JACKSON TWP — At Monday’s work session meeting, the Seneca Valley school board heard eight public comments criticizing the proposed final budget of $186,666,993 and accompanying 5.03 mill tax hike for the 2026-27 school year.

Several residents from across the school district spoke at the meeting about Seneca Valley’s spending choices at large and continuous tax hikes over past few years.

Jack McMillin, a former Butler County controller, claimed the “cumulative impact” of the tax increase in the last four years is 21.4 mills.

“That’s not a pittance by any standard,” said McMillin.

He said raising taxes has “become the norm” for the district.

“Let’s not think of this as ‘the current increase represents only $11 per month for the average household,’” said McMillin, a resident of Zelienople.

McMillin called for either a voter referendum, or $24 million of the $36 million in unrestricted funds to be reclassified into a restricted account. He said doing the latter would eliminate the need to increase taxes.

“Return those dollars to the wallets and purses of Seneca Valley taxpayers,” said McMillin. “This simple bookkeeping entry still preserves over $12 million in an unrestricted contingency account, consistent with the 8% maximum allowed by state law.”

Becky MacKay, an Evans City homeowner since 2000 said the school board was out of touch with the struggles of taxpayers.

“As I look around, I find very few of you are about to retire,” MacKay said of the school board members. “I think you guys just don't get it. You are spending money that's not your own.

“This is home to us. You are literally taxing the middle class out of having a home in Seneca Valley, because you think it's OK to spend millions.”

Julie Jones, a resident of Zelienople, said the teachers and staff are why many parents choose Seneca Valley, not renovation projects. She said the board has made many decisions which shift the burden of responsibility upon families and parents.

“There’s a kind of toxic positivity, a constant message, that everything is fine, everything is justified, everything is good,” said Jones. “It’s not. A pattern of overspending and your tax increases jeopardizes the future success of Seneca.”

Dana Kirk, the district’s business manager, made a presentation that addressed some of the concerns expressed.

In her presentation, Kirk highlighted several factors she said contributed to increased taxes, including rising costs of healthcare premiums, less state funding than some other school districts and property assessments being based on 1969 values.

Kari Zimmer, board member, voiced her frustration with lesser state funding coming this school year compared to other districts.

“Other districts are getting millions of dollars more than us,” said Zimmer. “It’s just something that I keep noticing and it bothers me and I don’t understand it.”

Tracy Vitale, district superintendent, said part of the issue for the board is the aftermath of 2023’s William Penn School District v. Pennsylvania Department of Education, which called for a new, more equitable funding formula for public education.

Vitale said the decision created “winners and losers,” and Seneca Valley was one of the losers. Due to the new formula, she claimed the district lost $2 million to $3 million in state funding.

On Tuesday, school board President Eric DiTullio addressed the pushback from critics in more depth in an interview with the Butler Eagle.

DiTullio said, “Nothing when it comes to taxes and funding at the state or federal level is easy.”

In response to McMillan’s suggestion regarding the unrestricted fund balance, DiTullio said the funds are a cushion for delays in state budgets being passed. Those funds can cover payroll or other expenses.

“State budgets have to be done by the June 30 date, but they never are,” DiTullio said.

The passing of the state budget can get postponed, sometimes by months and income from property taxes do not come in until later in the fall season. There are school districts who use the funds before receiving them through a tax anticipation note, a loan garnering interest; but the board believes that to be fiscally irresponsible, DiTullio said.

DiTullio defended upgrades to district facilities as necessary to address growing student population and structural issues. Growth in Cranberry, Jackson, Lancaster and Forward townships has led to demand for bigger spaces.

As for claims the district is opting for the priciest paths toward renovations, DiTullio said the most expensive choices would have added close to $40 million more to total costs.

“When people talk about, ‘You took the most expensive option,’ those criticisms — well, that’s not really true,” said DiTullio. “Our most expensive options never made it to the bid day.”

He said he takes pride in relatively affordable construction costs per square foot compared to many other locations.

“People would rather criticize than point out that, ‘Wow, you did the right thing getting all of those done,’” DiTullio said.

“I guess we're gonna have to come back next Monday and see where the vote goes,” said McMillin after finding out the vote was not scheduled for the meeting.

McMillin said he was not satisfied with the board’s explanation, adding if the budget is approved on Monday, a bipartisan group will petition state Auditor General Timothy DeFoor to conduct a financial audit of the district. He said expects at least 20 signers for the petition.

In 2023, DeFoor had listed 12 school districts in the state which had “accumulated large excessive reserve funds while still raising taxes, using accounting methods that allowed them to circumvent state legal restrictions.”

McMillin claimed Seneca Valley is doing something similar and the requested audit would investigate the claim.

DiTullio pointed out that none of the 12 schools noted by DeFoor were penalized by the state.

Lower Merion School District in Montgomery County, which McMillin has singled out, raised its taxes past the state mandated cap with a fund balance. DiTullio said while Seneca Valley exceeded the index 12 to 15 years ago, it has been below the index for the past 10 years.

“We are well within the law of the state of Pennsylvania,” said DiTullio.

The district’s proposal includes a planned real estate tax millage increase of 5.03 mills, setting the total millage rate at 148.88 mills, a 3.5% increase.

A mill is equal to $1 for every $1,000 of a property’s assessed taxable value.

Each approved homestead or farmstead will also received $171.81 in state property tax reduction in accordance with state law, according to Kirk.

The board plans to vote on the proposed budget at its meeting Monday.