Interim Superintendent Dr. J. Richmond and district finance staff presented first‑quarter (Q1) financial results to the Shelby County Board of Education, reporting that the district is near expected spending levels but faces revenue headwinds tied to state funding changes and falling enrollment.

Chief financial presenter Tito Langston told the board the district’s reported revenues fell year‑over‑year by about $33.2 million, driven in part by changes to the Tennessee Investment in Student Achievement (TISA) funding flow and the winding down of ESSER grant reimbursements. He said the district’s expenditures rose by about $9.5 million compared with the same quarter last year, with salaries up roughly $28.3 million because of teacher bonuses and raises.

Langston said the district’s overall expenditure rate for Q1 was about 24 percent of its annual budget — close to the 25 percent benchmark for a quarter of the year — and called that “in good standing.” He told the board the ESSER portfolio includes roughly $55 million originally earmarked for construction projects; approximately $25 million has been spent, another $25 million is encumbered, and staff expect to complete those projects by March 2026.

Why it matters: Finance officials warned trustees that enrollment trends will affect next year’s revenue. Richmond and Langston said preliminary enrollment is down a little over 2,000 students year‑over‑year; at an estimated average per‑pupil revenue of about $12,000, that change could translate into tens of millions of dollars of reduced revenue if it persists into next year.

Board members pressed staff for details. Commissioner Hewitt Garcia asked whether the Q1 line items represent actuals or budget and how long‑term enrollment forecasts will be incorporated into future budgets. Langston said the current budget is based on prior‑year enrollment and that staff will present a FY27 preliminary forecast next month showing projected revenue impacts.

Among other details Langston provided: Shelby County local revenue timing explains about an $8.8 million year‑over‑year variance; federal revenues decreased about $5.5 million largely because ESSER is winding down and indirect cost reimbursements have declined; the district recorded an $8 million textbook adoption charge under “other charges”; and several capital appropriations (county‑funded projects and two new high schools) carry forward across FY23–FY26. Langston also said about $6.4 million of general‑fund CIP funds remained uncommitted.

Board members asked follow‑up questions about HVAC and intercom capital needs, and about which salary lines drove the increase; Langston attributed much of the salary jump to one‑time teacher bonuses and the implementation of teacher raises in July. He said vacancy savings were used last year to pay certain separation payouts through Aug. 31 by means of a budget amendment.

The district did not announce a formal board vote during the presentation; the slides and supporting materials will be available to trustees for review and follow‑up at the next meeting.

Ending: Langston closed the Q1 presentation and invited board members to submit additional questions; Richmond and staff said they will return next month with enrollment forecasting and more detailed allocations breaking down salary spending by employee category.