The Farmington School Board heard a detailed budget update and bargaining report July 17, with district officials warning that current union proposals would add millions to the district's projected deficits and that the benefit of a possible November operating levy could be wiped out if large settlements are accepted as proposed. Board Chair Christiansen opened the discussion and Superintendent Berg and Directors Jane Huska and Jess Ulrich presented the figures and the status of negotiations.
Why it matters: board members said the district has limited room to fund ongoing wage and benefit increases without cutting programs or asking voters for new, sustained revenue. Chair Christiansen said the 2.74% increase to the general-education formula passed by the Legislature "does not mean we get to increase dollars on the matrix by 2.74%." The board emphasized keeping compensation growth aligned with sustainable revenue and cited the possibility that large settlements would undercut planned investments.
The administration described how the district manages multiple fund-balance categories and reviewed recent history. Huska outlined fund-balance classifications (nonspendable, reserved, assigned and unassigned) and said the board adopted a fund-balance policy in February 2013 that targets an unassigned range of 8% to 12% of the budget. The district reported combined reserved and assigned balances of about $16.2 million going into 2024-25 and expected scheduled drawdowns of roughly $3.7 million for known one-time costs such as HVAC control work and device refreshes. Huska said approximately $3 million of planned spending is reserved for iPad and MacBook replacements and about $2.8 million remains from the 2015 levy to help maintain class sizes.
On revenue and projection figures, Ulrich summarized the district's high-level 2026-27 estimate: expenditure projections used recent multi-year averages and yielded a round estimate of $102 million in expenditures; revenue was modeled with a 2% increase in general-education formula funding and a $1 million trend increase for special education. That approach produced a projected 2026-27 deficit of about $5 million to $6 million. Ulrich said a successful referendum in November would add an estimated $8 million, producing roughly $2.1 million of discretionary revenue for the board to allocate.
Board members and staff repeatedly highlighted that bargaining proposals announced so far sit above what is budgeted. Ulrich and Huska reported the district had budgeted for a 2% compensation baseline but that initial proposals from bargaining units are considerably larger:
- Teachers (Farmington Education Association): initial FEA proposal requested an 11.39% total-package increase over two years. The district plans to present a counteroffer at the next session.
- Custodians (International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 70): custodians initially requested more than 20% total-package increase; the district increased its offer to about 7.99% over two years and the union was reviewing that proposal.
- Community education classroom support (IUOE Local 70): an initial 15% total-package request was reduced by the union to about 8.99%; the district's first counteroffer was about 4.61%.
Ulrich explained that the district reports and posts full proposals and counterproposals on the district website under About Us > School Board > Negotiations and that negotiations focus on "total package" costs (salary + benefits + automatic step/longevity increases) because benefits and step increases affect long-term budget obligations.
Board members emphasized the practical effect of those initial offers. Berg and Huska noted that if the current offers were accepted as-is for 2025-26, the district would need to find roughly an additional $2 million in immediate savings atop the board's balanced 2025-26 budget. Going into 2026-27, Ulrich said those offers could add another $2.3 million to the 2026-27 deficit projections.
The board also discussed state-level risk to special-education funding. Huska and Ulrich told the board that a recently announced state blue-ribbon committee is charged with identifying $250 million of reductions in special education; if the committee does not identify reductions, those funds may be drawn from the state's cross-subsidy support the district receives. The presenters emphasized that reductions in state funding do not reduce obligations to students but would force local budget cuts if the state does not fully fund special-education costs.
Superintendent Berg reported that some federal Title allocations previously withheld will be released and that the district expects roughly $260,000 in additional Title funds this year. He said that will lessen the need for budget adjustments tied to those specific federal grants.
No bargaining settlements were approved at the meeting. The board moved into a closed session for labor negotiation strategy under the statute cited by the board. The motion to enter closed session passed on a motion recorded as being made by Sterling and seconded by Dezierski.
The district's presentations cited posted negotiation documents and emphasized that staff and board will continue to present updated counters and report progress. Huska and Ulrich invited board members to ask follow-up questions and asked the board and public to review the posted proposals for specifics.
Looking ahead: board members said they will weigh the trade-offs between preserving programs and meeting compensation requests. Several members urged restraint in approving multi-year, ongoing increases that the district cannot sustain through formula increases or stable local revenue. Ulrich and Huska said they will bring updated counterproposals and budget impacts to upcoming negotiation sessions and to future board meetings.