Pulaski schools operational referendum seeks $1.5M to $1.9M

The Pulaski Community School District has been busy with trying to sell voters on a capital referendum to expand and improve schools, but there is another referendum question on the ballot Nov. 8 asking voters to allow the district to exceed its state-imposed revenue limit for the next five years.

If approved by voters, the district will be allowed to exceed the limit by $1.5 million when it comes time to establishing the 2023-24 budget, and that limit increases by $100,000 annually until the fifth year, which puts it at $1.9 million. Saying yes to the question is expected to add 58 cents per $1,000 of equalized valuation to the district’s tax rate, which means the owner of a piece of property worth $100,000 will pay an additional $58 in school taxes.

Pulaski schools are in a unique position compared with other districts in the state in that its student population continues to increase annually, so it’s not looking at having to cut programs or staff. However, this referendum is meant to keep the existing teachers and staff from wondering if the grass is greener in another field, according to business director Mark Logan.

“The district is looking to remain competitive with our neighboring districts,” Logan said. “Our revenue limit is the second lowest in the area in terms of per student funding, and our operational budget is also second lowest. To keep competitive with salaries and benefits, we’re looking to go above the set revenue limit from the state.”

The salaries and benefits are only one piece, although that’s the biggest piece, Logan said. If the capital referendum passes and the district gets more wiggle room to expand, it will be necessary to have the funding to operate those facilities.

The current levy limit is just shy of $40.7 million, according to Logan, for a school district serving 3,755 students.

This is the first operational referendum the district has requested for staff pay. In 2013 and 2015, according to Logan, the district asked for referenda to pay for technology upgrades and increases.

If the district did not seek voter approval to exceed the revenue limits, it would be easy for staff to seek employment elsewhere, Logan said, as other districts have higher limits and could sweeten the pot for prospective educators, administrators and support staff. He said the district would also have to find the dollars by looking at cutting programs and services, a hard task for a school district ranking in the higher echelons in the state report card system and known for a variety of highly successful student programs.

“We’d have to look at potentially reducing those to maintain the staff that we have,” Logan said. “We do have a lot of great programs, and we have a diverse population as far as the programs — from tech ed all the way to marching band.”

Aly Truss, the district’s human resources director, noted there is a nationwide teaching shortage, which makes it not only important to keep the existing staff but to find a way for new people to come in and succeed retiring employees. To not ask for the operational referendum “would lead to a greater shortage of staff.”

Even with the recent jumps in inflation, Truss and Logan both believe the $1.5 million to $1.9 million would allow the district to keep its wages and benefits competitive.

“We did a compensation and benefits review of many of our neighboring school districts and felt that amount would put us competitive range,” Truss said.

Logan noted that parents and taxpayers in Pulaski have always put a value on teachers, so he’s been hearing a lot of support for the operational referendum.

“Pulaski holds pride in that we run our own food service program and our own buses and our own custodial staff,” Logan said, highlighting that other districts have to contract one or more of those services out. “Having the benefits of those services in-house impacts our employees. We’ve seen high regard for those individuals. There’s really no question that people want to be in the district and retain good teachers and staff members.”

Logan noted that the amounts can be reined in if staff realize they could maintain a healthy budget with a lesser amount like $1.2 million, and that good stewardship of the budget could also bring down what the tax impact would be.

“The (school) board has the authority to set that tax levy annually, so that would be at their discretion,” Logan said. “Right now, our estimates are very accurate, so I would assume that those funds would be needed to go toward compensation. While they’d have the authority to, that doesn’t mean they automatically would.”

Logan feels the increasing student population is a benefit to the district as it makes its case to voters on Nov. 8.

“Districts that are dealing with declining enrollment have multiple things against them right now like a frozen per-member revenue limit and less members. It really impacts funding,” Logan said. “The fact that we are able to see increases not only helps from the funding side also ensures that the money put toward staff really is needed.”