Three Village officials outline 0.84% budget increase, 2.78% tax-levy rise and potential contingency cuts

Three Village Central School District administrators presented the official budget hearing on May 13, saying the proposed 2025–26 budget reflects a 0.84% increase over the prior year and a tax-levy increase of 2.78.

Mr. Carlson explained that, after applying the tax-cap formula and adjusting capital projects, the district’s tax-levy increase complies with the cap. He said the district expects roughly $5 million in additional revenue next year derived from a roughly $4.8 million tax-levy increase and about $238,000 in non-building state aid. "The cap varies from year to year and from district to district," Carlson said, noting building aid linked to older bond referenda will decline as certain aid payments end.

Administrators detailed expense pressures that outpaced revenue: Carlson said salary increases with current staffing would total "a little over $6,000,000," and he described a health-insurance increase of "over $5,000,000" driven largely by pharmaceutical cost trends. He described mandatory employer contributions to the Employees' Retirement System (ERS) and the Teachers' Retirement System (TRS) as state requirements that further raise costs.

Dr. Scanlon summarized staffing reductions and concessions the district negotiated to narrow the gap. The district had planned larger elementary staffing cuts but reduced that number through attrition and other adjustments, cutting the projected elementary-teacher reduction from roughly 14 to about 5.4 full-time equivalents, he said. The district also identified reductions in teacher assistants, administrative restructuring, and limits to overtime and certain summer programs; the board restored some programs by reallocating funds.

Carlson said the governor’s initial budget proposal was only marginally different from the final enacted state budget for the district; he warned that Three Village’s aid formula does not yield the large increases seen in some other districts. He explained that, if voters reject the budget on May 20, the district’s options are to present the same budget for a revote, revise the budget for a second vote in June, or move directly to a contingency budget with no tax-levy increase and additional required reductions. "On a contingency budget ... that still requires another more than $3,300,000 in reductions," he said.

Administrators reiterated that board and staff cannot advocate for or against the budget in the public meeting, and they encouraged voter turnout; Carlson noted that last year about 3,300 people voted out of 38,000 registered voters in the district.

No formal vote on the budget occurred at the May 13 meeting; the budget vote was scheduled for May 20 in the Ward Melville High School gymnasium, and district leaders described logistics for voting and early voting options.