Meeting Monday Oct. 23 at 8 p.m. in the high school library, the Stanley-Boyd Area School Board approved Option A for the present fiscal year, setting the school levy mill rate at $6.82 per $1,000 in …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
To continue reading, you will need to either log in, using the login form, below, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free website account and connect your subscription to it by clicking here.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
Meeting Monday Oct. 23 at 8 p.m. in the high school library, the Stanley-Boyd Area School Board approved Option A for the present fiscal year, setting the school levy mill rate at $6.82 per $1,000 in equalized property value. Option B would have underfunded the levy for a slight drop in property taxes, but also affected the pool, which budget (Fund 80) has seen ups and downs since the basement was flooded several years back.
As things stand, and the coming school tax levy represents a number 1.31 times that of last year’s levy, reached by dividing the present school levy mill rate (6.82) by last year’s mill rate (5.20). District Superintendent Jeff Koenig explained the final levy versus recent projections.
“State aid came in lower than what was estimated, and the private school voucher aid came in higher,” he said. The first affects Stanley-Boyd as being a high poverty school district, the second shifts funds to private school uses which the district then has to levy in taxes to make up the shortfall, its budget being based on enrollment. As such, the district also took advantage of the increased limit in state aid per student of $11,000, up from $10,027.36. The increased aid will kick in next year as the new numbers are taken into effect. For now, though, the rise is shouldered by taxpayers, pending next year’s adjustment.
With motion by Bob Geist seconded by Chad Verbeten, the 2023-24 levy was set at $4,031,820, with $$3,781,820 for the General Fund (Fund 10) and the remaining $250,000 to set pool finances right after increases in chemical costs and other fluctuations. Then following this with a motion by Geist seconded by Denise Hoffstatter, the district set the 2023-24 budget with revenue of $20,027,558.18, with expenditures at $25,243,160.21.
Those extra expenditures, while appearing at first glance outsized, come from ESSER III funds the district has left as well as approximately $4 million in Fund 46 savings for projects.
In short, the present budget balances, despite initial appearances.
Digging somewhat further, the just approved budget also contains several costs pushed for fiscal year accounting from last year into this year, among them the Toolcat purchase (approved last fiscal year but arrived August 22) and last summer’s bus loop work paid for with Fund 46 savings.
Still to come next summer in addition to the upper elementary remodel, is replacement of the roof on the original school building, a foreseen expense that will also use Fund 46 dollars. But the final analysis?
“I just want to reiterate that I think we as a board would be fiscally irresponsible if we didn’t do this,” Verbeten said passing Option A. It represents a slight increase over Option B but fixes the pool budget, he said, with no known drownings of students who had taken swimming lessons at the pool since opening. “You can’t put a dollar value on a human life.”