Forsyth County Schools propose $750.5 million FY26 budget with no millage increase

The Forsyth County Board of Education on May 29 heard a presentation of a proposed fiscal year 2026 budget totaling $750,500,000, a roughly 5% increase over FY25, with no proposed increase to the millage rate, presenters said.

The proposal, presented by Dr. Young and finance presenter Larry Hamill, would keep the district—s fund balance target at about 15% while directing most spending toward instruction. "This year's summary of the proposed budget... $750,500,000," Dr. Young said, and he added, "We are proposing no millage rate increases this year." Hamill summarized funding sources, saying "our local funding is about 50.3, and our state and federal is about 40.6."

The budget matters because much of the increase is driven by costs the district cannot control, presenters said. Officials told the board that $22.3 million of the year-over-year increase is tied to mandated cost pressures, with about $16.3 million specifically attributable to rising health-care premiums. Presenters said roughly $207 million of the proposed budget is allocated to health-care and retirement costs. Hamill explained that, of the budget increase, about 3.46 percentage points are mandated increases and 1.54 percentage points are locally controlled.

Under the proposal, about 73% of total spending goes directly to instruction and classroom personnel, presenters said. The board was told the district plans to provide eligible staff with their annual salary step and to continue a multiyear effort to extend the teacher salary schedule toward a 30-year top step. Dr. Young said the district intends to continue investments in the teacher pipeline, including the Forsyth Teacher Academy and a residency partnership with the University of North Georgia.

Safety and student supports are among locally funded priorities in the proposal. Dr. Young said the legislature and the local delegation increased funding for school psychologists this year and that three student advocacy specialists will be funded or partially funded by the state. The district also plans to fund one of two threat-assessment investigator positions proposed to be shared with the sheriff—s office; Sheriff Freeman would fund the other, Dr. Young said. The presentation noted the district is reserving funds to implement a mobile safety panic-alert system that, according to presenters, was required by a state law passed in the most recent legislative session and is expected to be operational by July 2026.

Presenters detailed the district—s financial posture: a proposed millage of 15.208 mills, an estimated net digest change of about $23.8 million, and a projected tax collection rate of 99.84%. Hamill said the district began FY25 with an estimated fund balance of about $172 million and projected an ending FY26 fund balance near $114.5 million (about 15.26%). The presentation noted the district preserved cash to pay for facility expansions without borrowing; Mashburn was cited as an example the board paid for largely from reserves.

Officials also reviewed capital and special funds. The district expects SPLOST 6 receipts and planned SPLOST spending of roughly $62 million in FY26 and said it will use reserves to finish part of the Mashburn project. The school nutrition fund, which had about a $2.7 million deficit in the prior year, was reported to be improving; presenters said they expect the nutrition fund—s FY26 ending balance to be about $15.6 million.

Hamill flagged a current-year revenue shortfall of approximately $2.6 million tied to lower-than-projected vehicle tax (TVAT) receipts, and he said revenue projections have been resized based on current-year performance. The board was told the district plans a debt-service budget that projects roughly $33.3 million in revenue, principal payments around $26 million, and interest and fees that produce a potential excess versus payments; presenters said SPLOST reserves could be used to cover differences.

On next steps, presenters said the district is scheduled to continue budget work in public meetings on June 12 and June 19 but that county digest data needed to finalize millage notices had not arrived. Because of the missing digest information from the county, presenters warned the June 12 millage hearings may be canceled or rescheduled and that final millage-setting could become separate from the board's planned budget approval on June 19. "If we were to approve a budget without a millage rate being set, that budget would... be contingent on the millage rate," Dr. Young said.

At the meeting—s public comment period, resident Virginia Hawn thanked the board and staff for transparent budget work: "I thank you guys for being responsible and putting it all out there so it's easy to understand for the public," she said.

The board did not take formal action on the budget at the May 29 hearing; the meeting record shows only procedural votes to adopt the meeting agenda at opening and to adjourn at the end.

The district plans to return to the board for further hearings and possible adoption once county digest numbers and other required documentation are available.