Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Early Childhood Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Averill Park board: UPK slots cut after Sacred Heart closure; BOCES administrative budget fails
Summary
Superintendent told the Averill Park board that Universal Pre-K slots fall from 81 to 63 after a contracted provider closed; the board debated BOCES’ administrative budget and its funding, then the motion to authorize a $7,461,009 administrative allocation failed.
The Averill Park Central School District board heard an update April 22 that the district’s Universal Pre-K (UPK) program will have fewer seats next year after a contracted provider closed, and then debated the administrative portion of the regional BOCES budget before voting down the proposed amount.
Superintendent said the district had contracted three sites for the district’s UPK program but, “Unfortunately, with Sacred Heart closing, we’re only able to offer spots to 2 locations, which reduces our number of available slots, quite a bit right from 81 to 63,” and that the district had informed families and providers of the change. The superintendent added that the state per‑pupil allocation does not cover the full cost and that the district “does not wanna take that on” in its general fund at this time.
The funding shortfall — and whether to run UPK in‑house, partner with BOCES, or rely on outside vendors — became a central thread in board discussion. Board members asked whether BOCES could operate a turnkey UPK in district facilities, whether enrollment projections explained swings in the regional budget, and how much local districts would pay if regional costs rise midyear.
Board member Michelle pressed the policy implications, saying early education can reduce later costs and that it is “an ounce of prevention” for student outcomes. Board member Adam said he reviewed the BOCES budget detail and voiced skepticism about the presentation and projections, concluding, “I don’t like what I see.”
Discussion of the BOCES administrative budget focused on numbers in multiple budget documents. Board members cited the adopted administrative total of $7,257,451, an adjusted (actual outlay) figure near $7,550,015, and the tentative administrative request of $7,461,009 for 2025–26. Several board members said the overall BOCES tentative budget also shows reductions in instructional/Career & Technical Education lines — figures they said were not explained in the materials provided.
After discussion the board voted on a motion to authorize the BOCES component to include the administrative sum set forth in the 2025–26 tentative administrative document, $7,461,009. The board recorded five members as voting in favor (Jesse through Michelle), one abstention (Lauren), and the motion failed.
Other routine items handled during the meeting included approval of minutes and the consent agenda, and several district votes to elect or re‑elect representatives to the BOCES Board of Education. The board thanked outgoing staff members and noted project management updates for ongoing capital work.
The board did not adopt any local policy changes tied to the UPK funding issue during the meeting; members asked staff to continue pursuing options, including potential in‑house operation if per‑pupil funding changes or if additional local revenue is allocated.
Board members said they will continue outreach with state legislators and community members about UPK funding and will track BOCES budget materials closely ahead of any future votes.
