School Board Debates Fund Balance

The school board faced internal disagreements on Monday’s meeting over the use of the district’s approximately $14 million fund balance.

With the budget seemingly put to rest with a vote to increase taxes by .25 of a millage president, Mike Eddinger uttered the fateful words, “That went easier than I thought it would.”

The board moved on to the seemingly innocuous "Policy 620" which stated that the “district will strive to maintain an unassigned general fund balance of not less than five percent”. As explained, "unassigned" does not refer to the school district’s total fund balance, but rather the money in the budget not restricted to any specific purpose.

As Director of Business and Personnel Services, James Snell explained, “The current administration [Pennsylvania State Government] is focused on unassigned, uncommitted fund balance.” He said that the state could decrease subsidies to a district that consistently had unassigned funds. “Over the years a larger fund balance could become a target.”

Discussion of the policy opened the door to intense disagreement among the board members over what should be done with the district’s approximately $14 million general fund balance.

“Why not send it right back to the people?” board member Jeffrey Dimmig asked. “If school’s that have a surplus as large as ours is a target, a solution is not to have it.”

While it might seem odd to discuss a tax rebate on the heels of a tax increase, Dimmig never went as far as to motion a rebate for a vote, something which president Micaehl Eddinger took Dimmi to task for.

“If you think our fund balance is too big, make a motion to rebate it,” Eddinger said. “We’re constantly hearing that [the school board] is a bunch of drunken sailors who rob the people blind. I await the motion.”

“The problem with the current fund balance is its $18 million,” Dimmig said. “You can’t negotiate [for subsidies] because [the state says] 'you’re loaded'. We have, by definition, over taxed [residents].”

Other board members disagreed with Dimmig’s assessment. “In five years that fund balance is gone,” said member Elizabeth Stelts, referring to the district’s five-year projections.

Board member Thomas McLoughlin also spoke out against the district’s taxes. “It’s not a fair burden. Demonstrably taxes have increased far more than people’s incomes.”

“We built a school,” said board member Corrine Gunkle defending the current taxes.

All of this disagreement occurred after the board had already passed a quarter of a millage tax increase, and ultimately, though Policy 620 generated discussion, it was unanimously passed while no new motions on the fund balance were brought to a vote.

“Let’s move on,” said board member William Miracle, amidst the heated discussion.