[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6184862,"mediaKeyId","5086114-ed4f2864a84fa47cfb84f465416993ed","parentId",5086114,"title","Upper Dublin committee recommends 2025–26 budget with proposed 4% tax increase; committee to forward to board","audioSeconds",1486,"startMs",3670000,"endMs",5156000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5086114-ed4f2864a84fa47cfb84f465416993ed&start=3670&end=5156","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5086114-ed4f2864a84fa47cfb84f465416993ed/thumbnail_3670000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6184862/Pennsylvania/Upper-Dublin-committee-recommends-202526-budget-with-proposed-4-tax-increase-committee-to-forward-to-board","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6184862-ca04490d1d29609e861fa06cf97eeede/orig.mp4?Expires=1771184839&Signature=Wg0JSdrin-2eTTvFVvnSFxKdL8-Tfd-8J5vMuUS3Pz6N8sYWxzWeZyJYcxDgDiTpIXOucyPZEX3oqlnCdco0C~3xiHH2qWtVSAdcAHPps5lGadlowpA8H82iCaC6LTxUcUq6cLMWJ5wNxFj-t1HT7Mj4kJqjnBeOx1tAQKvzLqDUnX1vaDndclvx2jsuRp7pxguWy3WyQOsotnOoJbLsZ123ZFpPKJcgNor2HRrbABmN6vci3TT4rF3fPhT5nzqT72tp2oPejSz1u4xfgi24USY1fOqkZI9Sh97JIYwI4oGaMVrXESoMTuvza5-y2BaoJ0y9qYaupnsItImdizvfHw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Upper Dublin School District","date","2025-06-27T09:55:59.473Z","article","The Upper Dublin School District Finance Committee reviewed administration’s recommended 2025–26 budget on June 18 and agreed to forward the package — including a proposed 4% property-tax increase — to the full board for final action.

Administration presented a multi-year budget outlook and argued the recommended tax path and reserve strategy are needed to preserve debt capacity and enable capital projects, including the proposed Jarrettown Elementary project. \"This is a look at what that long term picture looks like,\" the business officer said, while noting the numbers assume future Act 1 index increases and revenue from a planned development at 1125 Virginia Drive.

Key points: the proposed operating budget as presented showed a $3.5 million budget gap under current assumptions. Administration proposed covering that gap by a combination of the 4% tax increase, targeted use of one-time resources and letting the projected current-year surplus flow to unassigned fund balance. After those steps, administration projected the district’s unassigned fund balance would rise to about 7.1% of expenditures — within the board’s policy guideline of 5–8%.

A separate but related item proposed creating a committed fund balance of $1.4 million to support an elementary classroom furniture refresh; administration noted the funds are one-time IRA reimbursement dollars received this year and that any purchase would return to the board for approval before orders are placed.

Committee discussion centered on affordability and timing. Several members voiced concern about tax impacts on residents and asked for alternatives; others argued that building debt capacity now is necessary if the district moves forward with the Jarrettown project. One committee member proposed lowering the increase slightly to 3.99%; committee members noted the fiscal impact of a single one-tenth-of-a-percent change is modest (roughly $89,000 in revenue) but would slightly increase reliance on fund balance.

Administration emphasized the budget remains contingent on factors not yet known — state aid levels, final assessment appeal outcomes and final design and borrowing decisions for capital projects. The committee voted to forward the budget and associated resolutions to the legislative board meeting for final action.

What to watch: the budget assumes Act 1 index increases over the planning period and includes a concept to borrow for Jarrettown; if schematic design or market conditions change, the board can pause before awarding construction contracts and re-evaluate financial steps.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","UDSD Finance Committee Meetings (6/18/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","The committee reviewed a proposed 2025–26 budget that includes a recommended 4% property-tax increase and asked the administration to forward the package to the full board for final action.","taxTitle","Upper Dublin SD, School Districts, Pennsylvania","taxId",60292,"location","Pennsylvania","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6184865,"Upper Dublin administration recommends new 84,000-square-foot Jarrettown Elementary, estimates $60 million cost",1156,26000,1182000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5086114-ed4f2864a84fa47cfb84f465416993ed&start=26&end=1182","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5086114-ed4f2864a84fa47cfb84f465416993ed/thumbnail_26000.jpg","/articles/6184865/Pennsylvania/Upper-Dublin-administration-recommends-new-84000-square-foot-Jarrettown-Elementary-estimates-60-million-cost","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6184865-0abaa76949c66933bc0f0c857c8bcefd/orig.mp4?Expires=1771184839&Signature=jCOUjfdBnPaWecRKVYhrLZlP~RHTSVK8XeUoFM6A6xzyIexjjdRteZ90OA1b2FaZ~9StWpxEBNq~0IvidtkTCekdAFWJY9HltLm5KHJ5BlxNKR0mccHluVo3e8vErhPZO4EOgLHUIv8dhf6hpfPCl48ul6dOOLyENes9yQrshXjnYkrcSXOCfm~10zoG2bM0ztNWn6RN7l3fMuH0jtwnmN2kn80TElQReoVo0dKz7xmXUXrKh01yYsPkoAOes9y4Ucz7xd22pkX6VIOTOyVxz9~6hgyUt-YLMELSRtUe8GFWm28FoZs1ycMCqyrIhLnM-NhHUtNCw5d~ddtSql0xQw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Upper Dublin School District administration recommended building a new, 84,000-square-foot Jarrettown Elementary School and asked the Finance Committee to forward that recommendation to the full board for action.

The recommendation presented June 18 would remove options that district staff and consultants judged either too small to meet program needs or too disruptive and costly when performed as an occupied renovation. \"The 84 is what I would call right sized,\" said Phil (ICS consultant). The administration estimated the project at $60 million and described a concept financing plan to cover the cost while limiting near-term budget disruption.

Why it matters: district staff said the current Jarrettown building dates to the 1950s, has multiple later additions and persistent space, accessibility and building-system deficiencies. Consultants and administrators argued a new building would address ADA, layout, educational program modernization, safety and parking while minimizing student disruption during construction compared with an extensive occupied renovation.

In committee discussion, administrators said they eliminated a basic systems-only fix (option 1) as inadequate, and eliminated larger 94,000-square-foot concepts (options 5 and 6) as oversized compared with priorities identified by teachers, staff and the community. A major occupied renovation plus addition (option 3) remained under consideration until committee members heard details about the phasing required for occupied work — including multiple temporary main entrances, repeated classroom moves, extensive modular classroom rentals and seven construction phases — which administrators said would be substantially disruptive to learning.

\"You could do all those things, but they are going to be some impacts: noise, odor, you will have to separate construction people from students,\" Phil said, describing the challenges of occupied renovation. Dr. Smith added it could be a three-year process that would affect students’ instructional environment and programs, including meals and physical education, at times during construction.

Administration presented a concept financing model: borrow roughly $45 million amortized over 25 years (estimated debt service about $3.2 million annually), allocate $11 million from the district’s capital reserve designated for Jarrettown, and use roughly $5 million currently held in the district’s debt service fund to cover the first three years of debt service while replenishing capital reserves with planned annual transfers. Administration and its financial advisor PFM described the plan as conceptual and subject to change as schematic design and cash-flow timing become clearer.

Committee members expressed concern about cost and tax impacts but repeatedly cited student disruption as a deciding factor. Several members — including Jenna, Stu and John — said the reduced disruption of a new-build option made option 4 the preferable path even though it carried a higher construction price tag than some renovation options.

Next steps: the committee agreed to forward a recommendation to the legislative board meeting to authorize the administration to enter an agreement with ICS to proceed with design and project services for option 4, and to continue detailed design, budget refinement and financing work. Administrators stressed the June action would not obligate the district to construction contracts; construction authorization would occur later in the design-and-bid sequence.

What remains open: administrators noted the $60 million is an early estimate and that schematic design will refine the program, square footage and cost. They said land-development permitting, site layout (including tree preservation and field layouts) and final program choices could change both cost and timeline. They also reiterated the board could pause before bidding if conditions (construction market, interest rates or district priorities) warranted delay.

Ending note: the committee’s recommendation to move forward to the board will appear on the next legislative agenda; if the board approves, the district will begin schematic design and more detailed budget and borrowing work.","Administration recommended building a new, 84,000-square-foot Jarrettown Elementary (option 4) rather than renovating the existing building, citing lower educational disruption and a financing plan that combines borrowing, capital reserves and use of a debt service fund to smooth initial payments.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6184853,"Upper Dublin recommends rejecting two unsuccessful fire-alarm bids; administration to pursue CoStars vendor",3486,163000,3649000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5086114-ed4f2864a84fa47cfb84f465416993ed&start=163&end=3649","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5086114-ed4f2864a84fa47cfb84f465416993ed/thumbnail_163000.jpg","/articles/6184853/Pennsylvania/Upper-Dublin-recommends-rejecting-two-unsuccessful-fire-alarm-bids-administration-to-pursue-CoStars-vendor","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6184853-dc7a778393b9dec878d92c4baba6d42b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771184839&Signature=KoUPV5IR-wLaI7rrZ1rnJRob18OxDPIT2IYfvmK4LSW73tOFqbOulT8PpRCVMUJhd9~GaMNwlIOHkHyxwEu374oa2MX2Q7QoB0VMi-UJJ5jCu8RjmNV-oAGGugP-ZC2bnBgkAjVLKos12USuO1GhR3XZ6tGouOJzYzHnSsJZltu8VlKclTsiJxSPj60a5ZysInZ1hM-OVduY6oE8Sstb9t~Ua~IGmd~8K7zlZuGa7crTD8~BSwUlJEZvo5GTFxmsofk42cK51TScUoQZI~cC18ea2g7WISkl~PdESsnup70mmgDp8eAO~-yt0piNopUJjqWYP82-PS4bwvTQFduqkg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The district reported June 18 that two public-bid attempts for a multi-school fire-alarm replacement produced unsatisfactory results and recommended the Finance Committee forward a formal rejection of the bids and move the work to a CoStars state-contract procurement.

Background: initial bids were higher than anticipated. One subsequent bidder was disqualified for failing to meet bid-bond/document requirements and another declined contract terms, officials said. Administration and consultants said the decision to use CoStars (a state procurement vehicle) reflected a desire to avoid repeated unsuccessful public-bidding cycles and to use an available state contract that multiple districts use for similar projects.

Timing and scope: administrators said the fire-alarm systems are approaching end of life but that the systems continue to operate; the district plans to schedule the work for summer next year if the CoStars route is successful. Committee members asked about urgency and contingency planning; administration said vendors told them summer next year is feasible and that the district has some spare components and temporary workarounds to keep systems operating in the short term.

Procurement rationale: administrators noted several practical issues with the public-bid results: either bids were unusually high for the summer timeline or submissions were noncompliant with required bonding and contract terms, which forced disqualification. The district consulted its solicitor and recommended moving to CoStars to secure a qualified vendor within the budget.

Next steps: the committee will forward a recommendation to formally reject the public bids at the legislative meeting and to authorize staff to proceed through the CoStars procurement route to complete the installation next summer.","After two procurement attempts produced either noncompliant or unexpectedly high bids, the district recommended rejecting all bids for a multi-building fire-alarm project and pursuing a state CoStars contract vendor for next-summer installation.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6184857,"Upper Dublin moves to pilot camera-based bus-patrol program; citations fund equipment after break-even",291,3112000,3403000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5086114-ed4f2864a84fa47cfb84f465416993ed&start=3112&end=3403","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5086114-ed4f2864a84fa47cfb84f465416993ed/thumbnail_3112000.jpg","/articles/6184857/Pennsylvania/Upper-Dublin-moves-to-pilot-camera-based-bus-patrol-program-citations-fund-equipment-after-break-even","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6184857-1702f8e132d394c5d8acfc2be5587926/orig.mp4?Expires=1771184839&Signature=Gm3GHOFMQGRWYoN9bprnaoA7HM~4iQu6Ou~G9KiMCegKYv6vuFAFNIJAXVrLX7nlVB1US-zE~hND8dr6EeaXA7TIoSiDrsQoOYhtpNdMuCk6iIY7OuMW3mUXKvrg5ALDfbFCtM8-Di~x0UcnkQYOzLkHV-gwxY6MEgwGFB~x7NNftLkQwI-uejJArFCm4PUsSW6BjKo-uiqK5VM56mzoUzIfZYkUdq-TwsSaPKUeZL-C5in9853Y8cDGYSHIv7o0T2-eFKf1vWfqOkF0qtOrxyS-g2zcYT545k~-VZ2IZcG~HiGAdZbAnOwKROp1mildMBUexC2A64IwpM-VhNvxPg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Upper Dublin School District presented a recommended partnership with Bus Patrol to install exterior camera systems on district buses and an intergovernmental agreement with the Upper Dublin Township Police Department to allow police to issue citations captured by the system.

How it works: Bus Patrol’s exterior cameras document vehicles that illegally pass stopped school buses. Under the proposed financial model, each $300 citation first pays required state allocations and a $25 share to the township; the remaining $250 is applied toward recovering the district’s installed-equipment costs for the 30 buses. After the program reaches roughly 30 citations in a month (the district’s estimated break-even level), the monthly revenue split would be $185 to the district and $65 to Bus Patrol for each additional citation.

Administration said the program carries no net ongoing cost to the district under the proposed structure because Bus Patrol’s model applies initial citation revenue to equipment recovery; the district would not pay the vendor out of pocket. The district’s interior-camera system and data-access arrangements remain under district control, and administrators said Bus Patrol’s exterior-video servers would be hosted by the vendor; access and confidentiality were described as subject to standard privacy practices and board policies governing student and security video.

The program requires the township police department’s participation for citation issuance. Administration noted two minor open contract items they expected to resolve before the board meeting and said the intergovernmental agreement would be contingent on township approval at its July meeting.

Public education and data handling: administrators said Bus Patrol provides a communications toolkit and the district would coordinate messaging with the township and schools, and continue standard notice practices (signage inside buses indicating video/audio monitoring). Committee members asked whether the data could be used outside safety enforcement; administrators said video is treated as security footage and would be handled according to existing video policies.

Next steps: committee members recommended forwarding the Bus Patrol contract and the intergovernmental agreement to the legislative board meeting with the caveat that township approval and final contract edits be secured prior to implementation.","The committee recommended moving forward with agreements to install Bus Patrol exterior cameras on 30 district buses and an intergovernmental agreement with Upper Dublin Township Police. Vendor-hosted video will be used to identify illegal passes; district receives $185 of each qualifying citation after equipment break-even.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Upper Dublin committee recommends 2025–26 budget with proposed 4% tax increase; committee to forward to board

Upper Dublin administration recommends new 84,000-square-foot Jarrettown Elementary, estimates $60 million cost

Upper Dublin recommends rejecting two unsuccessful fire-alarm bids; administration to pursue CoStars vendor

Upper Dublin moves to pilot camera-based bus-patrol program; citations fund equipment after break-even