Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Acti Stipend topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board questions ACTI stipend and personnel increases in 2526 budget amendment
Summary
Board members questioned a proposed $15,000 stipend for the Adams County Technical Institute superintendent of record and a $30,000 business-office increase in a 2025–26 ACTI budget amendment, seeking clarifications on whether these are recurring costs and what assumptions in the budget had changed.
Board members reviewed ACTI (Adams County Technical Institute) budget amendments for 2025–26 that include a proposed $15,000 stipend for the ACTI superintendent of record, a $30,000 increase for business-office personnel and an additional allied‑health teacher position.
A board member raised concerns that the $15,000 stipend—described at the meeting as tied to land purchase and a building project—could become a recurring cost if the project concluded, asking, “what happens when the building project is over? Are we gonna continue to pay the ACTI superintendent of record $15,000?” The same speaker said she had no objection to adding an allied-health teacher, but questioned adding multiple administrative increases before program expansion was evident.
Several board members sought clarity on what assumptions in the budget had been “inaccurate” and what categories of spending had been adjusted; the board was told that collective-bargaining negotiations and forecast assumptions had required some revisions. Jeff (district administration) said he did not have an immediate answer but would try to find details. The board president and other members proposed two paths: individual board members could email their questions to administration for written answers, or the item could be added to the next meeting as an informational item with ACTI representatives present.
Dr. Matzer (superintendent) and other members noted that different contributing districts handle the superintendent-of-record role differently; one board member asked for a clear description of the performance responsibilities tied to the stipend before approving an ongoing payment.
A board member asked three specific follow-ups to be answered: why the part‑time lab assistant role was difficult to fill (which led to the proposed full‑time position); whether the ACTI superintendent-of-record role had previously been paid from another budget or was voluntary; and how many business-office personnel would be supported by the $30,000 increase. Administration said it would gather those details and either respond by email or present the item again as an informational item at the next meeting.
No final vote on the ACTI budget amendment was taken during the informational discussion. Board members agreed to collect questions and requested that administration coordinate with ACTI to provide answers or representatives at a future meeting.
