Board okays $65.7M budget

WESTFALL — In a last-minute amendment to the proposed budget for the Delaware Valley School District, board members struck a compromise said to be in the interest of both students and taxpayers. The bottom line is a tax increase of 1.99% and 85 new SMART boards for students this fall, bringing the total budget to $65,697,008. On behalf of Jack Fisher, the chairman of the Budget, Finance, and Audit Committee, who was absent from Thursday’s meeting, board member Sue Casey read an amendment which would provide for the purchase of 85 SMART boards at a cost of $250,000, a reduction of approximately $38,000 in the budgetary reserve to keep tax increases under 3%, and an additional use of $375,000 of unreserved undesignated fund balance to provide further tax relief. Though Fisher in the past has been adamantly opposed to such a proposal of using funds from the unreserved undesignated fund for tax relief, Casey explained that it was a necessary compromise. Board member Bell Smith said Fisher always does what he can to bring the board together. “It is the essence of team work,” she said. Diane French, member of the public and a board hopeful, criticized this move as political expediency. Smith’s suggestion to purchase computer interactive, white display boards received much support early on from the district’s Director of Technology, Gina Vives, who pointed out that buying in bulk will save the district nearly $1,000 per SMART Board. Vives quoted Susan West, high school math teacher, who stated that, “(Those in) my classes who can access SMART boards have begun to soar above my other students.” Smith says she is a large proponent of integrating more technology in school saying that she will support “anything to give the children an advantage.” “We have not been steered wrong yet when it comes to technology,” Pam Lutfy said, in support of the measure. “It is not uncommon to make this type of decision,” she added. However, some board members argued that just because the district will have surplus funds does not mean they have to spend such funds in what they considered a spontaneous way. Ed Silverstone said that if the teachers or administration wanted more SMART boards, they should have included them in the original budget. “This is impulse purchasing and therefore inappropriate,” he asserted. Silverstone said he’d support buying only 1/3 of the proposed SMART boards. On the contrary, Frankie Colletta commented that the decision was part of negotiations, and though it was made in a short period of time, it was not a knee-jerk reaction. Board member Bob Goldsack rejected the compromise, suggesting that the SMART boards not be purchased, and the $375,000 solely go to tax relief, which would bring tax increases to 1.49%. “We need more discipline as a board … if we have extra, then send it back to the taxpayers,” he said. “Our wisdom as a group is greater than the wisdom of an individual,” board President John Wroblewski said in favor of the compromise. He described the SMART boards as an “indispensable instructional technology.” Wroblewski further stated that, like Fisher, he would normally be opposed to raising taxes by a lesser percentage than the percent increase in expenditures, but in this case he has no objection because of a “substantial surplus” of funds from the past fiscal year. “This district is in excellent financial shape,” he said. Before the final vote, Wroblewski stated, “We have to ask ourselves the questions: is it good for the student? Is it good for the taxpayers?” The budget passed 5-3, with Goldsack, DuCharme, and Silverstone voting in opposition.