Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
West Seneca board hears 2025–26 budget preview; special‑education placements and transportation costs drive risk
Summary
Business officials presented a budget preview showing a projected 2.75% tax‑levy increase draft and highlighted rising special‑education tuition, contract transportation and health‑insurance costs; board members asked for staffing and FTE trend data.
District business officials and the superintendent provided a budget-development update on Feb. 11 and outlined key cost pressures for the 2025–26 budget cycle, including rising special‑education placements, charter tuition and transportation costs.
Business official Will Thiel and district budget staff said the current draft tax‑levy increase is approximately $1.9 million (roughly 2.75 percent) in the preliminary tax‑cap calculation. Thiel said the draft levy moved down from earlier estimates as staff refined state-aid and calculation details. The presentation showed state aid rising and noted key drivers in the draft appropriation: salaries and benefits, contract transportation, special education tuition and BOCES costs.
Staff reported 80 students currently placed privately out of district in special‑education programs (up from 41 two years earlier), stating those placements are a major budget pressure and that in some cases the district is planning to bring high‑need programs back in‑district for both educational and cost reasons. “We are actually right now in the active planning stages of which we're looking at two classes of high need that would be bringing in district,” a district staff member said.
Transportation contract costs rose after a recent bid, the presentation said; the district is exploring whether it can handle additional buses in-house rather than leasing them from a contractor. Health-insurance costs and teacher‑unit benefit trust contributions were also highlighted as large recurring expenses.
Board members requested more detailed analyses, including: a three‑year comparison of staffing (FTEs) and positions added July 1 to March 1, a more detailed breakdown of the proposed budget lines to identify potential offsets, and explicit scenarios for how the district would close any remaining funding gap using reserves or other tools.
Staff said they will update numbers for the March board meeting, bring a first draft budget on March 4, and continue to refine assumptions with an eye toward preserving long‑term fiscal stability while responding to immediate special‑education and transportation needs.
