In a 6-to-3 decision, Sharpsville school board adopted a 1-mill property tax increase Wednesday for the 2002-03 school year and approved a final $10.9 million budget.

Budget predictions call for spending $160,000 less than in 2001-02, Superintendent Dr. Derry Stufft said.

"I think we're the only school district that went under (last year's budget)," he said, adding that there weren't any cuts in programs or positions lost as a result.

"We're running a very austere budget," he said.

School directors Kimberly Barringer, David DeForest, Joyce Grandy, Terry Karsonovich and Robert Timmerman voted for the budget and tax increase, while Donna Murray, Charles B. "Chaz" Rice and Chris Ruffo voted no.

Directors -- who were faced with the choice of using the school district's reserve fund or raising taxes to support the budget -- cut 2 mills from the projected tax levy Wednesday. Initially set at 56 mills, the board approved a motion from Timmerman to set the millage to 54 mills.

A mill is $1 for every $1,000 of a home's 1970 market value. At 54 mills, a property valued at $20,000 would carry a school tax bill of $1,080. That's a $20 increase -- 1.8 percent -- over this year. Under the old assessment radio, which assessed property at a third of its 1970 market value, Sharpsville's 1 mill tax increase would be 3 mills. Last year, county commissioners changed the ratio to 100 percent of that value.

To reflect the millage cut, the board cut $40,000 from the tentative budget, leaving a total of $10,900,510.

Several Sharpsville residents turned up at the meeting to express their disapproval of a tax increase.

Gerry Hanley asked if the board was spending more than it can afford, adding that everyday citizens have to spend within their means.

"You don't care about the people that have to struggle and work more hours," he said. "You don't care about the common people..."

Jim Gibbons asked the board to make a decision on a House bill to allow property tax relief for people on fixed incomes and poor families.

Director Rice said he didn't think the district needed to increase the millage.

"I think the reason there isn't younger people here complaining about tax increases is because they have to work more than one job. It doesn't mean that they're in favor of a tax increase," he said.

"I recommend that it stays where it is," he said. "We have enough money to balance the budget without raising the mills."

Mrs. Murray agreed. She said she was against the tax increase and unhappy with the final vote, calling the board's action "unfortunate."

"I voted no because as far as I'm concerned we don't need a millage increase. Some may say the 1 mill is better than 3, but it's still unfortunate for taxpayers to be faced with a 1-mill increase when it's unnecessary," she said.

Timmerman said he thought it would be a good idea for the board to prepare a budget report each month to be on the safe side.

"Personally, I like running the fund balance as low as possible," he said. "I think we should have a report each month, a break down of what is spent, so we can keep an eye on it," he said.

With no tax increase, the board would have had to cut about $90,000 from the budget or spend $90,000 of the fund balance. The projected fund balance for the 2002-2003 school year is $769,905.

Last week, DeForest said without a tax increase, the district -- which pays out $530,000 a month in payroll -- could run out of reserve cash in 25 to 27 months.