Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SLPS finance director reports healthy fund balance, audit work ongoing
Summary
District staff told the Board the operating fund balance remains above policy targets as auditors complete reviews; leaders warned of planned fund balance spending and state budget and voucher risks that could reduce future revenue.
The Saint Louis Public Schools (SLPS) finance presenter gave the board a second-quarter update covering August through December, saying the district’s unrestricted operating fund balance is projected to end the year well above the district target and state minimums.
The presentation showed SLPS’s projected operating fund balance for fiscal 2023–24 at 54.36 percent (subject to change after the annual audit) and budgeted year‑end 2024–25 fund balance at about 45.43 percent, above the district maintenance target of 30 percent and the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) minimum of 3 percent. The presenter said the district is “spending down our fund balance” in planned ways and described categories that have driven year‑to‑date expenditures, including payroll, extra‑service pay for before‑ and after‑school programs, transportation, special education, utility and capital outlay costs, and some Prop S capital spending.
The finance presenter cautioned that the projected balances are provisional until RubinBrown’s financial audit is finalized and listed audit open items: construction‑in‑progress support, unexpended grant balances that roll forward, revenue testing samples, and a pending ESSER journal entry awaiting state guidance. The district’s current target to submit the RubinBrown audit work is March 31, 2025; staff said they meet twice weekly with auditors to resolve outstanding items.
Board members pressed staff on details. Secretary Jones asked what the district meant by “vouchers” when the presenter listed vouchers and the state budget among future concerns; the presenter replied that the primary concern is potential student loss, which reduces state funding tied to enrollment. Vice President Davis and other board members asked about the composition of capital outlays (the presenter said capital spending includes Prop S projects and that staff would run a report to show Prop S line‑by‑line expenditures). The presenter also confirmed the ESSER journal entry involves reallocating some payroll costs between fund sources and that they are coordinating with the state to ensure the entry is acceptable.
Board members and the superintendent framed the financial outlook as strong now but emphasized the need for planning. One board member said the district should prepare for likely state budget cuts and voucher legislation and signaled an expectation that planned fund balance reductions will continue into FY2025 and FY2026 as part of a multi‑year budget strategy.
The presenter and board reiterated that the projected fund balance figures may change after the audit, and staff said they will return with more detailed Prop S expenditure reports and other follow‑up information.
Ending: The board received the presentation for discussion; no formal fiscal action was taken at the work session beyond questions and direction for follow up.
