The Salisbury Township School District board met April 12 to review the district’s revenues, expenditures and investments. Revenues compared to, this time last year, are slightly higher at about $36 million compared to $33 million last year. This is nearly 10% higher than what was brought in last year.

Expenditures, are “drastically under” without a specific reason as to why. All normal expenditures are coming in, but a $4 million gap exists and it’s anticipated incoming bills and expenses will level this out around May or June.

A big jump on the cash and investment side reflects $6 million from bond proceedings and $34 million in new bond money that will be dispersed in phases toward completion of specific projects.

The board is expecting some growth in the fund balance this year based on specific budgetary items that were expenditures, which placeholders were created for, paid out of Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief funds.

There are upcoming dates to note for the budget process. May 10 is the adoption of the proposed final budget. May 25 is the deadline the budget is made available to the public and June 14 will be the adoption of the final budget.

For the district’s millage value, one mill is $1,323,000. Local revenue sources includes a 4.1 tax increase for Act 1 index, looking at around $1,185,000 growth.

As for the state revenues, the governor’s budget is not yet passed, but a $383,402 increase to basic education and $107,888 increase to special education funding are proposed. Since this has not been passed and anything can change from now to that passing, 50% of the proposed funding was built into the budget reflecting an increase of about $245,000. Lastly, federal revenue increases for Title I and allocations for ESSR funds.

A review of the school district’s assessed value revealed a decline over 10 years. Back in 2013 when the reassessment took place, the assessed value was 1.325 mills; currently for 2022-2023 the assessed value is 1.323 mills, a loss of 1,908 mills.

Chief Financial Officer Dawn M. Nickischer explained, “We compared [our assessed value] to several neighboring districts and looked at what their natural growth is in their assessed values ... we found a few due to building of warehouses ... we wanted to keep one that was level ... the neighboring district that we picked, we rolled the assessed value back to mirror ours. So we were looking at apples and apples. So we figured out what percentage we had to take off every year to bring them down to the same millage. And we took that off every year [so] we could keep it level. You can see what their natural growth is. They’ve actually grown $184,995 in 10 years. We lost $1,908 over 10 years. So this is just showing that we have no natural growth in our assessed [value]. So everything that we do basically is reliant on our Act 1 index ... So that’s why it’s critical that we have to raise taxes.” In addition, the school district did not qualify for any special education exceptions removing any opportunity for any additional millage growth in their tax increase.

There were significant adjustments made to expenditures. Reductions were made where possible including any known retirements and replacements. Additional, or new positions being requested will not be filled. Adjustments to department budgets were made to roll back any of those expenditures. From the proposed preliminary budget, there was a $2.8 million gap which has been closed down to about $204,000 after reviewing and adjusting additional revenue sources and reducing additional expenditures.

The board discussed in detail specific areas where reductions and adjustments were made to close the gap and zeroed in on ESSR funding sources allocated toward the additional revenues line item.

Concerns were expressed the administration may be allocating one-time funding sources to recurring expenditures which will trigger more reductions from other locations to cover those expenses in the future. Nickischer reassured the board, “Every particular known expenditure that we have or that we anticipate having is built into that budget,” so debt payments that will become due from funding sources used to reduce the gap have already been allocated.

The board expressed a desire to find ways to reverse the trend of recurring deficits.

Superintendent Lynn A. Fuini-Hetten said programs and staff can be eliminated, although that is not what is best for the district. The discussion also revealed the budget does not allow for capital projects and the administration winds up paying more for repairs, maintenance and periodic improvements although attempts to allocate this in the past were done, the funds were used to close past gaps.

The superintendent continued to express possible areas to cut, in order to reduce expenses, including reducing specials and shortening the school day. Or reducing kindergarten to half day or eliminating or reducing some extracurricular athletic offerings or even furloughing staff for economic reasons.

Impassioned conversations ensued surrounding this topic and in agreement that extreme measures should not be taken. Instead, the board resolved to continue working to find areas to eliminate the deficit without major impact to the students, families and community they serve.

The next meeting is scheduled May 3.