ShareThis Page
New budget to hurt taxpayers most |

New budget to hurt taxpayers most

| Thursday, April 22, 2004 12:00 a.m

Mt. Lebanon school directors considered three budget drafts, and the one they ultimately chose as the official preliminary budget would cost taxpayers the most.

The school board narrowly approved a $66 million preliminary budget with a 3-mill tax increase that would raise the property tax rate by 14.9 percent, to 23.16 mills. Under the tax increase, the owner of a $135,750 home — the median in Mt. Lebanon — would pay $407 more in taxes, or $3,144.

Of the 3-mill increase, 2.6 would go toward the operating budget and the other 0.4 mills would start a capital and maintenance fund to pay for emergency or one-time-only expenses, something board President Ron Hoffman said he’s advocated in the decade he’s been on the school board.

“Each year, we have to scramble for funds for emergencies” such as replacing equipment, he said.

The district’s seven elementary schools are in various stages of renovation, and there is talk of a high school renovation when that project is done. The 0.4 mills would translate to more than $835,000 for the fund. One mill brings in about $2.1 million for the district.

Hoffman said the district should not dip into its surplus or fund balance, currently around $4.8 million, for those types of expenses.

The fund balance, which represents 7.25 percent of the budget, helps the district to obtain lower interest rates on bond issues, and came in handy when the district floated a $50 million bond for the elementary school renovations and construction of an indoor swimming pool. The pool is still in the planning stages.

The other two options before the board were budgets with a 2.5-mill and 2.6-mill tax increase, totally for the operating budget.

Three school board members said they found all three proposed budgets unacceptable. James Blazeck, Jean Palcho and Rodney Shepherd voted against the tax increase.

“I just feel like the budget has gone out of control,” Shepherd said.

The largest expense leading to the tax increase was salaries and benefits, and board members noted that the largest expense in any school district is its employees.

Palcho noted that the district’s budget called for hiring 17 to 19 new employees, and replacing 14 of 15 retirees. Student population has declined by nearly 100 students in the past two years to 5,544, while per-pupil cost has increased by more than $2,000 in that time, to $11,969. Shepherd suggested cutting positions by attrition.

All four new board members — Sheldon Campbell, Rene Garson, Sue Rose and Joe Rodella — supported the budget and the tax increase. Rodella was out of town on business and didn’t vote, but offered a statement that Hoffman read at the meeting.

The district raised taxes last year by 2.04 mills, and the municipality raised taxes by 0.35 mills in December. Residents turned out at commissioners’ meetings in favor of the municipal tax increase, saying it was needed to continue services at the level they wanted.

But the three residents that spoke at Monday’s school board meeting were fed up.

“This budget as proposed doesn’t deserve your approval,” said Bill Schmeltzer.

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.