Pleasant Valley OKs 3.9% hike in preliminary budget

Pleasant Valley School District has approved a preliminary budget for next school year which includes a 3.9 percent tax increase.

District officials say they may reduce the tax increase by the time they approve a final budget by the state’s deadline of June 30.

The board voted unanimously at its regular meeting last week to approve a preliminary budget with $103,706,755 in expenses.

Two residents who spoke at the meeting warned the board against passing a tax increase.

“I always believed boards have three basic constituencies to serve — they have pupils, they have staff, and they have the community that pays the bills. This district, it’s just an observation, I think has been overlooking that very much,” said Vernon Barlieb. “I think the road you are on is not sustainable.”

The proposed millage rate is 153.7811, a 3.9 percent increase over 2018-19.

The district’s business manager, Susan Famularo, explained prior to the vote that the district has a past practice of passing a preliminary budget with the maximum allowable tax increase so it can refine cost projections as it gets closer to the final budget deadline.

“This approach gives the school district maximum flexibility moving through the budget process. Millage rates may be reduced, but not increased,” Famularo said.

Board reacts

Board member Laura Jecker said she doesn’t think district residents can afford a tax increase, considering the fact that 43 percent of students in the district qualify for free or reduced lunch.

She said she favors cutting expenses from the budget rather than raising taxes on residents.

“We need to find a way to have what we want for our district, but we need to sharpen our pencil in other areas to get it,” Jecker said.

Board member Ken Cocuzzo pointed out that the district went several years without a tax increase prior to last year’s 1.3 percent increase.

Cocuzzo said the district needs to look at a consistent pattern of tax increases in order to retain staff, make necessary improvements to buildings in the district, and create new administrative positions recommended by a grand jury.

“We’re going to try to keep a lid on the costs, Laura’s right about that. We’re looking in the property committee to cut some of the projects we have to do, but you can’t let things fall apart.”

The grand jury recommended the district add new administrative positions as part of its investigation into misconduct by three administrators who are no longer with the district.

Residents warn

The residents who spoke out against the budget had different perspectives.

Barlieb, 84, said the preliminary budget prompted him to attend his first Pleasant Valley School Board meeting, despite being a lifelong resident of the district.

Barlieb said the district is not giving adequate respect to taxpayers when it puts together the annual budget. He said that homeowners in Pleasant Valley pay a higher percentage of their income to school taxes than most other districts in the state. On top of that, he said, incomes in the district aren’t very high to begin with.

“I know it’s nice to just keep adding, I’ve been there. It’s nice to take the approach that nothing is too good for the kids, and I believe that. However, it has to be seasoned with common sense,” Barlieb said.

Don Moore said the district’s enrollment has been declining for years — a total of 37 percent since 2004.

Despite the falling enrollment, the district still receives the same amount of state funding as if it still had the population it did at its peak because of a practice in Harrisburg known as hold harmless.

Moore said if the state got rid of hold harmless, something Gov. Tom Wolf favors, they would have a $10 million budget deficit, which would fall on the backs of local taxpayers.

For that reason, he said, the board should be more fiscally responsible.

“The school district is fat in fat times year after year. It does not appear to have done like the squirrel who plans ahead for the winter — rather the appearance is that of a glutton who has consumed in excess of his share and has little to show for it later except an enlarged waste fund,” Moore said.