ShareThis Page
EF board OKs budget after missing deadline |

EF board OKs budget after missing deadline

Joanna Blair
| Thursday, July 11, 2002 12:00 a.m

The Elizabeth Forward School Board Wednesday night approved a $28.4 million budget that calls for no tax increase or reduction in programs but makes significant cuts in the budgetary reserves.

Passage of the spending plan by a 6-3 vote comes 10 days after the state’s June 30 deadline for districts to have a budget in place.

Voting to approve the budget were Joan Astrab, William Boucher, John Clark, Laurie MacDonald, Lowell Meek and Linda Bennett. Eva Bizzozero, Michael O’Rourke and Ron Skrinjorich voted against the spending plan.

Elizabeth Forward was the only one of the 42 suburban school districts in Allegheny County that had been operating without a budget since the fiscal year began on July 1.

Without a budget, the district was forbidden to pay its bills, according to the state Department of Education.

The board debated the budget for months, with an early version calling for no tax increase but eliminating almost all extracurricular activities, including sports programs.

The board finally agreed last night to cut the fund balance by $100,000 and the budgetary reserve by $200,000.

The fund balance, which has been reduced to $82,000, is money set aside for unexpected emergencies. The budgetary reserve is money that was being set aside for possible increases in a new contract for nonprofessional employees. Those contract talks are ongoing.

The district’s tax rate for 2002-03 remains at 20.61 mills.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.