Forsyth County Schools warn millage hearings hinge on chief appraiser data; budget presentation set for May

District finance staff told the Forsyth County Schools Board of Education that the FY26 budget timeline and planned millage hearings depend on property valuation data from the county chief appraiser and that meetings currently on the calendar may be delayed if the assessor's office cannot deliver updated figures.

Larry Hamill, who presented the timeline, said the budget presentation draft was “ready to go for May 27 at a 6PM meeting” and that the “first budget hearing” was planned for May 29 with a second hearing and millage meetings tentatively set for June 12 and June 19. Hamill cautioned the schedule is the district’s “best case scenario” and that staff may need to be flexible if the chief appraiser’s software update is not completed in time.

Why it matters: property valuations and exemptions determine the tax roll that sets the millage calculation. Staff said a delayed appraisal or data feed would prevent timely advertising of hearings and could push key vote dates later, affecting the district’s schedule for adopting a final budget and millage rate.

Key details from staff - Draft presentation and first hearing: presentation May 27; first hearing May 29 (dates as presented by staff). - Contingency: if the county assessor’s software and spreadsheets are not finalized by the county’s June 1 internal target, the district may need to reschedule its June 12 meeting and adjust the June 19 timeline. - State law and new exemptions: staff told the board that recent state legislation (referenced as House Bill 717) introduced new exemptions that the county must account for, adding complexity to the appraisal process.

Board direction and next steps: board members and staff agreed to monitor the assessor’s delivery timetable and remain flexible on advertised hearings. Superintendent and finance staff said they plan to produce preliminary ballot language for a planned fiscal measure (district staff referred to extending the current revenue measure) so the county board of elections would have language if the board decides to place a measure on an upcoming ballot. Staff asked to continue internal work on timing and to bring draft ballot language to the board in mid‑June if possible.

Limits and open questions: staff stressed the district is “at the mercy” of the chief appraiser’s office for finalized valuation data and that the advertised hearing timeline hinges on that delivery. No final millage decisions were taken at the meeting; the presentation was informational and intended to set expectations and contingencies for the coming weeks.