Woodland Hills previews 2025–26 budget, flags state revenue uncertainty and tax levy pressure

At an April 9 agenda-setting meeting, Woodland Hills School District finance presenter Jill Regan outlined the district's preliminary 2025'26 budget and warned trustees that state funding uncertainty and assessment-appeal losses will tighten finances in the coming year.

Regan said the district currently projects about $115,445,422 in total revenue against preliminary expenditures of roughly $118,000,000, leaving planners to rely on a fund-balance draw and further adjustments before the final budget is presented in June. "If you see on page 21, our fund balance is still $14,050,571," Regan told the board during the presentation.

The nut graf: The presentation matters because Woodland Hills, like many Pennsylvania districts, depends on a mix of state subsidies and local property taxes that are influenced by the county common-level ratio and assessment appeals. Regan told trustees the district had budgeted using the governor's proposed numbers, which later changed; the result created a shortfall in the current year that the district must manage going into 2025'26.

Regan broke down major drivers: overall expenses are about $3.8 million higher than last year, driven primarily by a $1.4 million increase in debt service tied to the Edgewood project and higher salary and benefits costs after a negotiated contract. Health insurance is projected to rise about 5.7 percent, retirement contributions tick up modestly, and special-education costs continue to grow faster than the federal IDEA grant the district receives.

On the revenue side, Regan said the district is budgeting a roughly $3.6 million increase in total revenues, largely reflecting state-proposed increases and a higher property-tax-relief figure than used last year. Still, she warned, local real-estate revenue remains vulnerable because Allegheny County's common-level ratio reduced assessed values; she said the district expects appeals to continue and that a levy increase to the allowable index (1.3 mills in the presentation) is necessary merely to hold current collections.

Regan outlined several revenue and subsidy streams that affect the picture: IDEA federal funds for special education (about $1 million), E-rate funding for school internet and infrastructure (a federal subsidy that can cover a high percentage of eligible costs), transportation reimbursements tied to complicated state formulas, and other state line items such as the Ready-to-Learn allocation.

The district's capital and debt-service plan is a key factor: Regan explained how bond-structuring and a $3 million capital set-aside reduce next year's net debt payment so the district can keep that payment level in the near term.

Board members asked follow-up questions about the timing of state budget actions and about which numbers were "proposed" versus final. Regan emphasized the calendar mismatch: the district must adopt a budget in June while the state's final appropriation can come later, leaving districts to budget on proposed numbers and adjust when final figures arrive.

Ending: Regan said the administration will continue revising the preliminary figures, work on year-end payroll projections and other line items, and return in May and June with the proposed final and then the final budget for board action.