The online version of the Kittanning Paper contains the same articles as are in print but there is also the option to comment on the articles, including this one (below). For the past several months there have been many articles in regard to the Armstrong School District and many specifically relating to the status of Elderton High School.
Here is a very interesting posting from this week:
“Please explain the math you are using when you make this statement: “The Elderton attendance area generates enough tax revenue to pay for the operation of the school and contributes to the debt service for schools in other areas of ASD.” Please indulge me for my own edification and please explain this to the people of: East Brady, Worthington, Shannock Valley, Dayton, Kittanning, and Ford City.
I am using the ASD reported attendance area Revenue and Expenditure Statement and I don’t see where you can make this claim.
The people from Elderton are good upstanding people that contribute positively to the community. We want your children to have as stellar of an education as possible, but not at the expense of other children’s education within the district. The misconception that the ASD needs Elderton and their taxes in the ASD is not factual. However, Elderton attendance area does need the ASD in order to keep their facilities open. Surrounding School districts sought for consolidation would and will not keep the Elderton Jr. Sr. High School open and renovate the facility. Our wanting for Elderton to remain within the district has nothing to do with revenues provided by the Elderton attendance area. Everyone has access to the data from the ASD for attendance area revenues and expenditures. We urge you to review them. (See above web-link) Yes, if Elderton attendance area is to remain within the ASD, the ASD needs to close and consolidate Elderton in order to reduce expenditures in facilities and staffing. This is where the greatest gains are to be had. However, a positive affect to the revenue stream for the ASD is also created by a secession of Elderton along with their revenues.Our reason for posting this particular comment? Savings is a very difficult thing to show.
If secession to a neighboring school district is truly pursued by Elderton attendance area, for the price tag placed on the buildings you will find that the insured values of the facilities and assessed market value of the acreage should be a fair market price. Do insurance companies generally place higher replacement values on facilities that they insure? Regardless, the insured value of the buildings and the assessed market value of the acreage is the place to begin negotiation at a minimum. When Sugar Creek Elementary was closed by the ASD and re-opened to be continued to be used as an elementary school by the Karns City School District they paid for the facilities as such at that time. Other facilities that were closed and no longer to be used as a school have gone at lower prices. Which way would Elderton prefer it to be when their buildings are assessed for their value?
Do not get me wrong. I am NOT against Elderton, the people of Elderton, or the students of the Elderton attendance area. I am for ALL of the townships, boros, and municipalities and ALL of the people, and ALL of the students of the ASD. Elderton is not its own school district and has not been since the 1960’s. Due to declining enrollment, low student to teacher ratio, and ever increasing costs to educate a student (higher than all other attendance areas)it was time to close the facility and consolidate. If you truly believe that your above statement is correct, you may want the Elderton attendance area to earnestly pursue secession.”- Adam Scaife
We haven’t had a tax increase in this school district since approximately 2002 when the taxes settled at the current rate of 55 mills. Cost of education has gone up each year–so the “savings” have been used in one of two places. It is either being applied to off-set the increasing cost of operating a bloated school district (without increasing taxes)–or it is sitting in an over-taxation savings account (Fund Balance). Your savings which resulted from reducing costs are exactly in one of those two places.
And yes, there is savings which resulted from closing EHS. You simply can not remove the operation of a building and its associated staffing and not have “savings”.
The question is why hasn’t that savings been returned to the taxpayers in the form of a millage reduction?
