Delaware Valley board adopts $98.9 million 2025–26 budget with 1.97% tax increase

The Delaware Valley School District Board of Education voted to adopt the 2025–26 budget during its May public meeting, approving a balanced $98,916,182 spending plan and a 1.97% tax increase at a millage rate recorded in the motion as 124.36 mills. The motion passed on a roll call vote of eight in favor, one opposed.

The vote followed a multi-hour discussion during which business office staff presented alternative levy scenarios that ranged from the draft 2.74% proposal presented last week down to a 1.97% proposal. The lower option the board approved relies in part on a $100,000 assumed state cyber reimbursement, adjusted revenue estimates (delinquent taxes and interest earnings) and personnel reductions via attrition rather than involuntary layoffs.

Why it matters: the adopted budget sets school district revenues, the millage rate and program funding for the coming school year and will be reflected in fall tax bills. Board members emphasized limiting direct program cuts and using attrition where possible; members and public commenters also pressed the board to present the specific program-level reductions that would be required to reach a 0% tax increase.

Most important facts and decisions - The board approved a $98,916,182 balanced budget for fiscal year 2025–26 with a 1.97% tax increase and a millage rate described in the motion as 124.36 mills; the final roll call recorded eight yes votes and one no vote. - The 1.97% scenario presented by staff includes an assumption of $100,000 in state cyber reimbursement and projected additional interest earnings; staff said these items were included based on prior-year receipts but are not guaranteed. - To reach the 1.97% number staff proposed reducing staffing through attrition: compared with the higher scenarios, the presentation identified eliminating one or more positions via attrition. Specifically, the business office presentation cited two positions under consideration in the 1.97% scenario: a high school reading specialist (whose periods district staff said could be absorbed by existing English instructors) and an elementary self‑contained special education teacher at DDES that the district projects will no longer require two teachers because enrollment declined. - Board members asked staff to assemble program-level data (co‑curricular participation counts and per-program costs) so the board could see what further cuts would be required to reach a 0% tax increase; staff said that level of detail was in board binders and is available on request.

Discussion details and key concerns Board members and staff reviewed two lower-levy alternatives after members asked for options below the 2.74% draft. The business office described a 2.34% “breakeven” scenario and the 1.97% scenario the board ultimately approved. Staff explained the revenue side adjustments (real‑estate and delinquent tax receipts, interest earnings) and the expense reductions (absorbing duties through attrition, not filling specific vacancies). The 1.97% scenario specifically assumed retaining $100,000 of last year’s state cyber reimbursement as a budget line item even though staff said the governor’s proposal did not include it.

Several board members said they preferred a steady, moderate increase over large year‑to‑year swings. Members who favored minimizing tax impact argued for the 1.97% option because it relied on attrition and preserved co‑curricular programs; members who pushed back asked staff to provide a clear list of the program and personnel tradeoffs needed to reduce the levy further.

Public comments during the budget debate focused on (1) support for continued investment in extracurricular programs that district supporters said produce measurable student success and (2) concern about cyber‑school spending. One public speaker, Joe Cammerle of Milford Township, asked the board to publish per‑pupil cost comparisons for brick‑and‑mortar, internal cyber and external cyber students and urged the board to identify which programs would be eliminated if a 0% levy were pursued.

Votes and formal action - Motion: Approve 2025–26 budget with a 1.97% tax increase at a millage rate recorded as 124.36 mills and balanced revenues and expenditures of $98,916,182. - Outcome: Approved by roll call, 8 yes, 1 no. - Vote record (as announced at the meeting): Christine Agron — Yes; Mandy Colville — Yes; Jessica Decker — Yes; Bridal Fells — Yes; Jack Fisher — Yes; Pam Lutte — Yes; Felicia Sheehan — Yes; Rosemary Walsh — Yes; Carl Will — No. (Motion carried.)

What the board directed next The board asked the business office to provide the requested program- and co‑curricular‑level cost and enrollment details so trustees could assess specific tradeoffs if they wished to pursue a lower levy before final certification. Staff said much of that material is in the board packet and is available upon request.

Background and context Board and staff presentations referenced the district’s recent experience with state cyber reimbursements and noted uncertainty in the governor’s budget proposals. The business office described scenarios that balanced revenue assumptions with expense reductions by attrition rather than layoffs; staff emphasized preserving a budgetary reserve to cover unexpected summer changes in enrollment or staffing needs.

Ending The adopted 1.97% levy will appear on property tax bills for the coming year; board members and the business office agreed to continue sharing program‑level cost data with trustees and the public so future levy decisions can be evaluated against concrete program tradeoffs.