The East Penn School Board approved Naloxone, Policy 823, during the May 9 meeting.

Naloxone is an antagonist used to counter effects in a person caused by an opioid overdose. The policy will enable school nurses within the East Penn School District to administer Naloxone as needed.

Starting at the April 20 drug awareness community forum, heroin and opioid abuse awareness has been spreading throughout the district. East Penn brought the group HOPE, Heroin and Opioid Prevention Education, to Emmaus High School May 6. The entire school participated in a two and a half hour presentation about drug abuse. East Penn School District Superintendent Dr. Michael Schilder said the event was a success, stating that students were still talking about it the following Monday morning.

Schilder initially brought the board’s attention to the Naloxone policy, urging approval. After reviewing the board’s concerns over who can and cannot administer the drug, Schilder informed the board persons who are CPR certified can learn how to properly administer Naloxone. For now, the approved policy allows for school nurses to administer the drug. The board agreed as time goes on, the policy can be amended to include other administrators as seen fit.

In other news, Drew Hinkel was appointed principal of Jefferson Elementary School. Hinkel earned his bachelor’s degree at Moravian College, his master’s in education at Lehigh University and has been working in the East Penn School District since August 2007. Before that he worked in the Bangor School District as a full-time substitute.

The proposed 2016-2017 final budget and senior citizens tax rebate program was presented to the school board.

Schilder presented the proposal, stating with the allocated budget, no programs would get cut. About $95,000 would go to the STEM program; $100,000 to technology; $80,000 would be allocated for keeping class size down, $100,000 would go to a school resource officer, or SRO, $100,000 to special education classrooms, $80,000 toward middle school ESL programs and $110,000 to an elementary school assistant principal. There would also be a budget restoration to make up the 10 percent cut last year.

The total proposed budget is $143,170,415.

The board had many questions, starting with the SRO. Board member Chris Donatelli brought in a pros and cons list to discuss the necessity of an SRO. He said instead of having a paid officer, teachers could be armed. There are dangers that come with this option- i.e., having their weapon stolen, a police officer might confuse the teacher with the aggressor. On the other hand, Donatelli said an SRO could teach proper emergency procedure and help students on hand. But Donatelli also warned there have been incidents where an SRO has been known to mistake kids for aggressors as well.

Board member Rebecca Heid asked if the administration would still get to interview any potential SRO, to which Schilder said yes.

During a straw poll, only board member Francee Fuller was in favor of the SRO. Four board members were opposed and the remaining four felt neutral.

Concerns over the elementary school assistant principal also arose. Donatelli asked why there needed to be a new position added if the school district has not grown. Ken Bacher, school board vice president, asked what the position is. Schilder said the position is a combination of two proposed positions in one.

President Alan Earnshaw said the elementary assistant principal would move between the elementary schools, assisting the principals with their tasks. So much of the principals’ time has been allocated toward teacher evaluations the principals are finding they have less time to be with the students.

Though teacher evaluations are important, Earnshaw said, he would like to see each principal’s time divided evenly. The elementary assistant principal would take some of that burden.

Board member Ziad Munson expressed concern over splitting the assistant principal’s time over two schools, but Schilder said it would work.

During the straw poll, no one was in strong favor of the added position and no one was opposed to the idea.

Heid asked if the STEM and technology allocations were a one-time flat fee or an annual fee. Schilder said the proposed numbers were a starting point for the secondary science program with very little reoccuring costs each year to enhance the STEM program.

Further, board member Charles H. Ballard had an issue with the fund balance versus the budget reserve. He listed off local school districts fund balances and budget reserves, saying the East Penn School District has gone too far. He proposed to pass a preliminary budget in order to talk it over more.

Schilder reminded everyone the budget reserve sent out to the board members was an example of what it would be. Moving forward, Schilder asked for some guidance on how to amend the current proposal.

The board members took a 10-minute recess to collect their thoughts. Upon returning to session, Bacher made a motion to amend the budget. He asked the board to drop the proposed amount down to $142,670,415. Board member Paul Champagne seconded the motion.

The budget was not approved. Schilder will take into consideration the board’s concerns and the board will be presented with a revised proposal.

Additionally, the second readings of policies 200-220 were tabled. They will be read at the next school board meeting scheduled May 23.