District staff presented the Galesburg Community Unit School District 205 proposed fiscal year 2026 budget and flagged transportation and out‑of‑district special‑education reimbursements as the primary revenue risks on which the budget rests. The board approved the districtwide FY26 budget later in the meeting.

The presentation reviewed state, federal and local revenue assumptions and planned expenditures. The presenter said the district “did remain tier 1” under the state evidence‑based funding formula and that the district “looked at an additional $580,000 in new money” from that formula, bringing EBF funding to about $24,400,000 from roughly $23.8 million the prior year. At the same time, the presenter said the district’s teacher vacancy grant was reduced by about $129,000 for FY26.

Why it matters: the district projects rising costs for transportation and special‑education placements while state reimbursement formulas are being prorated, forcing local choices about levy levels and service priorities.

Key revenue risks explained

District staff described three areas of immediate concern. First, state reimbursement for regular‑education transportation is expected to be heavily prorated: staff estimated the district will receive about 58% of its regular‑transportation costs under the state formula after applying the proration factor. For special‑education transportation staff estimate roughly 61% reimbursement. For private‑facility special‑education placements, staff estimated the state will reimburse roughly 21% of the district’s actual tuition cost, pending a competitive, pooled distribution of limited state funds.

The presenter explained the math behind the stated transportation figure: a statutory reimbursement baseline (80% in the formula as read in the presentation) is then multiplied by a proration factor (projected at about 75% this cycle), producing the net 58% figure. The presenter also noted a $1 billion state revenue shortfall that contributed to proration decisions and that the district has been counted among those kept at the negotiated “fully funded” level of evidence‑based funding since the formula’s inception in 2017, while still operating below full adequacy levels.

Other revenue notes and federal funding

Corporate personal property replacement tax (CPPRT) is expected to be flat compared with recent years, and the district will apply for a $50,000 school maintenance grant that staff said districts with qualifying projects typically receive. On federal funding, staff said Title I, II, III, IV and IDEA allocations are expected to remain at FY25 levels for the district’s planning purposes; the presenter noted the federal appropriations cycle is on a different schedule and some Title programs face uncertainty until the next federal budget is enacted.

Planned expenditures and budget assumptions

Staff told the board the FY26 budget assumes a 3% average salary increase, a 15% budget increase for employee benefits (with health insurance singled out as the major driver), and 5% increases for contracted services and supplies. The education fund is projected to hold about $48.2 million in revenue for FY26, with 83% of education‑fund expenditures devoted to salaries and benefits (approximately $39 million). The presentation also broke out other funds: operations and maintenance, transportation and “all other funds.”

Transport contracting and local levy implications

Staff noted nearly all busing is contracted to First Student and that transportation expenses (97% of the transportation fund’s expenditures) are purchase‑services. Because state transportation reimbursements are projected to fall, staff said they will propose small levy adjustments to increase local contributions to transportation.

Board action

Later in the meeting the board voted to approve the District 205 FY26 budget by roll call. The motion was moved and seconded and passed with ayes recorded by roll call; board member Allison verbally recorded an “Aye” during the vote.

What the board directed

During the budget discussion board members asked about the sources of proration and whether regional associations are lobbying on transportation reimbursement. Staff advised board members to raise lobbying questions with their regional school board association representatives. Staff also said the district will monitor federal and state budgets and present levy options if the transportation reimbursement outlook does not improve.

Ending

District staff framed the FY26 budget as cautious but workable, contingent on state proration decisions and health‑insurance negotiations. The board approved the FY26 district budget at the meeting and will consider levy and other adjustments as state and federal funding signals become clearer.