Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Fiscal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District presents FY 2026 proposed budget showing $12 million drawdown and fund-balance concerns
Summary
Director of finance Tyler Daney presented the district’s proposed FY 2026 budget: $216 million in revenues, $228 million in expenses, and a projected $12 million reduction in total fund balance; staff noted an unassigned fund balance below the board’s 18% target.
Tyler Daney, director of finance, presented the Burnsville Public School District’s proposed fiscal year 2026 budget, showing a projected deficit between expenditures and revenues and an expected drawdown of fund balance.
Why it matters: The proposed budget outlines next year’s program funding, staffing requests, and the district’s financial position; trustees will vote on final approval at a later meeting. Several decisions in this budget cycle affect staffing and service levels districtwide.
Key assumptions and figures Daney presented include a K–12 enrollment estimate of 7,021, a per-pupil general education formula increase of 2.74% (about $200 per pupil), a $2.06 million decrease in compensatory after formula changes, and a $5.5 million decrease in the general tax levy assumption. Legislative updates since the presentation altered some figures: a compensatory hold‑harmless formula change is expected to add $1.67 million, summer unemployment costs will be reimbursed (about $375,000), and special-education transportation reimbursement will be reduced to 95% in FY26 and 90% in FY27. Reductions to per‑pupil allowances for student support personnel and library aid were noted at about $195,000.
Daney reported proposed all‑funds revenue of approximately $216,000,000 and total expenses near $228,000,000 — a roughly $12,000,000 reduction in total fund balance. General fund revenues are estimated at $158,600,000, with general fund expenditures at approximately $169,500,000; 77% of general fund expenditures are for salaries and benefits and 71% of expenditures are for instruction. The total general fund balance was presented at $45,350,000 with an unassigned fund balance of $30,240,000 (about 17.84% of expenditures). Superintendent Battle reminded the board that the board had directed not to go below an 18% unassigned fund balance and asked trustees to consider maintaining a slightly higher balance.
Daney reviewed other funds (food service, community education), staffing unit counts and program adjustments, and listed new grant awards including a $400,000 “Grow Your Own Adult” grant starting FY26. He also noted FY26 expenditure assumptions of a 2.5% increase to salary schedules and a 5% increase for health insurance and certain contracted services.
Board members asked questions and commented: one director thanked staff for removing an earlier proposal to increase walking distances for secondary students, and another asked about higher per‑student costs at Virtual Academy; Daney said falling enrollment and fixed staffing contribute to higher per‑student expenditures there.
Daney’s presentation was informational; a recommendation for budget approval will be brought to the board at the next meeting.
