SACO — After about four hours of deliberation on Monday night, the City Council approved a 2018 fiscal year budget that will increase the mil rate by 21 cents.
The council approved a nearly $26.6 million gross expenditure city budget and a $35.7 million school budget. In addition, the city will pay nearly $1.3 million in county taxes.
Monday’s vote was the final vote for the municipal budget. The school budget will go before residents who get the final say at a city-wide referendum in June.
The city and proposed school budget, along with the county tax, will increase the current mil rate of 19.42 to 19.63. This would mean a property owner for a $200,000 home would see an annual tax increase of about $42.
The school budget was reduced about $650,000 from the original proposal made earlier this year.
Much of this reduction — about $450,000 — came from a reduction of health care costs.
City Council voted for an additional $200,000 in reductions. As proposed by City Councilor Kevin Roche, this includes reduction of one teacher by articulation, a decrease of $81,000 in the technology department by eliminating a data management position and lowering the administration department’s budget by $44,000.
School officials opposed the reductions.
School Board member Garret Abrahamson said the School Department had put forth “a darn good” budget. “It’s lean, trust me,” he said.
A proposal to eliminate a principal position, that would have cut the school budget by another $130,000, failed.
Councilor David Precourt, who favored eliminating the position, said the city also had to think of the elderly, who couldn’t afford to pay their taxes. “Enough is enough,” he said.
C.K. Burns School Interim Principal Patrick Conley said cutting the principal position would have a drastic effect on the School Department. “It’s more than a full-time job,” he said. He strongly urged the council retain the position, and received a loud round of applause by school officials.
— Staff Writer Liz Gotthelf can be contacted at 282-1535, ext. 325 or [email protected].
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less