Keystone Central trustees direct staff to bring 3.5% tax‑increase budget option amid multi‑million shortfall

Keystone Central School District trustees reviewed a preliminary general fund budget on May 26 and instructed staff to bring a budget option that includes a 3.5% property tax increase to the district’s June meeting for submission to the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE).

The move came after Joanie, the district’s presenting finance staff member, said the original near‑$97 million proposal had been reduced by about 4.5% through attrition, technology and other cuts but that the district still faces a notable gap. A trustee summarized current projections as “approximately a $3.6 million shortfall” compared with last year’s forecast, while Joanie said ongoing tracking placed the likely shortfall nearer $2.0–$2.5 million depending on late insurance claims. Joanie also said the district is carrying about $800,000 in additional health‑care claims so far this year that could increase as late claims are processed.

Why it matters: The board must balance raising local property taxes with cutting programs or staff, but large portions of the budget—roughly 70% as staff noted—are wages and benefits bound by collective bargaining agreements, constraining immediate cuts. Trustees debated whether to accept recurring grant and subscription‑based costs now or to pursue deeper structural changes that would take months and require coordination with PDE.

Trustees split on the path forward. Several members, including Chair Chris, said they were prepared to accept a 3.5% increase now to buy time to pursue operational and staffing studies next year. ‘‘I’m going to go ahead with a tax increase,’’ Chair Chris said, acknowledging it would be painful for some taxpayers. Other trustees urged more aggressive spending freezes or an outside staffing and operations study to provide objective recommendations. Trustee Jason recommended making independent third‑party studies policy whenever they relate to furloughs or sensitive staffing decisions to avoid perceived conflicts of interest.

Board members discussed the timeline for any furloughs or contract changes if the board ultimately pursues reductions: one trustee warned that furloughs based on economic need require months of advance work and PDE involvement and are not feasible on a few weeks’ timeline. Multiple trustees emphasized that even if the board adopts a tax increase now, staff should continue identifying discretionary savings and trimming the budget as it finalizes the proposal.

What’s next: Joanie confirmed she will prepare and bring a single budget option reflecting the 3.5% tax increase to the June meeting for the board’s consideration and for upload to PDE. The finance meeting was adjourned at about 3:41 p.m.; trustees then continued an informational session to complete the remainder of the agenda. No formal vote to adopt a tax increase was recorded at the May 26 meeting.