A zero-tax budget was adopted by the Delaware Valley School Board, but some doubt that flat tax will hold up. The big unanswered question is $1.7 million in state aid.Read more at PoconoNews.net
The budget is essentially the tentative budget adopted on a 6-2 vote last month. The same two members, Pam Lutfy and Susan Schor, voted against adopting the budget again.
The problem is the $1.7 million, which DV may or may not get from the state. If the district does not get the money, the board may need to revisit the budget, going with “Plan B”, which would mean a more than four percent tax hike.
Saturday, June 20
Board adopts zero-tax increase budget, may be in $1.7 million shortfall
DV Board adopts budget, not sure it will stick
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
I was at the meeting and heard what board members said and it was also videotaped. The budget they passed is not a 0% budget. Without stimulus funds (not received) it's a 4.2% tax increase budget according to budget chairman, Ed Silverstone.
Pam Lufty and Sue Schor asked to discuss suggested cuts should the stimulus funds configured into the budget not come in on time or be decreased and the board and administration would not answer or set up a meeting sooner than July after the budget is due (June 30). How convenient.
Dr. Finan smugly offered that things were not ordered yet(and what's with all the eye rolling when board members are talking mam?) Really not ordered? Not what the teachers are saying. What was that end of year training about? What's in the boxes in the hallways?
View the video and stop these annointed and publicly paid people from thinking we are too dumb and not worthy of truthfulness.
Why won't they make cuts now and add later if funds come in? Because they have no intentions of cutting anything I suspect. And they have the guts to complain about our children's actions.
My regards to Pam and Sue the only ones willing to be tough in these tough times. What if Kolmar ran their business this way or maybe that's why they're pulling out of here. And Mr Wrobluski what's this you're right stuff but I'm still voting with the tax raise. Dah?
Bob Goldsack attacked Pam and twisted her words. Did you forget the meeting is taped sir? You better look in the mirroe when you start up about honesty.
Disappointing how some smile at your lies and other put their heads down. How spinless.
I say cut out football, shut down the big lights and get serious about learning. The threat of cutting out the Finans favorite past time might just get them to devulge the truth about what can be cut from the budget. I will picket against football if my taxes go up, believe me!
Anyone willing to join me?
The athletic budget for the entire district is just 1.7 percent of the entire 70 million. Compared to the number of students grades 7-12 that are served by athletics, as participants, managers and spectators, that's a small price to pay.
While football is the most costly single sport because of the extreme popularity of the games and community events it generates, football is one of nearly 50 sports teams in the middle and high schools. Home football games are a community event used to raise money for local causes and to generate a sense of school spirit and loyalty. Their effects penetrate much further than just the front line players.
If you cut the only 1.7 percent used for the nearly 50 teams in our district and put it toward regular instruction, would you really expect to see huge gains in performance? I would speculate that cutting back sports would result in more problems that would require costlier solutions. Using the 1.7 percent for sports offers a greater number of students a variety of skills that can't be honed in the classroom. They also provide incentive to keep up academics and a safe, alternative activity for after school, on the weekends, and over the summer.
The DVSD mission statement encompasses developing physical and social potential. These do a better job of fulfilling our district's mission statement at a lower cost than alternatives.
What would Ryan Bolton cut if stimulus funds don't pan out?
Who is Ryan Bolton?
Our original school district budget was based on the Governors's state budget proposal. After the Governor's budget was presented, the State Senate proposed legislation that dramatically cut school funding. The final state budget will probably represent a compromise between the Governor's proposal and the senate bill.
The DV school board passed a budget that calls for a 0% tax increase. All school board members are aware that is unlikely we will receive all of the state revenue reflected in this budget. Therefore, we will have to make some cuts to maintain a 0% tax increase.
Proposed cuts have already been discussed in previous open school board meetings. Some of the cuts we can consider have been referred to as "Option B." This option may allow us to maintain a 0% tax increase without seriously affecting our educational programs, although we may have to delay the adoption of new textbooks, delay the replacement of some old computers, and make other cost-saving measures.
I don't believe anyone on the board wants to increase school taxes in this environment, nor do I believe it will be necessary.
Some training for new programs has taken place, and materials for these programs have been ordered. They are paid for with federal stimulus dollars which cannot be redirected by the state.
The position of school board director is not a paid position. We are volunteers who strive to balance the educational needs of our children with the limited resources of the taxpayers in our district.
Thank you for your comments.
John Wroblewski
Plan B has a 2-3 % increase from what I see. Looks like the Plan B budget will need tailoring to achieve a 0% budget.
In all due respect shouldn't a budget be matched to local needs and not a state proposal? So many here want it all and do so little to demonstrate a need for it. Do we need smart boards in the computer lab and more lap tops every year? My daughter would like a wii but it's not in the immediate picture and depending on things may be a stretch for her birthday. You all throw around numbers like they don't mean much to us even though $50 extra is a lay away installment or a special dinner out that neverwise happens.
I attend many board meetings and and am a single mom and have not observed a serious discussion of Plan B or cuts in A or B. I believe most staff and board are out of touch with many of our difficulties as we try to afford own homes and mine is modest.
Mr. Ryan Balton,
I apologize for the misspelling of your name and am interested in your opinion. You are involved, informed, and I appreciate that. I am amazed with your accomplishments and assume along with your family your school contributed to your skills, which is why I wonder what you do and don't value. I understand your choosing to avoid spot light, there are a few mean critics out there.
Thanks for your response. Often times people are just trying to get me riled up, and that's not worth it.
To answer your question on what I'd cut from the budget... I don't think there is one large item that could be cut. I think you need to look at a smaller level to see where small amounts could be saved across the board.
A few examples: Someone had to pay for all the extra security at graduation. That had to add up to a few hundred dollars that could have been saved.
Where did the money come form to purchase not students but the board BRAND NEW laptop computers? That's something I wouldn't have approved in a million years. The board only uses the laptops to view PDF files, mostly text. There's a couple thousand saved.
I've heard from many teachers who are raising their eyebrows over the commercial curriculums that have been considered for purchase, at thousands upon thousands of dollars. This requires research, including interviewing and surveying the teachers. If the teachers (and ultimately the students) aren't going to benefit from the purchase of commercial curriculums proportionally to the amount of money being considered to spend on them, they should be cut.
I've long scratched my head at some of the needless technology purchased at DV. The quantity of SMART boards vs. their usage makes for an inappropriate spending. Many classrooms have a regular wall-mounted TV set, a flat panel TV screen, and a projector... all three do the same thing. Many laptop carts were purchased (though with a grant and not taxpayer $$) and the laptop batteries die after a period or two of use. More and more technology doesn't equal a more technological school. It's all about how it's implemented and used to improve instruction.
Everything needs to be looked at carefully. A few hundred here, a few hundred there, and the budget could be balanced. I'd need a lot more research to make a good decision. I've been to a few budget meetings, but I would need to actually have the entire budget in front of me and need to interview the teachers and students who need the resources. Without a fully researched opinion, I might suggest a blanket percent cut across the board to any budget category where there is no contractual obligation to increase funding. That way, it's just a tightening of belts and no single program is cut. I think spending a few less dollars everywhere would be the best way to accumulate a bigger savings overall.
Let us remember just a few years ago...when questioned about how the seniors and fixed income people can continue to afford high school taxes...The Queen stated "They can aways move". Great attitude...move from a place where you have spent your entire life...maybe it's time a few others...move on! Wasteful spending..you would not believe some of the things..way more than laptops!
Like what? How can citizens ask questions or comment when we don't know what is waste and what is essential. Try to be more specific and not just critical. Thank you
Post a Comment