Greensburg Salem looks to trim business teaching staff

Greensburg Salem School District plans to eliminate one of three business teaching positions through attrition as it prepares to pass a 2022-23 budget with no tax increase.

Superintendent Ken Bissell said the district can avoid replacing a retiring business instructor because it is dropping a digital literacy component of its graduation requirements.

“We looked at the digital literacy, and (students) are learning that in other classes,” said school board member Brian Conway.

Bissell estimated the district would save approximately $85,000 by dropping the teaching post. He expects relatively minor changes in other personnel-related expenses from the preliminary budget that was presented in May.

That includes salary differences resulting from replacement of some other employees who are retiring or resigning.

When it meets WednesdayJune 22, the board is expected to consider a budget with total expenditures of slightly more than $49 million and revenues of $48.5 million. The district proposes to cover the budget gap by dipping into its reserve fund while holding real estate taxes at 89.72 mills.

The downside of phasing out one business instructor is that the roughly 200 students who would have taken that teacher’s classes must now be shifted into other classes.

“It can be done, but we realize class sizes at the high school will increase,” Bissell said.

High school principal David Zilli noted it also will make it more challenging to schedule all students in the classes they prefer.

“We don’t have study halls, and that’s a great thing,” said Zilli. “We’re dropping 200 students into classrooms that already exist, maybe with 20 or 23 students, and now we’re dropping three or four more in because they have to go somewhere.

“Each time we lose a staff member, it becomes more challenging to get all those students in the right seats.”

Conway’s suggestion that Greensburg Salem students who turn 18 be exempt from paying the district’s per capita tax of $10 and the wage tax of .5% gained no support from fellow board members.

“We can’t charge our students for coming to school,” Conway said. “I don’t think that’s fair.”

“These kids are part of the community, too,” board member Robin Savage said. “They’re working citizens.”

Several board members pointed out such an exemption would create an added clerical task for district staff.

Athletic sponsors sought

The board supported a plan by Athletic Director Frank Sundry and Ashley Kertes, associate administrator to the superintendent and community outreach coordinator, to develop a proposed athletic sponsorship package for a trial run in the fall and winter sports seasons.

Kertes suggested money raised through sponsorship could help offset costs of upgrades to athletic facilities including scoreboards, turf and lighting.

“It’s an alternative to using taxpayer dollars,” she said. “It would benefit all of our students, visitors who come to the district and opposing teams.”

She suggested businesses could be approached to sponsor teams, individual games or Player of the Game honors.

Board members expressed support for the idea as long as it doesn’t conflict with fundraising efforts of team booster organizations.

“There are so many untapped things, avenues that are untouched,” Sundry said, such as generating revenue through sponsor signage at athletic facilities.