Amherst County School Board reviews $59 million proposed budget, requests $1.2 million from supervisors

At a special meeting, the Amherst County School Board received a presentation on a proposed $59 million operating budget that would add staff, raise compensation and ask the Board of Supervisors for a $1,200,000 funding increase.

Superintendent Dr. Wells told the board the proposal is built on conservative enrollment assumptions and the Senate budget figures that had moved through the General Assembly. "We went with the senate version because that's what when it came out of crossover and the conference committee, that was the one that moved forward to the governor's desk," Dr. Wells said, explaining the administration used that scenario to avoid a shortfall.

The proposal covers several priorities the board identified last fall: keep class sizes below the state Standards of Quality (SOQ), provide staffing to meet student needs, modernize facilities, maintain competitive pay and expand programs to improve post‑graduation readiness.

Why it matters: the budget would shift additional staff and dollars into schools while reducing reliance on one‑time federal ESSER funds that are expiring. Dr. Wells said the plan aims to put supports "in the schools, whether it's instructional assistance or whether it's working with elements to help support teachers in the classrooms and give students those supports." He added, "I do feel this will help, give those teachers what they need in the classroom, especially some of the behaviors that have been an issue."

Key figures and changes cited in the presentation include a move from a $57 million operating budget in 2024–25 to a proposed $59 million; the administration said this reflects a roughly $2 million increase. The presentation listed 29 new positions proposed for the operating budget: about 10.5 van drivers (moving from hourly to budgeted positions), 10 BEST lab technicians (previously approved but not budgeted), six instructional assistants for kindergarten classes, two school support assistants, a reading specialist (0.5), an added high‑school custodian tied to new square footage, and other school‑level roles. The presenter said two elementary teacher positions would be reduced through attrition because of projected enrollment declines.

On compensation the presentation followed a 3% baseline increase tied to the governor/General Assembly proposals for SOQ‑funded positions and added targeted market adjustments. The administration proposed additional increases for certain classified categories: instructional assistants (additional 2%), health assistants (2%), food service (2%), cafeteria workers (1%), IT techs (1%), class 1 and 2 secretaries (1%), bus drivers (1%), van drivers (1%) and bus assistants (1%). Dr. Wells also said the division will absorb a 7.74% health‑insurance cost increase so employees "will not see any increase in their insurance cost."

Enrollment projections were flagged as a source of uncertainty. The presenter compared multiple figures, noting the state/legislative budget used an enrollment figure referenced in the presentation as "36.15." He also cited Weldon Cooper projections higher than that and warned those projections do not account for recent local housing changes. A staff member added, "Weldon Cooper is based off of birth rates," and the presenter warned local development in Madison Heights could increase school population over the next five to ten years.

Revenues and external funding were outlined: the presentation said the governor's proposed state aid would be about $40.8 million in one scenario, with House and Senate proposals higher by roughly $1.4 million and $959,000 respectively depending largely on the timing of a proposed $1,000 bonus for SOQ positions. The administration noted federal ESSER funds that helped prior budgets are largely exhausted.

The presentation included next steps and public outreach: the proposed budget and presentation will be posted online, a public hearing is scheduled for March 13, and the superintendent is slated to present the budget to the Board of Supervisors on March 18. Board members were asked to submit questions by Tuesday so staff could compile answers before the board's retreat.

Votes at the meeting were procedural: the board approved the agenda at the start of the session and later took a routine final vote to close the meeting. No final appropriation votes were taken; the board will return to consider the budget at upcoming public meetings.

The superintendent and staff emphasized that some positions are currently funded through the "All in Virginia" program and could need local funding in 2026–27 if that program's funds are not reallocated. The presentation also noted increases in costs for utilities, insurance, workers' compensation and contracted services tied to facility projects and an upcoming high‑school addition.

Board members thanked staff for the work on a reorganized budget book and said they would review details in the days before the budget retreat and public comment sessions.