Although Seneca Valley taxpayers have been successful in pushing for a reworking of the 2004-05 budget, what they accomplish in reducing or eliminating a proposed six-mill property tax increase won't guarantee a spilling-over of that success beyond this year.

Therefore, if Seneca Valley taxpayers want to continue to make an impact on what transpires budget-wise, they must remain watchful and involved and strive to learn as much as possible about the district's operations, obligations and mandates from the state and federal governments. That exercise must include educating themselves on the terms of the current teacher contract, administration compensation packages and fringe benefits, staffing levels in the various school operations, construction and renovation plans, and equipment and supplies purchases.

The current five-year teacher pact expires on June 30, 2006, meaning that full-scale negotiations presumably will get under way in 2005 in an attempt to assemble and ratify a contract prior to the expiration date. Salaries and fringe benefits of district personnel consume a significant chunk of any school district's budget. Once a contract is ratified, terms of the agreement are locked into a district's finances for the duration of the pact, regardless of the hardships a school system might experience along the way.

If taxpayers want to influence the bargaining process, they must organize their thinking, based on provisions of the current contract, and then begin to express their viewpoints in an informed, clear, concise and respectful way. In Seneca Valley, the time for that is drawing nearer than some district taxpayers might realize.

Since the passage in 1970 of Pennsylvania Act 195, the state public employees bargaining act, teachers across the commonwealth have enjoyed wage increases that have, for much of the time, kept up with or exceeded the national inflation rate. Prior to Act 195's passage, most teachers were significantly underpaid, and for some years after the law went into effect, teachers' pay raises reflected that. Contracts included an increase mandated by the state, regardless of whatever wage increase was agreed upon otherwise.

Today, teachers are earning more than many other workers and have not been affected by the wage freezes, pay reductions, other givebacks or layoffs that have been dealt to numerous people in other occupations.

Whether Seneca Valley taxpayers feel their teachers and administrators are overpaid should be a ripe topic of discussion over the next couple of years. Meanwhile, taxpayers should examine certain other issues closely, one of which could be the $379,000 the district pays annually for paraprofessionals, who also are known as teacher aides.

Does Seneca Valley really need 72 paid teacher aides, or even half that many? In some private schools, parents still volunteer their time for that work, and many adults can recall their own school years, when there weren't any teacher aides in their schools and the schools functioned quite well nonetheless.

As part of the latest budget turn of events, Seneca Valley's school directors disagree over the board's role in the budget process. Some directors believe the school board should provide broad direction on a budget and allow administrators to prepare the annual spending plan. Other directors prefer a more hands-on approach by board members.

Regardless, the board is ultimately responsible for whatever budget plan is presented and must be prepared to accept criticism if the spending proposal isn't to taxpayers' liking.

For now, it is Seneca Valley's administrators who will prepare two new versions of spending for 2004-05, in answer to the public outcry over the proposed six-mill tax hike that remains on the table. The board instructed the administration to prepare one spending plan with a three-mill hike and another with no tax increase.

Both of those spending plans will cut spending that the district can live without, but which the administration chose not to live without in the budget's first version.

Prior to June 30, the board will have to decide which of the three plans is in the district's best interests. If the board opts for one of the two new options, the message to taxpayers will be that their involvement rooted out unnecessary spending; it also will cause some taxpayers to ponder how much less their current tax bill might be if they had become involved in years past.

A lower or no tax increase could set the stage for closer taxpayer scrutiny of contract negotiations whenever they begin.

It's a refreshing prospect for anyone concerned about the escalating costs of public education and the drain on property owners' wallets and bank accounts.

- J.R.K.