Ballston Spa board hears first FY2026 budget presentation; district flags aid, tax-cap and transportation pressures

Brian Sirianni, a district staff member who presented the budget, told the Ballston Spa Central School District Board of Education on Feb. 3 that the district’s preliminary 2026 revenue picture includes a 2% increase in state foundation aid, about $521,000.

“The minimum foundation increase that she is proposing is under the rate of inflation,” Sirianni said, adding: “For 2026, we're getting a 2% increase, that's $521,000.” He said that the proposed increase is below recent inflation figures and that the board will need to close other gaps in next months’ budget development.

Why it matters: foundation aid and local tax-cap rules drive much of the district’s revenue. Sirianni told the board the district faces a structural shortfall tied to a long-term decline in the assessed value associated with the GlobalFoundries plant and to rising transportation costs and out-of-district special-education transportation.

Sirianni explained the GlobalFoundries assessed value has fallen substantially over the past several years; as a result, the district must identify roughly $780,000 to balance next year's budget. “We've gotta find a way to make up that $780,000,” he said.

On revenue drivers and the tax cap, Sirianni walked the board through the mechanics: New York State’s tax-cap calculation includes a tax base growth factor that in Ballston Spa has been buoyed by local construction and commercial development. He said the district’s allowable tax-cap figure for next year looks near 5.3 percent under the statutory formula, but that the board has historically recommended seeking much lower levy increases to reduce taxpayer impact.

Transportation and special-education costs were a major budget pressure in the presentation. Sirianni said in-district operations costs rose chiefly because of higher salary costs tied to substitutes and overtime and that out-of-district special-education transportation has jumped in recent years. He told the board the current-year cost for some out-of-district transportation was “750,000 for this year,” and cautioned the board that the initial budget projection for next year was not fully finalized in the presentation record.

Sirianni also addressed state-driven electric-bus requirements and infrastructure questions. He said district staff are still evaluating whether to include electric buses in the next bus proposition and warned that current electric-bus technology and charging infrastructure may not yet meet all district route requirements. “At the very most, we would just buy one of these for next year… this would be another pilot,” he said, noting statewide deadlines that would limit diesel purchases in some future years.

Board members asked questions about fuel contracting and competitiveness for driver recruiting. Sirianni said the district buys diesel through a New York State volume contract (referred to in the presentation as the state’s barge rate), which helps limit diesel price exposure. He and board members also discussed the continued driver shortage and the possibility that wider adoption of electric buses could increase the number of discrete runs and therefore the number of drivers required.

Next steps: Sirianni said the board will receive further budget detail at subsequent meetings. He scheduled the next budget discussion for March 5, when administration and benefits items will be presented and any revenue updates incorporated.

Votes at a glance: The board took a series of routine votes during the same meeting. Resolutions listed by number and the meeting record outcome were: 369 (readoption of the 2024–25 Board meeting schedule) — approved; 370 (field trip, Music Department) — approved; 371 (field trip, indoor track) — approved; 372 (agreement; details not specified in the meeting record) — approved; 373 (universal prekindergarten providers) — approved (presentation noted an increase of 65 spots); 374 (placement of students with disabilities) — approved; 375 (placement of preschool students with disabilities) — approved; 376–386 (consent agenda bundle) — approved.

Minutes: The board approved minutes for the Jan. 22, 2025 regular meeting; the meeting record notes one abstention by a board member, Mr. Ryan, who said he was not present at the earlier meeting.

Context and timeline: Sirianni characterized the governor’s state-aid proposal as making limited changes to the foundation formula’s measures of student poverty and said most of the Rockefeller Institute’s broader recommendations are not being implemented at this time. He also showed historical charts of state aid as a share of district revenue and of long-term borrowing rates to illustrate how prior years’ trends differ from current conditions.

The board did not adopt a final FY2026 budget at this meeting; the presentation was the first in a multi-step calendar. Additional budget hearings and committee work are scheduled through the coming months, and the board will vote on a proposed budget later in the budget-development cycle.