Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawndale presents 2025–26 budget proposal as enrollment declines; district warns Prop 98 uncertainty
Summary
Assistant Superintendent Howard Ho and Director Luis Diaz presented the proposed 2025–26 general fund budget and fiscal outlook, citing a projected enrollment decline, recent drops to the Prop 98 guarantee, and a 2.3% COLA in the May revise; no final budget vote was taken at the meeting.
District business officials presented the Lawndale Elementary School District proposed budget for fiscal year 2025–26 at the June 5 board meeting, describing revenue and expenditure assumptions and the risks created by state budget uncertainty and declining enrollment.
Assistant Superintendent of Business Howard Ho and Director of Budgeting and Accounting Luis Diaz led the presentation. Ho told the board that temporary "hold harmless" funded average daily attendance (ADA) years from the COVID period have dropped off, and "our funded ADA now is closely aligned to our current enrollment," which reduces prior protections for local funding.
Staff outlined the state context: Governor Newsom’s May revise lowered the Proposition 98 K–14 funding guarantee by about $4.4 billion across the three‑year window and showed a projected cost‑of‑living adjustment (COLA) of about 2.3 percent for K–12. The presentation described state fiscal uncertainty and said the legislature and governor must finish a balanced budget (statutory dates noted) before final impacts are clear.
District figures given in the presentation included a current‑year enrollment of roughly 4,324 students, a projected enrollment of about 4,216 for 2025–26 (a roughly 2.5 percent decline) and a longer‑term projection near 4,111 for 2026–27. Staff said the district’s estimated funded ADA was 4,271 in 2024–25 and projected 4,145 for 2025–26.
On revenues and expenditures, staff reported total LCFF revenue of about $62.7 million and total expected revenue of about $67.8 million for 2025–26, with unrestricted general fund expenditures projected at roughly $76.1 million. District presenters said unrestricted funds contribute about $17.9 million to restricted programs (special education and routine restricted maintenance). Restricted revenues were presented at about $35.5 million with total restricted expenditures near $37.7 million.
Ho and Diaz reviewed several local mitigation steps: an early retirement incentive (several certificated, classified and some management employees accepted offers, which the district said softened reductions in force), continued monitoring of special education expenditures, and aligning staffing to enrollment. The presentation also flagged federal proposals that could reduce non‑defense discretionary spending nationwide and noted continued commitments to Title I and special education funding.
Board members asked clarifying questions about the composition of salary lines (certificated salaries projected down; classified salaries rising), the possible loss of Title III funding and the district’s exposure if federal or state grants are cut. Diaz said the district receives under $2 million annually in Title III and that eliminating it would require the district to find other resources to continue related services.
No final budget action was taken. Staff said the district will continue to refine assumptions after the governor and legislature complete the state budget process and will return with a final budget for board adoption at a later scheduled meeting.
