posted by Joe Polk at 5:27 PM /
The poor economy that has led to massive job losses and job insecurity felt by those still employed is going to make it particularly difficult for officials to balance school district budgets this year.
And it's not only the bad news that already has been reported, but the uncertainty of how bad things could get that really puts school officials throughout the region in a bind when it comes to projecting tax revenues for next year.
"How the economy is going to go, that's the big wild card," said Mark Cherpak, director of operational services for the Steel Valley School District.
This week, Mr. Cherpak, who keeps the books for the financially-struggling Steel Valley School District where 86 percent of the students are enrolled in the free or reduced lunch program, and the finance director of the affluent Mt. Lebanon School District, reported concerns about drops in tax revenues across the board if the economy continues to falter.
Link: www.post-gazette.com/pg/09071/954894-55.stm
And it's not only the bad news that already has been reported, but the uncertainty of how bad things could get that really puts school officials throughout the region in a bind when it comes to projecting tax revenues for next year.
"How the economy is going to go, that's the big wild card," said Mark Cherpak, director of operational services for the Steel Valley School District.
This week, Mr. Cherpak, who keeps the books for the financially-struggling Steel Valley School District where 86 percent of the students are enrolled in the free or reduced lunch program, and the finance director of the affluent Mt. Lebanon School District, reported concerns about drops in tax revenues across the board if the economy continues to falter.
Link: www.post-gazette.com/pg/09071/954894-55.stm
Labels: budget, school district
1 Comments:
This morning the PG reports household net worth declined about 20% in the last 12+ months. In Mt. Lebanon, with more than 10,000 households, this could total more than $500,000,000 (1/2 Billion), if the average net worth is $250,000. Ouch!
From the article (the subject of this post): In Mt. Lebanon, earned income tax revenues have held steady so far, but Ms. Klein said she will suggest that the board consider discussing revenue projections for next year if massive layoffs in the workplace continue.
We are in rough waters and while many are not donning life jackets (yet), there is (and has been) considerable economic uncertainty around every corner.
What concerns me locally is how the school board and in particular Mr. Silhol wanted to protect their ability to raise millage more than 4.1% or just under 1 mill for our soon to come 2009 tax bills. In fact -- the Board passed a preliminary budget in February calling for a millage increase of 1.53 mills (6%+). Double ouch!
Ms. Klein opined in December she did not believe we needed more than the statutory limit of a 4.1% increase. And I don’t believe, at the time, Mr. Allison thought the district needed more than the allowed increase of just under 1 mill. But the Board wanted the flexibility to raise taxes 50% more than the allowed index.
Why do I single out Mr. Silhol? In January the Board had the following motion introduced: It was moved by Cappucci and seconded by Rose that the Board makes available for public inspection a Preliminary Budget for the 2009-2010 school year dated January 19, 2009, as required by Act 1 essentially in the form presented and announces its intention to approve such budget at its regularly scheduled meeting on February 16, 2009. This was a budget with a 1.53 mill (6%+) increase.
The vote was 4-4, which in normal legislative activities means the motion "fails for lack of majority" and the Board should move to the alternative agenda item, which was: That the Board certifies that the Final Budget for 2009-2010 will contain a millage rate at or less than the index rate of 24.786 mills. This would have capped the Board’s tax increasing ability at 4.1%.
But instead of ruling the motion failed, Mr. Silhol (focused on preserving his options to raise millage more than 4.1%) ruled the vote was a “tie” and called for more discussion, a decree I had never previously heard in a legislative body. After additional discussion, Mrs. Cappucci indicated she would change her vote to be in favor of the flexibility to raise millage more than the 4.1% limit, and reintroduced the motion.
This past week Mr. Allison presented his real draft budget with an increase of 1 mill and stated he thought he could get it down below 1 mill.
This leaves Mr. Silhol (and the Board) potentially a bunch of room to raise millage, up to the 1.53 mills limit of the preliminary budget adopted in February.
Has anyone told the Board – Times are Tough out Here?
Postscript - Most if not all the Board members voting in favor of adopting the budget with a 1.53 mill increase wanted it clearly understood they we not voting to raise millage 6%+, they were just voting for the ability to do it. Now I feel better. NOT!
Post a Comment
<< Home