The Plum School Board has backed off its plan to cut 21 teaching positions to help balance the $55.2 million preliminary budget.
The board's decision during a Thursday night budget workshop could restore a host of electives that board members recommended cutting last month.
School director Sal Colella, education committee co-chair, said that 17 positions that were to be eliminated have been placed back in the budget. He said the committee recommends adding two sixth-grade teachers.
Consideration is being given to filling a vacant elementary music teaching position and hiring an additional kindergarten teacher.
The positions at the high school that have been placed back in the budget are: three ROTC instructors, three business education teachers, two technical education instructors, one librarian, one guidance counselor, and the television production teacher.
Two computer instruction positions, two world language positions, and two technical education positions have been restored at Oblock Junior High School.
The preliminary budget, which originally showed a $1.5 million budget deficit, now calls for a tax increase that would raise an additional $460,068 in revenues. The exact millage rate has not been determined.
Staff cuts and program eliminations would save $591,612. The budget would be balanced by taking $448,300 from a reserve fund.
A final vote on the budget is scheduled for 7 p.m. June 25.
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 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.