Greensburg Salem examines 2-mill real estate tax hike
Greensburg Salem School District administrators have proposed a 2-mill hike in real estate taxes to balance the 2014-15 budget and keep more of the district's financial reserve.
Business manager James Meyer told school directors on Wednesday, when presenting the proposed budget, that he trimmed $250,000 from the spending plan since revealing it last month. Further cuts will be up to directors, Meyer said.
“If you cut now, you're cutting programs,” he added.
An average homeowner whose property is assessed at $16,410 would pay $32.82 more in annual real estate taxes to the district, according to the presentation.
Meyer said flat state basic education subsidy payments during the last few years and escalating pension costs have hurt Greensburg Salem and other districts across the state.
President Ron Mellinger said he and other directors don't want to raise taxes that much and will look to lower the amount of the increase before budget adoption in June.
“Something has to be done, and we have a month,” Mellinger said. “Jim (Meyer) did his due diligence. Now it's up to us.”
On Thursday, Mellinger added he and other directors are concerned about the 2015-16 budget because new staff contracts begin then and pension costs keep rising.
“We're in survival mode this year,” he said. “Obviously, we're going to have to raise taxes a little. Next year, the floodgates are open.”
Directors discussed some possible staffing changes during a closed-door meeting that followed Wednesday's meeting.
“Nothing's been settled with the personnel issues,” Mellinger said on Thursday.
The district has lost or not filled about 30 teaching positions since 2010, Superintendent Eileen Amato told directors. At the same time, enrollment dropped about 200 students.
Within the current $42.27 million spending plan, salaries are up nearly $343,000, and pension contributions have increased by nearly $780,500, a combined $1.1 million.
Revenues, without any tax increase, are projected at $40.48 million.
District officials estimate raising nearly $457,000 in additional revenue with the 2-mill increase, which is slightly less than the 2.2-mill hike they are allowed to impose under Act 1 of 2005.
With a 2-mill increase, $1.33 million from the reserve would be needed to balance the budget, leaving an estimated $1.56 million in reserve June 30, 2015, according to the presentation.
If directors impose no tax hike, they would need $1.79 million of the reserve to balance the budget. That leaves about $1.1 million in reserve, according to the presentation.
The district has consistently had more in reserve at the end of each fiscal year than was projected a year earlier at budget adoption time.
Last year, directors raised millage 1.25 mills to 81.21 mills.
Directors plan to adopt a preliminary budget on Wednesday and to adopt the final budget during a June 18 meeting.
Meyer noted the budget can be changed between the preliminary and final adoption.
Bob Stiles is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-836-6622 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
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.