Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the K12 Budgeting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cedar Rapids school board holds public hearing on FY2026 certified budget; resident warns rightsizing could harm at‑risk students
Summary
The Cedar Rapids Community School district Board of Education held a special meeting April 7, 2025, and conducted a public hearing on the district's proposed fiscal year 2026 certified budget.
Get email alerts on the K12 Budgeting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Cedar Rapids Community School district Board of Education held a special meeting April 7, 2025, and conducted a public hearing on the district's proposed fiscal year 2026 certified budget. Business-services staff member Carla presented the budget assumptions and projections; one public commenter, Kaylee Muhlbauer, told the board the district's rightsizing model would harm at‑risk students.
Carla said the district is “using a 2% supplemental state aid rate, for the certified budget,” and reviewed how that assumption affects projected new money, enrollment impacts and the property-tax rate. She told the board the notice published in the Gazette on March 26 showed a current estimated tax rate of $13.65 and referred to a maximum tax-rate notice of $13.84. Carla said the district is estimating about $2,400,000 in unadjusted new money under a 2% SSA assumption and that net open enrollment out and enrollment declines reduce that amount.
In public comment, Kaylee Muhlbauer urged the board to consider how staffing “rightsizing” would affect students the Iowa Administrative Code labels at risk. Muhlbauer recited the code definition and said the district’s proposed at‑risk ratio of 15 to 1 is too high compared with the National Dropout Prevention Center guidance and would reduce opportunities for one‑on‑one connections. “The right sizing model does not support at risk students and their ability to succeed in school and beyond,” she said, adding that students have reported increased anxiety and statements that they may not return to school.
Carla summarized revenue assumptions and fund actions the budget incorporates: maintaining a $13,000,000 management-fund levy, reserving $45,000,000 in SAVE/PPEL bond sales to support high‑school projects (which she said is borrowing against those funds and “is not an increase or an ask to property taxes”), estimated insurance savings from plan changes, and use of the general fund balance as a bridge year while ESSER federal dollars expire. On the expenditure side the district included estimated negotiated settlements, staffing realignments, and operational reductions; Carla said the current fiscal-year deficit estimate had decreased from an earlier estimate and that the district currently projects a roughly $2,560,000 surplus for FY2026 under the assumptions presented.
Board members pressed staff for additional detail on open-enrollment out and on the supplemental state aid (SSA) timeline. One board member noted SSA “was supposed to be determined more than 60 days ago, by law,” and said the delay makes staffing and negotiation planning difficult; Carla asked the board and community to “please reach out to state and local representatives, let them know how important it is” to set SSA in a way districts can plan. The board closed the public hearing and was told it will consider adopting and certifying the budget at the April 28 board meeting ahead of the April 30 statutory deadline.
The public hearing produced no final vote on adoption; board action to adopt the certified budget is scheduled for a future meeting. The public comment on rightsizing and multiple board requests for additional enrollment and open‑enrollment detail are scheduled for follow up as the budget process continues.
Ending: The board closed the hearing and continued other business on the April 7 agenda; the adoption and certification vote is scheduled for April 28, 2025.

