Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 7 · column 5 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
Budget
From Page A1
personnel, teachers and administrators should be on a more even keel; and they did not want taxes raised this year (a point they heard repeatedly from those who spoke against the budget).
While they felt the 5 percent raise for teachers was fine they did not think the difference in the raises for administrative personnel and support personnel was fair. They cut function one (instruction) by $60,684 — most of which came from administrative salary proposals.
They also asked superintendent Dr. David Gangel to provide them with a breakdown of the support personnel (bus drivers, food service workers, maintenance workers, and teachers aids) salaries and what a 3.75 percent raise would mean in additional funds as compared to the 3 percent which was proposed. Once they determine this they will instruct the funds necessary to ensure that raise for support personnel be factored back in.
They cut function two (administration, attendance and health total) by $35,311 to bring it to $526,707. They then changed function three and made it $584,893 instead of $579,052.74 in order to add in additional funds for bus drivers and personnel.
Function four, function five and function seven, for operation and maintenance services, school food service and debt service respectively, were passed as they stand in the proposed budget. The amount proposed for function four was $501,263.30 (about $30,000 under last year’s budget), for function five $89,591 (a little over $6,000 more than last year) and for function seven, $279,476.26, or $41,328.49 less than last year.
They reduced function six, facilities, from $381,500 to $239,500. The reduction were made from the architec
95.7%