Forsyth County Schools officials presented a proposed $750,500,000 fiscal year 2026 budget at a special call meeting May 27, saying the plan would be balanced at the start of the year and would not require a millage increase if adopted.

Superintendent Dr. Young led the presentation with district finance staffer Larry Hamill, outlining a total proposed increase of about 5 percent over the current year and describing how locally controlled spending would rise by 1.54 percent while state-mandated costs drive the remainder of the increase.

The proposal would keep the district’s millage rate unchanged if adopted; the presentation said the rate would remain at 15.208 mills. "For this to go through, there would be no millage rate increases, and we would be providing a balanced budget, to start FY26," Dr. Young said. Larry Hamill said roughly 53.3 percent of the district’s revenue is expected to come from local sources and about 47 percent from state and federal sources: "So we're about 53.3, and that trend has slowly been going up in that direction for the last several years."

Why it matters: district leaders told the board the budget is intended to absorb large state-mandated increases in health insurance and Teacher Retirement System (TRS) costs while preserving a 15 percent fund balance and investing in student safety, mental-health staff, and teacher retention measures.

Most important numbers and priorities

- Total proposed FY26 budget: $750,500,000 (about a 5% increase over FY25).
- Locally controlled spending increase: 1.54%.
- State-mandated portion of the increase (health care and TRS): about 3.46%; staff cited a $22.3 million increase this year attributed largely to health care and TRS costs.
- District estimate: $207,000,000 of the proposed budget covers state-mandated health care and TRS obligations.
- Fund balance: the district began the fiscal year with about $172,000,000 and projects an end‑of‑year balance near $169,000,000, preserving roughly a 15% fund balance.
- Millage: no increase proposed; the presentation listed the millage at 15.208 mills if the budget is adopted.

Key investments and operational changes

Board and staff described several locally controlled investments funded in the proposal: additional school psychologists, social workers, and student advocacy specialists to improve student-to-professional ratios; two full‑time threat assessment investigator positions assigned from the sheriff’s office to support school administrators and SROs; and a placeholder reserve for a mobile safety panic-alert system tied to House Bill 268 while the district awaits legal and policy guidance.

The budget also includes a personnel strategy aimed at retention: the district proposes adding a final step to salary schedules for eligible staff so long‑serving employees have compensation for service years beyond the previous maximum. Dr. Young and staff said every new central-office position added in the proposal comes with an offset, meaning an existing position or expenditure was reduced or repurposed to fund the new role.

Capital, food service and special funds

District staff said they expect about $62,000,000 in collections from SPLOST (special-purpose local-option sales tax) funds, will transfer $16,000,000 from the general fund to finish the Mashburn project, and anticipate ending the year with roughly $67,000,000 in the SPLOST account. The presentation noted a previously approved $8.3 million Mashburn reserve and proposed an additional $10.9 million to complete the project in FY26.

Food and nutrition services were projected to run a budget deficit in FY26. Staff estimated a possible $5,500,000 deficit in the nutrition fund, citing rising food costs, higher TRS and health care expenses for staff, and a multiyear pause in meal price increases for families.

State funding and the "5-mill share"

Presenters reviewed how state funding affects local resources, citing the QBE (Quality Basic Education) formula and other state allocations. The superintendent described the "5 mill share" required by state law — the portion of local mills that is redistributed statewide — and said Forsyth County’s 5-mill share is worth "in excess of a hundred million dollars" this year. Board members noted that many Georgia systems receive part of those redistributed funds while Forsyth County does not.

Process, timing and next steps

District staff told the board they did not yet have final tax digest data from the tax commissioner’s office needed to schedule a millage hearing. The presentation scheduled a first budget hearing for the Thursday following the meeting at 5 p.m. and a second called meeting June 12 for a second budget hearing; staff said the June 12 millage hearing likely will be postponed until the tax office provides the necessary documents and that the board is scheduled to consider adopting the budget on June 19, though the millage decision may be set on a different date.

Board response and questions

Board members thanked staff for the work on the proposal and praised a low locally controlled increase, which some members described as unusually small given recent years’ costs. A board member said, "I just wanna publicly say thank you very much, Dr. Young, Larry, everybody in this room," and multiple members commended the staff for finding offsets for new central-office positions and for focusing on teacher retention.

What was decided at the meeting

The board adopted the meeting agenda at the start of the session (motion by Mrs. Hoist; second by Mr. Grimes; vote: unanimous). The board later voted unanimously to enter executive session for personnel (motion by Mr. Usherwood; second by Mr. Grimes). The FY26 budget was presented and discussed but not adopted; final adoption and millage decisions remain pending at later called meetings once the tax office digest and required documents are available.

Reporting constraints and dependencies

Staff stressed several items are contingent on external information or guidance: final tax-digest figures from the tax commissioner to set a millage hearing, and legal/policy guidance on implementing HB268 requirements before finalizing the mobile safety panic-alert expenditure. Several board members said they had additional follow-up questions and that the new board members’ questions during the process had helped refine the budget.

Ending note

The board scheduled further budget hearings and retained the option to postpone a millage decision until tax-office documents are available; a formal vote to adopt the FY26 budget is expected at a later meeting.