Huntington UFSD budget draft shows $3.2 million gap; transportation, BOCES and capital projects highlighted

Assistant Superintendent for Finance and Management Services Dr. Ruby Harris presented the Huntington Union Free School District’s draft 2025–26 general fund budget to the Board of Education on the evening of the district meeting, saying the district faces a gap between projected expenses and revenues that officials will try to close in coming weeks.

The presentation outlined that the district’s maximum allowable tax-levy increase under the property tax cap calculation is 3.34 percent and gave a snapshot of scenarios for lower levy increases. Harris said the district calculated that each 0.1 percentage point in levy change equals roughly $117,044. Total revenue for the draft was shown as $156,910,988. The district’s preliminary figures show about $7.8 million in additional expenses against roughly $4.6 million in additional revenue, producing a working gap of about $3.2 million that the board and administration must close.

The draft budget, Harris said, does not yet include final staffing decisions or finalized BOCES charges. She told the board that some line items are based on assumptions — for example, cybersecurity and network costs (referred to in the presentation as “NICER”) were modeled at 10 percent increases — and that the district is still awaiting BOCES’ detailed percentage increase, which could change the draft.

Transportation was a major focus of the discussion. The presentation said the district’s contracted home-to-school service includes 44 large buses and 65 vans and that contracted transportation costs were modeled at a little more than a 3 percent increase in the draft. Board members and staff noted the difficulty of adding new late buses because of the number of parochial and private destinations the district serves: the slide listed 31 private/parochial sites, including 24 special‑needs out‑of‑district placements. The administration said nonpublic-school transportation requests must be registered by April 1 for the coming year; missing that date can legally relieve the district of an obligation to provide a seat where routes do not already exist.

Harris reviewed debt-service and interfund-transfer items, including the district’s use of short-term borrowing (tax anticipation notes) to cover cash-flow needs. The district has historically borrowed up to $16 million on short‑term notes; interest in prior years ranged around 5.25 percent and this year’s borrowing for 2024–25 carried an interest cost the presentation listed as 4 percent. The administration also noted a planned use of roughly $212,000 from the debt-service reserve in 2025–26.

On capital planning, the presentation referenced a set of smaller projects the administration proposed to fund by a transfer to the capital fund, including smoke-separation doors and various building repairs. Harris said the administration will ask the board to consider a transfer to capital to cover a consolidated list of these items. The presentation also introduced a proposed new Building Improvement Fund (referred to in the slides as a 2025 Building Improvement Fund) with a proposed cumulative contribution limit of $15 million and a 10‑year maximum term; the administration noted that funds placed in that reserve could be used for capital facility upgrades only and that withdrawals would require voter approval.

Board members asked clarifying questions about how much of the draft reflects maximum assumptions versus likely outcomes, how utilities and capital work (for example, roofing and HVAC upgrades) feed into energy savings, and the potential for future transportation costs to rise above CPI because of driver shortages and the cost of electric buses. The administration said a forthcoming meeting will present staffing and benefits details that are not yet included in the draft figures.

The administration said it has filed required paperwork with the Office of the New York State Comptroller and will update the filing when the board finalizes a proposed levy. A schedule shared with the board calls for additional budget workshops in the coming month and a formal presentation of staffing and benefits at the next board meeting.

Why it matters: the draft frames the district’s choices ahead of the final 2025–26 budget proposal — whether to use reserves, seek a higher levy within the tax-cap allowance, reduce proposed spending or identify other offsets — and highlights several major cost pressures that could affect tax rates or the scope of capital projects and services.

Ending: The administration will return with more detailed staffing and benefits figures and an updated BOCES estimate; the board set no votes on budget propositions at the meeting and will consider actions in future sessions.