But board member questions why other adjustments aren’t made now
By Jennifer Eisenbart
Staff writer
A revised, likely no-tax-increase Burlington Area School District budget passed as expected Monday night, but not without some discussion about what should be finalized – and what’s still up in the air.
The School Board passed the amended budget with just one “nay” vote, from Roger Koldeway. Philip Ketterhagen abstained.
Koldeway raised a number of questions during the meeting, including why the budget hadn’t been adjusted for items such as the technology lease contract coming in cheaper than planned.
Items such as that, plus his feeling that teachers should pay a portion of their health insurance premiums, led Koldeway to vote no.
“I believe that the correct numbers that they can give can be given to the public at the annual meeting,” Koldeway explained. “And there’s no guarantee they’re going to do it.”
However, in talking to former Business Administrator and now Superintendent Peter Smet, the questions Koldeway raised are valid – but normally not dealt with till later in the process.
“Normally what school districts do … they do a preliminary budget,” said Smet. “That is the budget the board adopts prior to July 1, though boards have done it later.
“Then you do what’s called an adjusted budget,” added Smet, pointing out that adjustment is normally done between Oct. 15 and 30 – the period during which the district receives final student count, final state aid numbers and property valuations.
Smet said the district did things a little differently this year. With the preliminary budget set in June before the state aid numbers came in, the district got a surprise in the form of $700,000 more in state aid than anticipated.
“I wanted to go back to the board and have the board adjust their preliminary budget, so the information is as accurate as we can be going into the annual meeting,” Smet said.
However, there are a number of issues that still need to be addressed – including student count, open enrollment, staffing, short-term borrowing rates and the like.
“All of those things are going to be happening here,” Smet said. “When those are done, we do our budget adjustment.”
The majority of those numbers won’t be final until after the annual meeting – which the board voted to schedule on Aug. 27 at 8 p.m.
“They will be adjusted,” Smet emphasized. “They usually are adjusted in October.”
Smet admitted the process is a little backward, and the state itself is at fault as all school districts face the same issue.
“School districts are doing their budget adjustments and setting their levy for a year that began in July … and we’re getting numbers in August, September, October,” Smet said. “We’re over 30 percent into our fiscal year before we have all of the information we need to know.
“That’s very awkward,” he added. “But it is that way for everyone in the state.”
I feel we are so fortunate to have Mr. Smet as our school district’s Business Administrator and Superintendent. I have always felt that he has been straight forward and fair in regard to budget issues, and I have complete confidence in his recommendations to the board.
Awkward? Its the way everyone else does it?
Talk about Passing the Buck!
And how about paying for Each Student who’s Parents Can’t pay ? If it cost say $15,000 per Student x even 25 ? = $375,000 .. Were is this going to come from?
Add Those Free Lunch Programs? And Who knows what else is on that List? Let the Taxpayers see that List of who’s Paying their way and How many aren not!
Then their is the Sore Issue are the Teachers being Paid Enough or Too Much or Too Little?
Considering ALL the Costs , Benefits, into the Equation.. Not just their Salaries..
And how can you not Increase Property Taxes at least Per Indexed to Inflation? Is that not Passing it off to the Next Yr? And Not Paying-As-We Go instead?
I expect My RE Taxes to go Up at least per Inflation for the Area I live in and If the Value of my Home has Decreased, that’s My Problem, not the County..
Once you commit to paying people their Incomes( Salaries and Benefits) you have to Honor that committment , regardless.. Those People Buy their Homes and Finance Their Lives based upon that committment.. Don’t make them the Scapegoat for MisManagement of funds /expenses or property values that Happen to Go down ..
If you hired someone for a Certain Total Amt. of Income and Benefits? You Don’t change it to Paying them Less at a later time..You Honor your Committments to them..One way or another..
This will Expose alot more than is..and has been done.. And maybe more Municipalities/Towns/Cities will have to do like those In California Have had to do.. File Bankruptcy for Over Committing themselves..and exposing Inept Management of The Cities Funds..among other causes..