While the just-approved proposed Northampton Area School District 2015-16 budget locks in a tax rate of 1.11 mills, or 2.27 percent, the president of the Board of Education doesn't approve.

The NASD board voted 6-1 with two directors absent May 4 to pass the proposed General Fund budget of $95,998,542.

Board President David Gogel cast the dissenting vote.

The vote authorized the administration to advertise and make the proposed budget available for public inspection.

The vote also approved an Athletic Fund of $179,120 and a Food Services Fund of $2,370,376.

School Director Jean Rundle made the motion to bring the proposed budget to a vote, seconded by school Director Chuck Frantz.

After the meeting, Gogel told a reporter for The Press that he voted against the proposed budget because it includes about $917,000 in additional state funding that he doesn't think will be dispersed.

"To me, it's an elevated amount. The gross figure is not accurate. Plus, I'm not happy with the tax increase," Gogel said.

NASD Business Administrator Terry Leh said the final budget will be on the agenda of the 6:30 p.m. June 8 board meeting. The board next meets at 6:30 p.m. May 18 in the district administration building, 2014 Laubach Ave., Northampton.

During an approximate 30-minute budget discussion prior to the vote, district Superintendent Joseph Kovalchik said that while the $917,000 in increased funding from the Pennsylvania Department of Education isn't guaranteed, the board will need to decide at its May 18 meeting what to do with a separate amount, $115,000 in district refinancing savings, which is certain. Kovalchik indicated that amount could be added to the 2015-16 budget contingency fund, which is listed as $200,000. Or it could be used to reduce the tax hike or for other purposes.

While Leh included the $917,000 in potential state funding in the budget, the revenues and disbursements for this amount "balanced out and is offset as zero," Kovalchik explained.

Leh did not include the amount in the $12.9 million basic education state funding expected for the 2015-16 NASD budget.

Complicating matters, the state Legislature's Basic Education Funding Commission is expected to recommend a formula to distribute basic education funds. Pennsylvania is the only state that doesn't have such a formula. The state's "hold harmless" dictate, where no district is to have a reduction in state aid, is under fire.

"This year has been one of the toughest years to put something together," Leh said of the NASD budget process.

Before the vote, Gogel asked Leh if he included the $917,000 in the 2015-16 General Fund budget. "Yes," Leh replied.

Gogel said that to balance the 2015-16 budget, the administration is using $1.9 million from the unassigned fund balance, $950,000 from the assigned fund balance and $1.2 million in tax increases.

"You're talking $4.1 million that we're overspending," Gogel said. "Using $2.9 million in unassigned funds is way too much."

"Somebody with a $100,000 house will pay $5,000 in taxes," said Gogel.

"I don't think the district overspends," said Kovalchik. "A lot of things coming our way are mandates. I don't think 'overspend' is an accurate assessment.

"Yes, we do have to rein in costs," Kovalchik said, but he asserted that 10 years ago, school districts did not have to provide funding for charter schools, cyber schools and increased costs in technology, security and special education.

"That $4.1 million is not only because salaries have increased. And, of course, pensions are a concern," Kovalchik said.

"We've been trying to bring you a budget that's realistic," Kovalchik said to school directors.

Leh said that of the $2.9 million being taken from the unassigned fund balance, $1 million is paying for PSERS (Pennsylvania Public School Employees' Retirement System).

According to school Director Dr. Michael Baird, the PSERS funding crisis was created by the state not contributing to it and not requiring districts to do so either.

"Districts didn't put in, but employees did," claimed Baird.

"And investments went bad," Leh added, referring to the 2007-08 Great Recession.

Longtime school Director Rundle, who's not running in the May 19 primary election, sounded a conciliatory tone: "I want to thank the administration, staff and the school board for working together. I'm proud of what we accomplished the past years. Money was tight."

"We did not have to lay off and touch a program," said Baird.

Kovalchik and Gogel agreed on one thing: In their opinions, school district officials around the state may not know for certain about funding until Aug. 1 because the state budget may not be approved until then.

By law, school districts in the state must approve final budgets by June 30. The legislature is supposed to approve the state budget by July 1.

Kovalchik and Leh announced at the April 13 board meeting that they lowered the tax hike to 1.11 mills, for a total of 50.00 mills, up from 48.89 mills, which is a 2.27-percent increase based on an average annual tax of $2,888.07, up from $2,823.95, which amounts to an increase of $64.12 annually, $5.34 monthly and $1.23 weekly.

The annual tax, as proposed when Kovalchik and Leh unveiled the 2015-16 preliminary budget at the Jan. 14 meeting and approved 8-0 with one director absent at the Jan. 28 meeting, was 50.12 mills, up from 48.89 mills, which was a 2.52-percent increase based on an average annual tax of $2,895, up from $2,823.95, for an increase of $71.05 annually, $5.92 monthly and $1.37 weekly.

The stated tax rates are based on the average NASD property assessment of $57,761.38.

The new lower 2.27-percent increase gets the district under the state-allowed percentage of tax increase, or index, for NASD, which is 2.3 percent.