Chippewa Valley Schools projects $2.2 million surplus in first amended 2024–25 budget; board staff flag one-time retirement offset

Chippewa Valley Schools finance staff presented a first amended 2024–25 budget on Jan. 13 that projects revenues of about $218,000,000 and expenditures of $215,801,676, leaving a projected surplus of approximately $2,209,905 and an estimated fund balance of $43,076,294 at June 30, 2025.

Danielle Jacobs of the district business office led the subcommittee review and said the amendment reflects a mix of enrollment, categorical funding and expenditure adjustments. “Overall, revenues are exceeding expenditures by a little over 2,200,000.0, which would then bring our estimated fund balance to just over $43,000,000 at June 30,” Jacobs said during the Jan. 13 finance subcommittee meeting.

Why it matters: the adjustment raises the district’s projected fund balance to roughly 20% of budgeted expenditures, above common minimums used for operating flexibility. But staff and board members cautioned that part of the improvement stems from a one‑time state funding treatment linked to retirement costs, and that some grant and categorical revenues have declined.

Details and major changes - Revenues: The amendment shows a net revenue increase of about $733,000 versus the original budget. Key drivers Jacobs cited included a blended enrollment increase of 57 students (about $554,000) and increased special‑education and related adjustments (about $1.1 million). Interest income was up roughly $219,000 and fees for services (preschool, community ed, athletics) rose by about $403,000. Jacobs also noted decreases in some grant and categorical lines, including a roughly $3.9 million drop tied to the State’s section 147/MPSERS offset accounting.

- Retirement funding: The Jan. 13 discussion focused on a roughly $6.1 million new categorical the state provided this year to offset retirement costs. As explained by district staff in response to board questions, the state reimbursed districts for an effective 5.75% of retirement costs in the current year rather than reducing the employer rate immediately. “So the amount in this line item is, just a little over $6,000,000,” Jacobs said, and staff warned districts should expect that funding to disappear and the change to be reflected differently next year when the retirement rate is formally lowered. A district finance staff member summarized the effect to board members: the net of the state actions equates to about $400 per pupil this year and, combining other items, roughly $150 additional per pupil relative to the original assumptions.

- Expenditures: The amendment reduces total expenditures by about $760,000 versus the original budget. Jacobs listed a near $2.3 million increase in net staffing/wage changes (including labor agreements, retirements and known vacancies), with roughly $1.3 million of that tied to payroll payouts recorded to actuals. Benefit lines rose about $914,000 overall. Purchase‑of‑service spending showed a net decrease (about $1.6 million), in part because some contracted maintenance work was brought in‑house; supplies and materials increased by just under $1.6 million due to several projects (including modular purchase and finalization of vestibule work funded by grants).

Board reaction and next steps Board members asked for and received clarifications about the MPSERS (retirement) treatment and grant fluctuations. Jacobs and finance staff emphasized the state’s treatment of retirement funding this year is a timing/structural change rather than a permanent unrestricted increase: “When it goes away, they will be reducing our expenses by 5.75% of our retirement costs,” one staff member explained during the meeting. The board approved the district’s updated appropriations for the 2024–25 fiscal year later in the regular meeting; that action passed unanimously.

The finance office said it will continue to track a second amendment tied to federal and title grants once the consolidated application is available, and staff invited board members to request additional line‑by‑line detail if needed.

Ending note District staff called the amended budget “healthy” at the subcommittee meeting but emphasized several large items are temporary or categorical and will need attention during next year’s planning cycle. The board signaled it expects administrators to return with further detail as federal and state grant information is finalized.