Plum board approves $56M budget
The Plum School Board approved a $56 million budget on Tuesday for the 2013-14 school year that includes furloughing three teachers and a guidance counselor.
The vote was 6-3 with school directors Tom McGough, Shane McMasters and Loretta White dissenting.
The spending plan projects revenue of $55,863,571 and expenditures of $56,813,993. The board agreed to take $950,422 from the district's reserve fund to balance the budget. A tax increase is expected to raise another $460,068 in revenue.
Business Manager Eugene Marraccini said the fund balance is expected to contain about $1.1 million at the end of the 2013-14 school year. The board also voted to reduce the millage from 22.2 to 18.758.
The spending plan eliminates the family and consumer sciences program at the high school. Three teachers from the program will be laid off.
A preliminary budget called for 21 staff cuts and the elimination of a host of electives.
McMasters said he voted against the budget because he couldn't support taking nearly $1 million from the district's reserve fund to balance the budget.
“It is irresponsible,” McMasters said. “It means next year there will be a referendum for a large tax increase. It likely won't pass. There will be budget cuts, teacher furloughs and program cuts. Do I want to see massive cuts, no. But it may be the answer.”
McGough and White said they didn't support cutting the family and consumer sciences program and the tax increase.
Board member John St. Leger said he is disappointed all the positions were not restored but decided to support the spending plan.
“We need a budget to get school going for the next year,” St. Leger said.
Karen Zapf is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.