On April 10, the Salisbury Township School District Board of Directors held an operations and finance committee meeting to discuss proposed increases in staffing for the coming year, facilities and spacing issues and possible tax increases.

Superintendent Lynn Fuini-Hetten began the meeting by outlining some of the proposed staffing changes for the 2024-2025 school year based on analysis of Forecast5 data, Pennsylvania Department of Education data and current enrollments.

She proposed five additions to staffing which have already been built into the budget adding one classroom in both first grade and fourth grade. An additional English as a second language classroom at the high school level has been proposed based on an increased number of students with lower level English skills or non-English speakers.

Lastly, a custodial maintenance position and a nurse’s assistant position were also proposed.

While these positions have been built into the budget, a deficit of $200,000 will be created causing members of the board to ask pointed questions of administrators and teachers to justify the need for additional staffing.

Salisbury Elementary School Principal Zach Brem explained how in a post-COVID learning environment the individualized needs of students have increased exponentially in the areas of social emotional learning, special education and ESL.

Assistant Superintendent Kelly Pauling reminded board members not only has the student population become more diverse, the demands of the current curriculum are much greater than in the past. She remarked in the past few years the district has allocated most of its resources into expanding special education, interventions and mental health but said we cannot neglect basic education.

The next piece of the puzzle involved taking a hard look at the facility space issues. Administrators felt while there is adequate space at both the middle and high school facilities, space is an issue at the elementary level.

Fuini-Hetten presented a plan to accommodate the two additional elementary classrooms by relocating Lehigh Valley Child Care to the cafeteria and repurposing other areas within the building.

Director Laura McKelvey posited whether space within the building could be reconfigured to accommodate future needs which rekindled a discussion about the cost to renovate the building as opposed to revisiting the idea of constructing an addition to the building.

Fuini-Hetten said it would cost $6.5 million to build an addition but it might be worth looking into the cost of reconfiguring the existing space.

During the finance portion of the committee meeting, Director Ian Riccaboni informed the board about a Public School Facility Grant Program Resolution which was created to provide grants for public and career and technical schools for eligible facilities improvement projects. Examples of qualifying projects include roof repairs and replacements, HVAC equipment, boilers, demolition or plumbing.

Administrators and Bill Brackett, director of facilities, referenced the master facilities plan to compile a list of projects that could qualify for the grant. The list includes replacing a chiller, high school cafeteria HVAC and controls and upgrading the middle school fire alarm system. The amount the district would seek through the grant would total $1.8 million. The only caveat in the process would be that if the board gives the approval to write the grant it needs to agree to fund 25% of the project as the grant only covers 75%.

Director Joseph Gaither pointed out if these projects were scheduled to be done in the next few years anyway and the district can get 75% of the project cost through a grant it seems like a “win-win” situation because projects will get done sooner than planned and money is saved in the long term.

In her year-to-date financial analysis, Chief Financial Officer Dawn Nickischer reported revenue is on pace from last year at this time but expenditures are again ahead of pace. She expects expenditures to level out in March.

Cash and investments are higher by approximately $4 million due to grant money still in accounts and money from the sale of land. She feels this trend will continue throughout the course of the year.

In response to a question raised by the board at a previous meeting concerning merging bus routes as a cost-saving measure, Chris Smith, coordinator of technology and transportation, looked into merging middle school bus routes. On the plus side it would save $50,000 but it would come with several drawbacks including 50+ students per bus, some rows three to a seat, increases of up to 1/4 mile walk to some bus stops and 5-10 minute increases in ride times.

The next topic of discussion was the proposed 2024-2025 budget. Nickischer presented a line-by-line review of federal, state and local revenues and expenditures comparing them to the previous year’s budget.

The governor’s budget has not yet been passed and as she has done in the past Nickischer conservatively estimated the district will receive 50% of the amount currently proposed. As it stands now, the district is facing a budget deficit of $224,000 which could be eliminated if the district receives the total amount the governor has proposed.

Unfortunately, the district budget must be adopted before the governor’s budget is finalized.

It should be noted the 2024-2025 budget includes the five additional positions proposed by the administration which contributes to the budget gap.

In an effort to be transparent, Fuini-Hetten noted embedded in the budget is the fact it assumes a 5.3% tax increase but if the board does not support a tax increase changes will need to be made and administration is open to cost cutting measures in other areas.

Gaither raised a concern for members of the community who are on fixed incomes. The proposed tax increases hit them the hardest because they don’t get cost of living increases. He wondered how many in our community will find these tax increases a hardship and urged board members to consider the impact on taxpayers as increases hit some residents harder than others. He relayed to the board the sentiment he hears from many seniors who are unhappy because they pay high taxes and do not have children in the district.

Director Carol Klinger offered her own perspective as a retired older adult in the district. She noted she may not have children in the district at this time but when her children were in school seniors contributed to her children’s education so in her mind she is helping the next generation receive an education.

In response to this point Director Sarah Nemitz said “public education is funded by the collective for the collective good.”

Director Rebecca Glenister noted that due to the limited growth in Salisbury, the board is faced with the same questions every year. “Unlike our neighboring districts who have the ability to grow we are asking what can we cut? How do we tighten the belt?”

Newly elected Director Christopher Hoffman expressed his belief raising taxes is a hard sell but if the community knows the money is being spent productively it will make the increases more palatable.

As a board, no decisions will be made until the next regular school board meeting allowing time for reflection as they look to move the district forward while being fiscally responsible.

The next operations and finance meeting will be held 7 p.m. May 8. A curriculum and technology meeting followed by a regular school board meeting will be held 7 p.m. April 17. All meetings are held in the administration building, 1140 Salisbury Road, Allentown.