Anderson 5 finance update: sales tax strong, state bills and proposed personnel costs shape early 2025 budget

Anderson School District Five’s finance director presented the board with January and year‑to‑date financials on Feb. 3, telling trustees that sales tax collections remained strong while several state legislative proposals and board requests are shaping next year’s budget outlook.

Finance Director Amy Hurd (referred to in the meeting as Miss Hurd) reported a January sales‑tax allocation to the district of about $1,300,000 and noted the county‑level sales tax split between districts is recalculated after state average daily membership counts. She said the district’s front fund balance at year‑to‑date was about $20 million, down from roughly $23 million the prior year, a difference she described as a possible timing issue.

Hurd walked trustees through revenue lines and changes the district is tracking: property‑tax receipts year‑to‑date were about $21.7 million (roughly $2 million ahead of the same point last year), investment income had declined from 5.61% to 4.6% in the present portfolio, and the state’s distribution related to Act 388 (a 1% sales‑tax allocation tied to the property‑tax shift) amounts to an annual allocation the district lists as about $14.9 million paid in 10 monthly payments starting in October.

Legislative proposals flagged to the board include two measures the finance team said could affect the state budget and district revenues: a scholarship expansion (Senate Bill 62, as outlined by staff) that the presentation said would raise eligibility to multiple income thresholds and expand scholarship amounts from $5,000 to $10,000 and possibly $15,000 per pupil; Hurd cited a fiscal‑impact estimate of about $130 million tied to the broader scholarship change. A separate bill (Senate Bill 169) was described as allowing debit‑card purchases of lottery tickets; Hurd said staff were tracking a roughly $40 million estimated fiscal impact tied to that bill.

Another bill of direct local consequence, identified in the presentation as Senate Bill 317 (and similar House language), would create a 50% tax exemption for watercraft. Hurd said the district currently receives about $1,557,000 annually from the watercraft line and that a 50% exemption would reduce that to roughly $778,000 — an immediate revenue loss for Anderson 5 of about $778,000 if enacted as written.

Hurd and the superintendent reviewed potential new revenue the district can count on for next fiscal year, including projected increases in the tier‑3 sales‑tax allocation and state allocations yet to be set by the legislature. She told the board that, factoring in projected new revenue and board requests for personnel and program changes, the district faced an early unfunded gap of roughly $812,000 (staff later noted the figure could rise to about $1.5 million if a 50% watercraft exemption passes).

Board‑level budget requests and city/district items discussed during the meeting and shown with staff estimates included: - Add an additional multilingual translator position (cost shown with benefits included). - Move one part‑time Robert Anderson office staff position (27.5 hours) to full time (37.5 hours). - Add district security resources (details discussed in executive session; a summary figure was referenced). - Add 25 elementary teaching assistants (staff estimated more than $1.1 million for salaries and benefits). - A proposal to pay out sick leave above the 90‑day accrual threshold for 220‑day and shorter‑term staff (staff calculated a full daily‑rate payout would cost roughly $708,000; a limited payout at $50/day would be about $104,000).

Hurd also told trustees the district receives roughly $30,000 a year in fee revenue from paying 4K students in some classrooms (4K is a state program for at‑risk pre‑K students), but cautioned that the figure varies and should not be built into a long‑term revenue assumption.

On consent business the board approved routine minutes and the budget consent agenda items the meeting packet showed; several votes were conducted by voice/show‑of‑hands during the meeting packet approvals.

Staff said they will bring refined projections back to the board in monthly updates and that the first reading of the 2025‑26 budget will begin to take shape after further state budget actions and continued review of board priorities.