Deputy superintendent and business official outline budget pressures and reserves

Deputy Superintendent Onyx Peterson and School Business Official Kimberly Roaring presented the Newburgh City School District’s budget process and projections during the Jan. 28 board meeting, explaining why the district faces ongoing structural pressure and how reserves have been used to smooth year-to-year spending.

Peterson, who said she is leading the district in the superintendent’s absence, described the district as “a microcosm of America” with complex needs and noted recent local incidents that have heightened concerns about student safety and mental health. “I am running the district right now,” she told trustees and the public.

Kimberly Roaring, the school business official, walked trustees and the audience through budget terms and considerations, including the district’s four levels of auditing oversight and the role of the state comptroller’s fiscal stress monitoring system. Roaring told the board Newburgh “has never been designated in this system, which means we are in a solid financial position.”

On the budget projections Roaring and Peterson presented, staff said the district’s rollover budget (the cost to maintain current services next year before new program requests) is projected at about $368,800,235 as presented in the meeting. They noted that number excludes certain mandated increases and unanticipated individual special-education placements.

Roaring explained why the district maintained a surplus and why some reserves were set aside: the district received higher-than-expected Medicaid reimbursements, stronger interest income from investments, and larger utility-tax receipts. She showed restricted reserves available for use as revenue and said the combined balance highlighted in the presentation totaled roughly $4,440,000 (as listed on a slide). The unassigned fund balance was described on a slide as about $3,700,000, a figure Roaring said represents roughly 1% of the operating budget.

Both presenters emphasized that budget planning is projection-based and that personnel, employee benefits and student transportation are the largest cost drivers. Peterson said the board asked for “minimal to no layoffs” and limited levy increases during planning; the executive team pursued staffing adjustments, a retirement incentive and program reviews to close the forecast gap.

Peterson and Roaring called for continued community engagement and said staff will bring department-level budget requests to upcoming meetings. They also asked the community to submit questions via a QR code so staff could prepare detailed responses.

Ending: The presentation set the stage for more detailed departmental budget reviews at future board meetings. Staff will return with a refined multi‑year projection, requested program additions if any, and options for balancing the coming year’s budget.