Elwood board sets 2.64% tax-levy for June 17 revote after budget failed in May

The Elwood Union Free School District Board of Education voted on June 2 to submit a revised $78,566,259 budget with a 2.64% tax-levy increase to voters in a revote scheduled for June 17, after a May 20 proposal with a 4.2% levy failed to reach the 60% approval required to exceed the statutory tax cap.

The budget matters because, if the 2.64% proposition fails, state rules would require the board to adopt a contingent budget that would limit the tax levy to the statutory cap (1.29%) and force an estimated $2.2 million in further cuts. "If the proposed budget does not meet the board approval, the Board of Education must adopt a contingent budget," the district presenter said during the meeting. The board also directed the assistant superintendent for business to submit the property tax report card to the State Education Department following the vote.

The administration described a multi-step reduction process that has already reduced spending by about $1.9 million from the original 4.2% proposal. "We are recommending a budget that would include a tax levy of 2.64%," the district presenter said, summarizing the administration's recommended revision. The $1.9 million of reductions combines earlier cuts (about $414,000 identified in February–March), additional reductions of roughly $690,000 included in the 4.2% package, and a further $829,000 proposed after the May vote failed.

Key program and staffing implications the administration presented include: eliminating or reallocating roughly 7.6 teaching positions (largely through attrition, with 10 teachers retiring this year), reducing 1.3 administrative positions, trimming co-curricular clubs with low attendance, and removing one of five secondary Academic Intervention Services (AIS) tutors. The district said it would share a librarian between the middle and high school and reassign a technology-integration teacher (elementary-certified) into a classroom role. The administration warned these moves may slightly increase class sizes and may require collapsing classes with low enrollment.

On revenue and reserves, the administration said the state proposed a $557,000 increase in state aid but that the district budgeted roughly $275,000 because some lines (BOCES aid and transportation aid) must reflect actual current-year spending. The presentation showed the district planned to draw about $1.3 million from targeted reserves (approximately $800,000 from the Employees' Retirement System reserve and $500,000 from the Teachers' Retirement System reserve) and use fund balance; combined, reserves and fund balance were shown covering roughly $3.8 million of the shortfall. Officials cautioned overusing those balances would reduce future flexibility.

Public commenters and board members repeatedly emphasized the local stakes. Marlene Costanza, identified as a parent and community member, told the board, "Voting down the school budget hurts the kids, of course, but it also hurts our community." Several parents said even modest increases in class sizes or the loss of extracurriculars, field trips and athletics would worsen the district's long-term competitiveness; others urged the board to limit administrative cuts that would shift work onto remaining staff.

Speakers also raised specific operational issues. Residents questioned whether unified sports, the district's literacy program (a five-year contract estimated in the meeting at roughly $300,000–$350,000 over five years), and security staffing would remain under the 2.64% plan; the administration said the literacy program and planned technology investments were retained in the proposed budget and that the security line would be analyzed to find reductions that would not undermine core safety services. Transportation was repeatedly cited as a major cost driver; one speaker noted transportation accounts for nearly $6 million of district expenses and urged pursuing stronger contracts and legislative solutions for inefficiencies.

Board discussion reflected concern about voter sentiment and long-term program impacts. Several board members said they believed the 2.64% levy was a compromise that preserved most programming while limiting further use of reserves; others urged considering a lower figure to improve the odds of reaching 60% voter approval. The board emphasized outreach: a budget hearing was scheduled for June 9 (7:30 p.m., district elementary school) and the open forums and informational sessions were to continue ahead of the June 17 revote (polls 6 a.m.–9 p.m.).

Formal action at the meeting adopted the 2.64% proposition for the June 17 ballot and directed the assistant superintendent for business to file the required property tax report card with the state. The board noted that adoption of a budget that exceeds the statutory tax-levy limit of 1.29% requires 60% voter approval under New York State rules and repeated that a failure of the revote would force a contingent budget that emphasizes legally required educational programs and property/health/safety items while allowing many discretionary programs and non-mandated items to be eliminated.

The district presentation and public comments made clear the tradeoffs: the 2.64% plan reduces staff and non-essential expenditures while attempting to preserve most classroom services, but it depends on voter approval and uses one-time reserve funds that the district says will shrink future flexibility.