Audit & Finance Committee recommends second reading of FY2026 budget; administrators highlight weighted student funding rollout and fund‑balance plan

The Charleston County School District Audit & Finance Committee voted to recommend second reading of the district's proposed fiscal year 2026 budget after a lengthy discussion about the weighted student funding program, the use of fund balance and projections for future pay obligations.

Finance staff presented the budget and answered trustees' questions about program-level spending and long-term fiscal risk. "We are requesting a recommendation from the committee for second reading of the FY2026 budget," Mr. Prentice said as he opened the discussion. He told the committee the district reduced its planned use of fund balance from the prior year and intends to spend committed ESSER sustainability reserves strategically over the next several years.

The budget recommendation matters because it frames the district's spending plan for compensation, schools and programs for the coming year. The proposal includes continued funding for the weighted student funding (WSF) program, a one-time use of committed fund balance to smooth a transition away from ESSER, and a set of salary increases adopted in the current cycle. Trustees pressed staff for more detail on how recurring raises will affect out‑year budgets and asked how the district models attrition and step increases.

Prentice described assumptions and modeling tools used to project costs through FY2030. He said the district's internal forecasting model draws on position‑level data from the financial system and historical trends. "Now that we've kind of reached this ultimate optimal circumstance for compensation across all the spectrums, we're really looking at kind of a 2 and a half, 3% increase to the actual scale across every cell each year plus a step," Prentice said, noting sensitivity analyses exist to show how different revenue scenarios would affect the budget.

Trustees asked for clearer risk assessment of the long-term effect of the recently adopted pay increases. Several trustees said they support the proposed budget now but want more granular reporting on how salary growth and retirements will shape costs in later years. One trustee asked staff to show the effect of natural attrition and retirements on the salary base; Prentice and staff described an in‑house contract/position forecasting tool (the ACRF) that aggregates employee and position data to produce multi‑year projections and said they will provide additional out‑year detail in follow‑up materials.

Committee members also discussed the weighted student funding rollout. Staff reported that principals have been meeting with finance and academic leaders to create WSF plans, and that an automation and dashboard now allow central office and principals to review plans and spending trends more quickly. Prentice said the district expects approximately $3 million of WSF underspend in FY25, which will be reappropriated into the FY26 WSF pool under the board's policy that returns a share of aggregate savings to schools that administered plans within guardrails.

The committee voted to move the budget to second reading. The motion carried after a voice vote; no roll‑call tally was recorded in the meeting transcript.

Looking ahead, staff committed to deliver a refined FY2030 forecast after the budget is approved and to provide trustees with the underlying sensitivity analyses showing the budget's exposure to slower property tax growth or other downside scenarios.

What happened next: the committee's recommendation advances the FY2026 budget to the board for formal consideration and second reading. Staff said they will include the approved budget book and supporting forecast materials in the post‑adoption packet presented to the Government Finance Officers Association for award consideration.