The Westerville City Schools Board of Education on May 19 approved an updated five-year forecast that shows the district bringing in about $17 million less in revenue than it plans to spend in fiscal year 2026.

Nicole Marshall, district finance staff, presented the forecast and told the board the district had reduced a previously projected $22 million shortfall to $17 million through budget adjustments. Marshall said the district also recorded a loss of about $4 million in state funding for fiscal 2025 and that one-time items — such as an e-rate reimbursement and ESSER dollars — had distorted year-to-year comparisons.

The forecast approved at the meeting includes a planned one-time transfer out of $45 million to create restricted accounts for predictable future costs, including a termination‑benefits fund (for severance and accumulated leave payouts) and a capital projects fund to cover replacements such as school buses and roof work. Marshall and other staff said the transfers are intended as accounting steps to show external reviewers and lawmakers that the district has plans for cash balances; the board’s approval of the forecast records the transfers in planning but any movement of funds will follow required procedures.

Superintendent Hamburg explained the transfers are intended to smooth spikes in costs in later years of the forecast and to make the district’s intentions clearer to state lawmakers who have proposed tighter limits on school district cash balances. Staff cited a legislative proposal discussed in hearings that would cap district cash at roughly 30% of expenses; Marshall said the House proposal as described could affect roughly $102 million statewide. The board discussed the risk that additional state action or reductions would increase local shortfalls.

Board members and staff discussed local options for raising revenue. Marshall outlined two primary voter‑approved choices: property tax levies and school district income taxes, noting that an income tax would apply to residents and renters inside the district boundary and that setup and employer withholding schedules mean revenues lag implementation. The board was told that the filing deadline to get a tax question on the November ballot requires action in early August, with paperwork to county or state offices required in mid‑summer.

The board set a June work session to refine plans, including the proposed capital projects priorities and the termination‑benefits accounting, and approved the May 31 updated forecast by voice vote. Trustees also approved a separate amendment to the FY25 appropriations to reflect incoming grant adjustments.

Why it matters: Marshall told the board the district’s revenues are not keeping pace with inflation and without additional local or state revenue the district will need further programmatic reductions. Board and administrative leaders said they will continue state advocacy and prepare potential local ballot options while monitoring summer enrollment and staffing decisions.

What’s next: Staff will prepare detailed plans for the proposed restricted accounts and present options at a June work session; the board could decide in June or July whether to place a tax question on the November ballot.