between the schools (the K–8 district and Northern Highlands), the Borough, and Bergen County. The schools' share has been shrinking.

Groupings as printed on the tax bill. Schools: K–8 district and Northern Highlands. Borough: municipal and municipal open space. County: county, county open space and library. Hover or tap a slice for its share.

Between 2022 and 2026 the schools' share of the bill fell from 68.7% to 64.1%, a relative drop of 6.7%. Over the same years the County's share grew by 19.7% and the Borough's by 10.8%.⁴ The Borough and the County face the same health insurance pressures as the schools. We think residents deserve a discussion about how the tax bill is divided.

Academic standards

What does the state's "high performing" rating mean?

NJQSAC is the state's review of how school districts are run. A district that scores 80% or more in all five areas the state reviews is certified as "high performing" for three years. At its September 2026 meeting, the State Board certified 35 of the 47 districts reviewed that month. Across its monthly reports from March to September 2026, 162 of 289 reviews reached the rating.⁹ Districts that fall short follow an improvement plan and are reviewed again six months later.⁹

It is a meaningful rating, and it is also a minimum standard that most districts meet. Upper Saddle River families expect more from our schools than meeting it. Strong schools also support property values for every resident, whether or not they have children in the district.

Why we're running

Why are Kyle Kotch and Jeff De Vaul running together?

We started as two independent campaigns and joined because we agree on the issues facing our schools. The platform is ours, and the volunteers helping us represent it.

We are both parents of young children at Bogert who will be in the K–8 system for years, a perspective we think the Board needs more of. Our guiding principles are strong schools, intentional transparency in how the Board works, and fiscal responsibility.

As two of the Board's seven members, we could not make these changes on our own. We would argue for them, vote for them, and work with the rest of the Board to get them done.

We have spoken with residents of many backgrounds and views, and that shapes what we propose. If you disagree with something here, we would like to hear from you.

Questions

Questions residents have asked us

Are you saying the Board mismanaged money?

No. We have not said the Board mismanaged funds or acted in bad faith. We believe there were ways to reduce costs that the Board did not pursue, or pursued late, and that the district can control more of its costs locally regardless of what happens in Trenton or Washington. Every taxpayer benefits when it does.

Is your plan to raise taxes and avoid any cuts?

No. We want to balance the budget over several years through earlier planning, lower health insurance costs, new revenue, and community fundraising; all while protecting academic programs.

Would leaving the state health plan solve the deficit on its own?

No single change would. Ramapo Indian Hills, which buys coverage outside the state plan, budgeted health renewals of about 20% for 2026–27, against 37.2% in the state plan.³ A difference that size would take a large share of the pressure off our budget.

Wasn't the district overstaffed?

The district itself says it "intentionally maintained some additional staffing while we monitored new housing development in town."¹ That was a choice made over several years, and those costs compound. Adjusting a little each year would have avoided one large reduction and maintained a higher level of staffing over time, meeting the town's standards for academic excellence while being fiscally prudent.

Are you asking residents to cover the $2 million gap?

No. Any private fundraising or donation reduces the gap, in the same way savings on insurance would. Earlier notice would have given the community a chance to help.

Will the property revaluation raise everyone's taxes?

The revaluation is a Borough matter, outside the Board of Education's role, but residents have asked us about it, so we want to clarify. A revaluation does not change the total amount of tax collected. It updates each home's assessed value to current market value, so some bills go up, some go down and most change little. Owners who disagree with their new assessment can appeal.