Millard Public Schools proposes modest budget growth, aims to avoid dipping into reserves

Millard Public Schools presented a proposed 2025–26 general fund budget Monday that would raise district spending to about $294.4 million, a roughly 3.2% increase from the current year, while avoiding use of the district's reserve.

The projection, delivered by district finance staff, follows a year in which state aid fell and the board used reserve funds to bridge a shortfall. The presentation said state aid is expected to increase about $1.5 million for 2025'26 and that an unexpected boost in school-land revenues will help restore last year's $4 million draw on reserves.

The proposed budget assumes 4% growth in personnel costs (the district's recent total-compensation packages are projected to land closer to 4%) and 2.9% for most nonpersonnel costs. Staff warned that some lines will exceed that 2.9% due to rise in insurance premiums, utility costs and a contract renewal for student transportation.

District staff said the transportation contract adds about $1 million in recurring expense; that cost was delayed by prior multi-year rate guarantees that have now expired. Other inflationary pressures include higher property and casualty insurance premiums tied to local risk exposure and projected utility increases.

To limit the levy impact on local homeowners, staff outlined a stepwise plan that reduces the combined levy relative to a simple "do nothing" scenario. Key offsets include the larger-than-expected school-land apportionment (budgeted at roughly $4.2 million, anticipated receipts approached $8.2 million), shifting a portion of building-fund capacity to the general fund without raising the bond levy, and a $2 million budget realignment across operating lines that staff said would not cut classroom services.

After those moves the district's recommended combined levy would be about $0.9974 per $100 of valuation (general fund plus building and bond), below the board's maximum levy authority and well within statutory caps, staff said. Finance staff estimated that, absent the school-land revenue increase, a household with a $300,000 home could have faced roughly a $300 increase; the steps described shrink that increase substantially.

Staff also told the board they are budgeting conservatively on property-valuation growth (using a 5% assumption) and will recommend any additional revenue from stronger-than-expected valuations be applied to reduce the levy further.

The board set an anticipated budget hearing in August and indicated it will return with a formal proposed budget and levy request after final county valuations are certified.

"We are not recommending eating into the reserve this year," the presenter said, adding the board's goal is keeping the reserve near a 20% target so the district can respond to funding uncertainty.

The budget presentation included a review of other district funds, with food service and the self-funded health insurance fund both described as in stronger positions than in prior years. The presenters credited prior years' fiscal management and voter-approved bonds for maintaining flexibility.

The board will consider the formal proposed budget and levy after the county certification of property valuations and a public budget hearing this summer.