Oconee County schools present FY26 budget request: $3.5 million local increase, first reading approved

The Oconee County School District presented its proposed fiscal year 2026 general fund budget on the first reading, asking the county for roughly $3.5 million more in local ad valorem revenue and outlining compensation parameters tied to state funding changes. The board voted to approve the first reading of the FY26 general fund budget.

District leaders said the request would raise the district's local ad valorem ask to approximately $59,200,000, a 6.4% increase from the current year, largely to cover teacher salary step increases and the state's proposed $1,500 per-cell increase in teacher pay. Superintendent Doctor Thorsland and Chief Financial Officer Mister Schickling led the presentation and fielded board questions about revenue forecasting and long-term fund balance goals.

The budget makers told the board they expect roughly $1.4 million in additional state support tied to the House Ways and Means proviso that contains the teacher-pay parameters, but stressed that the state share historically covers only part of teacher cost increases. Schickling said the district would be responsible for an estimated 41% of teacher pay increases, higher than many regional peers, based on the state's local capacity index. He also warned that collections to date from county taxes stood at $51,104,000 versus a requested $55,650,000, a gap that could reduce the district's usual positive variance.

The presentation outlined compensation steps the district intends to fund if the state proposals hold: a $1,500 per-cell increase for teacher pay plus step increases, a roughly 3% starting-pay bump for bachelor's-level teachers, a 3% across-the-board increase for classified staff, and a 2.5% adjustment to administrator bands with steps where eligible. Schickling also described how benefits budgeting was adjusted this year to include benefits for currently vacant positions, which makes benefits look to grow faster than base salaries in the FY26 proposal.

Budget staff reviewed nonpersonnel costs, including technology and contracted services, and said roughly 88 percent of the proposed operating budget would go to salaries and wages (including contracted substitute services), with nearly all remaining operating costs driven by utilities, repair and maintenance, software and student-safety contracts. The administration said they are using Moody's guidance and district fund-balance targets (board policy minimum 20%) to shape a conservative request.

Board members asked about forecasting risk and whether the county's disbursement pace could change the district's positive variance. Schickling recommended presenting this package to county council with the board's support, noting the district's long-range capital plans and the variable nature of some local revenue sources (fee-in-lieu receipts). The board approved the first reading of the FY26 general fund budget by voice vote (motion passed; tally recorded as 5-1).

The administration said it will bring finalized numbers and any adjustments back to the board before a final vote and will brief the county council when the package is presented. The board also heard related legislative updates during the session, including a discussion of Proviso 1.3, paid family leave proposals, and state-level mobile panic alert mandates that could affect district costs.