Three Village officials outline roughly $7.1 million shortfall and potential cuts that could affect about 80 positions

Three Village Central School District administrators told a budget advisory committee Tuesday that the district faces about a $7.1 million operating shortfall for next year and showed a set of proposed reductions and limited additions that officials said could affect roughly 80 positions across departments.

Dr. Scanlon, a district staff member who led the presentation, said the packet circulated to committee members lays out potential staffing and line-item reductions across administration, teachers, teacher assistants, security, transportation and other functions. “It is stark. It has ramifications in every single area,” Dr. Scanlon said during the meeting.

The presentation showed roughly $6.5 million in proposed reductions alongside about $970,000 in identified additions, producing the stated gap of about $7.1 million. Administrators told the committee the district would still need to identify almost $2 million more in reductions if current assumptions hold.

Why it matters: The proposed reductions would mainly affect staffing and could raise average class sizes in elementary and secondary grades. Administrators identified 17 elementary staffing changes, 14 of which they said are classroom positions; restoring those 14 positions was estimated at about $1.4 million. Committee members and administrators repeatedly emphasized that primary‑grade teaching positions would be the first priority for restoration if funds became available.

Key budget levers and figures presented

- Start time initiative: The start‑time change already included in the board-approved budget is shown as costing about $1,014,000. Administrators said removing that line would reduce the district’s near‑term reductions by roughly $957,000, but the board must vote to remove it and that would only be a one-year fix unless other changes are made.

- State aid: The staff noted competing proposals in the State Legislature. The State Senate and Assembly proposals discussed during the meeting would add roughly 0.9–1.0 percent to state aid for districts, which the district estimates would yield about $250,000–$300,000 for Three Village under those proposals.

- Health insurance: Administrators said health insurance costs were a primary driver of this year’s large increase, with a year‑over‑year rise discussed in the meeting on the order of several million dollars. Staff characterized that increase as unusually high and a major factor in the current shortfall.

- Retirement and replacements: The presentation incorporated expected savings from retirements and the net cost of replacing staff. Administrators said the district has roughly 1,400 employees and that the proposed reductions would affect about 80 positions. They noted that replacement of experienced staff with less‑senior hires produces recurring savings, and that a significant number of staff are first‑eligible for retirement next year.

Class sizes and enrollment impacts

Administrators reviewed projected enrollment and class-size ranges for elementary and secondary grades under the proposed reductions. The presentation showed district‑level class averages that administrators said historically have been used for decades and that now may need revision if cuts are implemented.

- Elementary: The packet listed projected kindergarten and lower‑grade enrollments by building and noted testing and student‑by‑student placements remain incomplete; staff warned the numbers will shift between now and the start of school.

- Secondary: The packet used averages of about 25–27 students for various secondary grades, with administrators noting contractual averages and specific transition decisions (for example, smaller sixth‑grade classes during transition) affect how those averages are applied.

Officials said they would prioritize restoring primary‑level teachers first if additional funds become available, but principals could argue a higher priority for specific intermediate‑grade sections based on class composition and special‑needs populations.

Options discussed to close the gap

Committee members discussed and staff outlined several options, including: - Using reserves for one year to soften immediate staffing losses (staff warned that using reserves creates a hole to address in the next year unless offset by new revenue or property sales). - Selling district property parcels (staff said some parcels are ready for sale but legal and land‑division work is required and that sales timing would affect how quickly proceeds could offset operating costs). - Capturing incremental state aid if the Legislature increases school aid above the governor’s proposal. - Larger structural changes such as program consolidations or adjustments to extracurricular offerings, though staff and committee members said those moves would generate relatively small savings compared with staffing costs.

Process and timeline

Staff asked the committee to deliberate and put recommendations in writing; those recommendations will be circulated to the board in advance of a presentation scheduled for the board meeting on the 26th. Administrators cautioned that individual personnel decisions are not public at this stage and that a special board executive session would address specific positions before final actions.

What was not decided

No formal motions or votes were taken at the meeting. The board has previously approved the start‑time change as part of the adopted budget; removing it requires a separate board action. Committee members asked whether reserves could be used to protect staffing; staff said the board would have to approve any reserves withdrawal and that using reserves is a short‑term solution that shifts the funding need into future years.

Ending

Administrators said they will provide further enrollment and staffing detail as testing and registrations finalize through the spring and summer. The committee will draft recommendations for the board and return those in writing prior to the board presentation on the 26th.