Pine‑Richland presents fiscal plan: 3.5 positions proposed for attrition, paraprofessional cuts and activity fees eyed

During the April 7 planning meeting, district administrators laid out a multi‑part plan to address a structural revenue shortfall that they said will worsen next year if unaddressed.

Dr. Miller said the district has relied on one‑time or capital surpluses in prior years and faces continuing pressure from the common level ratio (CLR) on local revenues. He told the board the district is recommending the attrition of 3.5 positions (reducing the district’s teacher count from 339.5 to approximately 336) and other structural changes rather than relying on one‑time reserves.

Key staffing and budget details presented by administration included:

- Teacher positions: recommended attrition of 3.5 positions, reducing the district total from 339.5 teachers to approximately 336. - Special education teachers: the district currently lists about 37 special‑education teachers and recommended moving to 36. - Paraprofessionals: current staffing is around 72 paraprofessionals; administration recommended reducing that number to 68. Dr. Miller said administrators worked with building leaders and reviewed specific student needs in making that recommendation and acknowledged the recommendation is “not without impact.” - Band position at Eden Hall: Michael Chinchick, a music educator and the district’s music department chair, asked the board to “Please preserve the full time band position at Eden Hall,” saying the role is crucial for instrument instruction and supports many students including those with special needs. He warned that moving the position to 50% would reduce access to small‑group instruction. - Insurance premium update: Allegheny County School Health Insurance Consortium premiums came in at a 5.7% increase rather than the 9% projected earlier; Dr. Miller said that lowered projected spending by about $354,000 compared with prior estimates. - Budgetary reserve: the district currently holds about $450,000 in budgetary reserve; staff discussed possible reductions toward $375,000–$400,000 but cautioned that the reserve is the only place to fund unanticipated needs such as a newly enrolled student with intense special‑education needs. - User fees and revenue: staff proposed modest adjustments to activity fees, facility‑use classifications and ticket prices intended to generate an estimated $125,000 of structural revenue. Administration described a recommended activity fee structure (a per‑student annual fee to cover multiple activities) and said fee waivers are available for students who qualify for reduced/free meals; building principals would work directly with families to address hardship.

Dr. Miller also discussed cyber charter costs and state legislation under consideration that could change how cyber charter tuition is assessed statewide; he said any legislation that moves to a flat rate could materially reduce district cyber charter expenses. He said the board could provide feedback to the legislature but that passage is out of local control.

Board members asked about equity and hardship protections for fee increases. Several board members said they were reluctant to put more costs on students and families; one board member supported modest increases to parking and facility‑use fees, calling them consumption‑based charges that target users rather than all taxpayers.

Dr. Miller said the board will see a proposed final budget in May; changes between the proposed final budget and the June final budget are possible but the administration urged the board to give timely feedback so staff can include structural revenue changes in the May proposal.

No final budget vote occurred on April 7; staff will bring proposed final figures to the May meeting and seek board action to advertise the budget.