Gettysburg Area School District’s Board of Directors received a first look at its 2026-27 budget on Monday, and the conversation was not uplifting.
“This is not a good budget situation to be in,” Business Manager Belinda Wallen said.
Wallen said that even if the district raised taxes to the maximum amount allowed by law, 4.2%, it would face a $4.2 million deficit.
She explained that several factors contribute to the challenge, including the need for a special education comprehensive plan, the need to add seven positions previously provided by the Lincoln Intermediate Unit, and increased demand for autism support, life skills instructors, and learning support. The district administration has also requested an additional social worker, a special education supervisor, and additional technology staff.
The board and administration will spend the next several months examining options. What they cannot do, Wallen said, is tap into the unassigned fund balance or district savings account. Policy states the district must have at least 6% of its budget in the account, which is currently $5.1 million. The recently completed audit showed the district has about $4 million in the account, which will keep the district operating for 13 days if a financial emergency occurs.
“The goal is to never use your fund balance as one-time money to balance your budget. The district has been doing that simply because it hasn’t been raising taxes,” Wallen said.
Wallen said everything should be on the table, including not replacing retiring teachers, reassigning staff, not funding the capital reserve account, cutting positions or services, and auditing students’ residencies to ensure they live in the district.
Vice President Al Moyer, an eight-year veteran of the board, urged his colleagues to not rule out a tax increase.
“As much as it is appealing to do a zero tax increase and become a hero of the community for five minutes,” Moyer said. “At some point, you and your district are going to fall off the literal fiscal cliff.”
The board will review the budget again at its March 2 meeting.
What is the outstanding principal bond amount for the school district as of the date of the last school board meeting? How much is the compound interest on that principal as of the date of that meeting? Who has the bond rollover schedule from January 1, 2000, to December 2025? How much of the four million in the account, if used to fund the school district for 13 days, will be used to pay the interest on the outstanding bonds? How much of the four million would be used to pay down the principal? Where is the evidence that the School Board and Superintendent received a Property Tax Delinquency report before initiating action to raise a bond? School Bonds sometimes get issued for “wants” rather than “needs.” School Boards approve debt. The Attorney General certifies the bond is legal. Underwriters get paid. Bond counsel gets paid. Ratings agencies then assume the taxing power will cover it. But no one is personally accountable if the numbers don’t work. The problem with all this is that taxpayers can’t opt out, can’t renegotiate, and there is no automatic penalty for the overly optimistic assumptions made by the school board. Therefore, the cost is externalized to homeowners who didn’t issue the debt. That is why allowing school boards to issue bonds for wants is unfair to the taxpayers who have to live within their means. Another question would be what the per-pupil debt is, and how it compares with other school districts in the area.
Moyer is an 8 year problem that approved programs, contracts and development knowing that the revenue bringing brought in would not support. A manager he is not!
All PA Public School districts are facing the same issues. The entire PA School district system is inefficient. There are 499 school districts spread over 67 counties with each district having its own fat administration. For starters, eliminate the huge overhead of all the school district administrative offices and implement county based public school administrations instead. One county – one administrative office. Make the budget work without raising taxes on property owners first – work on fixing this ancient system first before even mentioning increasing taxes.
The GASD budget deficiency is ONLY because every school board after aggreing to be part of the ACT project has no concept on how to budget within the revenue collected. They have been like the over indulgent parent spending more on the child than the parent makes! NOT to mention the contracts they approved to teachers, superintendent and contractors. We the tax paying public have to suffer!
This deficit is not a one-year imbalance; it is a structural deficit caused by recurring expenses exceeding recurring revenue. If the district has been borrowing from some other fund to cover operating costs or rolling debt forward, that indicates a structural imbalance, not a temporary issue. What taxpayers should be asking is (1) How much total outstanding bond principal exists? (2) How much total interest will be paid over the life of the current bonds? (3) What assumptions were used in revenue projections for prior capital projects? These are governance questions, and simple arithmetic tells us that this “borrow now and assume taxpayers can pay later” approach has become unsustainable. The best solution might be to fund schools with a unified sales tax, so property owners will not continue to risk losing their homes due to school boards that, over the years, have borrowed without determining the long-term cost to taxpayers and whether they will be able to pay off the debt when it comes due.
A tax increase should be the very last thing considered. There must be things that are nice-to-have or not needed at all that can be taken off the list of perceived requirements.