Adams County Technical Institute budget approved 7-2 after questions about transparency and staffing funds

The Joint Operating Committee of the Adams County Technical Institute approved the institute’s 2025–26 operating budget by a 7–2 vote after a presentation and extended discussion about staffing, fund balances and the budget allocation formula. Administrative Director Sean Eckenrode presented the budget and answered questions from committee members and participating-district representatives.

Eckenrode told the committee the proposed operating budget relies primarily on district contributions, a state secondary career and technical education subsidy and a federal Perkins grant that the school treats as a net-zero resource for operations. He said the packet sent to districts shows a requested contribution total of about $1,684,000 and that the state subsidy credited back to participating districts was roughly $354,000. Eckenrode said he planned to use $50,000 from ACTI’s general fund balance to help balance the 2025–26 budget and that several other grant or reserve lines were available for equipment and planning.

The discussion focused on one prior-year line item of about $80,000 that some committee members expected would fund a new assistant/administrative position. Eckenrode said that money was budgeted last year for several potential uses — including partial administrative support, outside grant-writing services and small stipends for staff — and that none of it has been spent. "Not a penny of it has been spent," Eckenrode said. He said some of the $80,000 may be used to cover higher-than-anticipated collective-bargaining results this year, but that the school also has unassigned fund balance and capital reserve dollars that can be used as needed.

Committee members asked for additional transparency on how prior-year budgeted amounts became unspent, and they requested clearer reporting of "budget vs. actual" figures going forward. One committee member asked Eckenrode to include a high-level seat-allocation chart in next year’s packet showing how many program seats each participating district could fill; Eckenrode agreed to provide that.

The committee also discussed the district contribution formula. Eckenrode explained the formula uses a 20/80 split: 20 percent of a district’s share is based on its share of 9–12 enrollment across the five participating districts and 80 percent is based on the district’s three-year average of students actually attending ACTI. He said that method is intended to balance fixed costs and usage-based instructional costs. Eckenrode pointed out that, under the formula, Gettysburg Area School District was the largest financial contributor in this budget cycle (about $451,517) while Conewago Valley School District’s assessed share in the packet was approximately $293,609; he emphasized population and enrollment patterns drive those differences.

Several committee members raised concerns about overall transparency and governance processes, including how hiring and contracting decisions are communicated back to each home board. Multiple members sought assurances that the Joint Operating Committee (JOC) retains sole authority for budget transfers and contract approvals. Eckenrode and other staff reiterated that financial-system access is limited to two or three staff members and that all budget transfers and invoices are reported monthly to the JOC for approval.

During the meeting JOC members also debated whether to leave larger contingency lines in the budget for a planned administrative hire (described in discussion as a potential assistant or director-level position) or to withhold that amount until the hiring and collective-bargaining processes conclude. The committee ultimately voted to approve the full operating budget as presented.

Votes at the meeting were recorded by roll call: Buckley — yes; Mechley — yes; Salinger — yes; Swope — no; Flickinger — yes; Krug — no; Miller — yes; Goetz — yes; Kinshu — yes. The committee chair announced the motion passed, 7–2.

Eckenrode closed by reiterating that ACTI has conserved fund balance in recent years, that the institute is pursuing program expansion (including discussion of adding a second allied health section to serve waiting students), and that he welcomes tours and follow-up questions from participating boards. Committee members asked for more-detailed "budget vs. actual" reporting and for clearer documentation of seat allocations in next year’s packet.

The committee approved the 2025–26 operating budget and then adjourned.