BUTLER TWP — The Butler School Board has minimized the deficit for its proposed 2016-17 budget to $2.8 million, down from $6.9 million, but the plan keeps a 3-mill property tax increase.

The board Monday night discussed changes from earlier proposals.

Deborah Brandstetter, director of business services, presented a budget that estimates $100.2 million in revenue and $103 million in expenses. It includes the maximum property tax increase allowed by the state, a 3-mill hike to 97.8 mills.

At 94.8 mills, the average property owner pays $1,696 per year. At 97.8 mills, that would rise by $53 to $1,749, said Brandstetter.

In total, the tax increase would give the district an additional $1.3 million.

Brandstetter budgeted an increase in state funding, based on information from the Pennsylvania Department of Education, she said.

For the 2016-17 school year, she estimated the district will receive $25.2 million for its basic educational subsidy. This school year, it expected to receive $24.2 million and actually received $24.7 million, according to Brandstetter.

However, board member Bill Halle was unsure if the district should expect any increases and did not feel comfortable budgeting such a large increase, he said.

Board President Nina Teff agreed that it was a part of the budget on which the board needed to come to a consensus.

“Are we comfortable with budgeting a 2 percent increase based on the information we have today that the PDE has put out there?” Teff said.

The board will continue to look at that issue and may discuss it at the next finance committee meeting.

On the expenses side, Brandstetter was able to cut about $400,000 from salaries and wages by estimating how many teachers would go on unpaid leaves of absence in the upcoming year. For this school year, the district has saved about $444,000 in wages alone from staff going on unpaid leaves, Brandstetter said. She also said that the estimate for 2016-17 is a conservative one that she is comfortable with.

The spending plan proposed financing the technology budget, reducing the deficit by about $1.3 million that would be used to put smart boards in kindergarten to third grade classrooms and expand wireless access networks.

While, the technology budget could be financed through state-issued bonds, Halle was concerned about whether the board should consider going into further debt.

An option to finance the technology upgrade would require the district to pay $113,000 in the next school year.

This is an ongoing discussion that the board will address again at the finance committee meeting.

Another proposed change that will require further discussion includes student fees.

Currently, the district has a $60 athletic activity fee, and the money from that directly benefits athletics. One option would be to raise that fee to $75, increasing revenue by an estimated $13,000.

However, this only does the district any good when dealing with a deficit if that money is not going only toward athletics, board member David Korn argued.

The proposed budget includes a new activity fee of $75 for the marching band and the musical as well, raising revenue by $22,500.

An increase to the parking fee is being discussed, going from $75 to $100, but, according to the board, the district raised the fee from $25 to $75 for this school year, making some board members uneasy about raising it so much again.

Teff wants the district to find ways of generating revenue that don’t involve taking more money from students and parents.

“We’re trying to generate revenue from our students or our students and our parents,” she said. “I’m not saying that we could not or should not do that. What I would like to see is more focus being spent on how to generate revenue that is more appreciable, that is not from the students and their parents versus $53,000 coming from the students directly.”

The subject of raising student fees will be discussed at future meetings.

One solution for addressing the deficit would include using the district’s reserve fund to cover the difference.

The fund balance is at $11.4 million with an estimated deficit for this school year of $1.3 million. After that deficit for the 2015-16 school year is used, the district will be at $10 million, according to Brandstetter.

If the district used the fund balance to cover the $2.8 million deficit, the reserve would be $7.2 million.

The board has a policy that requires the district to keep its fund balance at 5 percent of the total budget, meaning the district should have a minimum of $5.1 million in its reserves.

That policy also is being discussed as something the board might change.

The finance committee will meet again at 6 p.m. on May 9, before the regular board meeting at 7:30 p.m. at the Harriger Educational Services Center, 110 Campus Lane.

The district is required to pass a budget by June 30.