King George schools ask for $2.81 million from county for FY26 budget; highlights raises, staffing and Virtual Virginia program

King George County Public Schools presented its needs‑based FY26 operating budget at a joint meeting with the Board of Supervisors and requested $2,812,034 in local funds, Superintendent Dr. Jesse Boyd said. That figure reflects changes in state budget projections and savings from lower‑than‑anticipated health‑insurance increases.

Dr. Boyd summarized the division’s priorities and numbers: a proposed 3% salary increase reflecting the governor/general assembly guidance (state funding will cover the SOQ portion only), steps to address mid‑career pay compression, funding to meet classroom needs tied to the Virginia Literacy Act and rising enrollment, and new positions for reading teachers, ESOL, paraprofessionals and a virtual‐instruction coordinator.

Key budget figures presented: - Local request to the Board of Supervisors as presented: $2,812,034 (Dr. Boyd: “The local request, from the school board to the board of supervisors as it stands today is $2,812,034.”). - Total “budget builder” increases (school side): about $1,500,000 overall; additional staff line items were shown at roughly $982,000 (total cost basis across state, federal and local funding). - Pay compression adjustment: school staff estimated an initial need of approximately $436,000 to address step compression (targeting step 10 first). - Health‑insurance renewal: presentation noted a projected annual increase that had moved from an earlier 20% estimate down toward about 12% in recent broker updates.

Virtual Virginia and outreach: the school division proposed launching a Virtual Virginia program. Dr. Boyd described the program as state‑approved and synchronous (students attend classes in real time). The presentation estimated the division’s tuition cost at about $2,000 per full‑time virtual student and noted the division would net roughly $5,000 per homeschool student who enrolls — producing a potential net revenue gain per homeschool student. Supervisors raised questions about demand, quality control and whether the division should pilot the program before staffing it at full cost. Dr. Boyd said the division would not hire a virtual director if enrollment did not materialize.

Operations and contracts: the school presentation highlighted rising utility and maintenance costs as major drivers. Electrical costs were noted to be trending up substantially (presentation slide: an increase in electrical expense of roughly $495,172 to a projected ~$1.7M total). The Honeywell energy/maintenance contract and its renewal were flagged for close review; staff noted the Honeywell contract includes proprietary automation and escalation clauses and that the contract renewal will be negotiated.

Questions and responses: supervisors sought clarification on stipend line items, counselor and social‑worker staffing, vacancy levels, and the mechanics of how state SOQ funding and the local match interact. The county administrator said he will include the school request in the county’s March budget presentation and asked the board of supervisors for guidance on the amount to include in the initial county budget (options requested by supervisors included presenting the full request, a partial allocation and a zero increase scenario to allow comparison).

Next steps and timeline: County staff said they will incorporate the school request into the county executive’s proposed budget for the March presentation and provide scenarios (full request, partial and no local funding) as requested by supervisors. School officials will track enrollment and program demand and said they will remove the proposed Virtual Virginia director if enrollment does not support the position. No formal appropriation was made at the joint session.