Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District Finance Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District officials sound alarm on budget shortfall, recommend tax levy and borrowing
Summary
CFO and staff told the Ferguson‑Florissant board the district faces a tight fiscal picture: amended 2024–25 spending will exceed revenues, the FY26 draft leaves the operating fund balance near or below safe levels, and administrators recommended an August operating tax‑levy increase and a $25 million tax note if needed.
Ferguson‑Florissant School District finance staff presented an amended 2024–25 budget and a draft FY26 budget on May 28 that show the district ending the year with expenditures exceeding projected revenues and carrying a low unrestricted fund balance into the next year.
Chief finance presenter Doctor Singleton told the board the amended all‑funds revenue forecast for the current year is about $156.6 million while amended expenditures are about $167.9 million, driving the district to reduce reserves. For operating funds only, the administration projected an unrestricted fund balance of roughly 5.4 percent at year end; the FY26 draft showed an operating‑fund balance as low as 1.58 percent without additional action.
Administration attributed the largest single budget pressure to higher‑than‑budgeted purchase services, including contract labor used to fill vacancies. The presentation pointed to agency nurse costs, contracted transportation for McKinney‑Vento students and other contracted services as primary drivers. Singleton said, “contract services is the culprit,” and urged more oversight of contract labor.
The administration offered a set of recommendations to stabilize finances: pass an operating tax‑levy increase in August (with authority to re‑place it on the ballot in April if necessary), postpone major nonessential capital and operational spending until property‑tax receipts arrive in November–December, and execute a tax note of approximately $25 million as a line of credit for immediate cash needs. The presentation included a $368,000 interest estimate on a $25 million note at an assumed 7 percent rate.
Board members asked detailed questions about McKinney‑Vento billing and inter‑district invoices, and whether the district could pause reimbursements to other districts pending receipt. Finance staff said the district has taken steps to invoice partners and, where appropriate, hold payments until reciprocal payments arrive.
Administrators also said ESSER federal funds that had helped finance district projects are now winding down, leaving the district with lower federal revenue in FY26. That drop, combined with higher purchase‑service spending this year, created the central gap between anticipated revenue and spending.
The board discussed next steps, including a plan to begin ballot preparations and community outreach should the board decide to seek an operating levy increase, and to begin paperwork for borrowing so a line of credit will be available if needed. Singleton and other administrators committed to more frequent budget reporting and to meeting with department heads and principals to control purchase services.
No final levy decision or borrowing resolution was taken May 28; the FY26 budget draft will be brought back for board action before the statutory June 30 deadline.
Board members requested a clear list of high‑cost purchases that could be delayed, and asked administration to provide a month‑by‑month cash forecast and an updated position list showing vacancies and which positions are filled by contracted staff versus district hires.
The presentation and discussion framed the situation as urgent; administrators repeatedly described it as a financial crisis and urged quick action to raise revenues and control contract spending.
