Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tecumseh finance staff outline budget amendment, project savings and enrollment impacts
Summary
Finance staff and the budget committee reviewed a proposed budget amendment covering revenue adjustments, program timing and projected fund balance; trustees were briefed on bond refunding, a S&P rating update and federal funding timing.
Trustee McGee, who presented the budget committee report, told the board the committee reviewed a bond-refunding that is out for bid and that the district expects taxpayer savings in the range of roughly $150,000 to $185,000; the refunding bid process opened at the end of January and results were expected in early February.
Kelly Glenn (identified in the meeting materials as presenting the budget amendment) walked the board through a proposed first budget amendment. Glenn said the amendment follows the state-required accounting-code structure and will be posted on the district budget-transparency page after board approval; this item was presented for discussion and will return for formal approval at the next board meeting.
Glenn said local revenue increased by an estimated $127,000 (driven by higher interest earnings and increased participation in before- and after-care tuition). State revenue showed an approximate reduction of $1.3 million tied to lower enrollment (district lost 65 students vs. the 50-student loss projected). She said a component of state funding (described in the presentation as “31AA funding”) was reduced to roughly half of prior expectations following state-level adjustments. The state contribution to the district’s unfunded actuarial accrued liability (pension-related) also moved from about $2.7 million down to about $1.2 million, and corresponding expenditure reductions will follow.
Glenn reported about $420,000 in cost savings from unfilled positions (including a teacher, a counselor, a dean of students and two other positions). Transportation categorical funding from the state was restored at roughly $300,000, and a one-time contribution from a state source added another roughly $300,000. Federal revenue timing (carryover and ESSER timing) reduced this year’s federal revenue projection by about $355,000, reflecting last year’s spending rather than a permanent loss.
Overall, Glenn projected revenues to exceed expenditures by about $1,147,677 under the amendment, yielding a projected ending fund balance of just over $4,000,000 (approximately a 12% fund balance). She noted two items not included in the amendment: a potential sale of Park (not added until finalized) and the effects of a recently passed House bill affecting health insurance costs, which remained pending signature and therefore was not yet modeled.
Nut graf: This was a discussion presentation; the amendment will be brought back for formal board approval at a future meeting and the budget committee recommended continuing monitoring of federal funding and enrollment trends.
Board members asked clarifying questions about sick-pay changes and how anticipated state and federal changes would affect next year’s budget. Glenn said implementation of sick-pay (referred to in the discussion as ESTA/ASTA changes) would be prorated for 2025 and have minimal impact this fiscal year but would be more significant next year, and she said pooled funds (for seasonal or hourly staff) could see larger impacts.
Ending: The board took the budget amendment up for discussion only and scheduled the formal vote at the next meeting; trustees requested continued updates on enrollment trends and impacts to per-pupil calculations.
