Edmond Public Schools preliminary budget projects $6.36 million FY26 shortfall; board presses for details

Mr. Dobson, the district budget presenter, told the Edmond Public Schools Board of Education that the district’s preliminary budget for fiscal year 2025–26 projects a deficit of about $6,355,000 and a decline in the general fund balance if current assumptions hold.

The projection follows the district’s recent “estimate of needs” filing, which establishes the legal spending limit. "I am projecting that this year, based on this budget, based on what I know today tonight, that we will have a deficit during the year of 6,355,000," Mr. Dobson said during the board meeting.

The shortfall arises mainly from three trends highlighted by Mr. Dobson: (1) the expiration of federal ESSER funds, (2) declines in enrollment that reduce state aid, and (3) several departmental cost increases including insurance, testing, athletics and district operations. Mr. Dobson said payroll accounts for roughly 85% of the operating budget and that smaller unspent line-item balances in past years have historically provided a cushion.

Board members pressed staff for more detail on several line items. One board member asked about a roughly $420,000 increase in student technology, questioning whether Chromebook replacements are being paid from bond proceeds or from student technology fees; Mr. Dobson said he would "get you a lot better answer." Staff later explained that the fund at issue contains money collected from students (student technology protection plan) and that Chromebooks and some repairs are purchased from that account, while other technology purchases generally come from bond funds or other sources.

Board members also asked why the district missed a payment request from the City for school resource officers (SROs). Mr. Dobson said a payment of roughly $460,000 was issued in July to cover a missed invoice and that an additional roughly $600,000 is budgeted for the current year because of an additional SRO. A board member asked staff to establish safeguards to prevent future missed invoices.

Child nutrition also drew questions. Mr. Dobson said the child nutrition fund is projected to carry a smaller fund balance (about 25% or roughly $2 million) after a projected operating shortfall of roughly $314,000. He said the district recently lost a supply-chain assistance payment of roughly $500,000–$600,000 that had previously offset purchases and that federal USDA funding fluctuations increase uncertainty for that fund. Board members asked staff to reexamine meal pricing and to work closely with the child nutrition director.

Mr. Dobson reviewed the district’s three principal funds in the presentation — general fund, building fund and child nutrition — and explained the difference between the legal spending limit established by the estimate of needs and the district’s operating budget. He described historical unspent amounts as a cushion but warned that relying on those unspent balances would worsen any deficit if actual spending matches the full operating budget.

Board members requested additional information before the final budget is considered next month, including: an itemized explanation for the student technology increase; clarification on whether athletics-related expenses (trainers, ambulances) are being paid from the athletic activity fund or the general fund; and a plan to ensure SRO payments are invoiced and processed on time.

The board did not take a formal vote on the preliminary budget at this meeting; Mr. Dobson said the final budget will be presented for approval at the next meeting.