Taylor County School Board adopts 2025‑26 millage and budget, approves equipment purchases; student progression plan tabled

The Taylor County School Board voted to adopt the 2025‑26 millage rate of 5.637 and approved the district’s final budget for fiscal year 2025‑26. The board also approved several consent items and purchases, including a six‑unit metal detector purchase, and passed a resolution affirming participation in the Small School District Council Consortium for 2025‑26. Separately, the board tabled the student progression plan to correct placement of alternative‑education language for high school sections.

Millage and budget: Finance staff reported the district’s current FTE and presented the final millage rate (5.637) and a budget package showing estimated general‑fund revenues of roughly $31.0 million and expenditures of approximately $32.76 million, with $3.0 million listed in miscellaneous state revenue pending allocation details. After a public hearing, the board approved the final millage and the final budget. Motions to adopt the millage and the final budget were made and seconded and carried by the board.

Equipment and consent items: The board approved a request from Miss Bradsby to purchase six metal detectors. According to staff, two detectors will be purchased with Safe and Security of Schools capital outlay funding totaling $40,476; the remaining four detectors cost $73,826 and will be paid from the general fund (the transcript indicates the district has $3,000,000 in state‑allotted funds in miscellaneous state revenue lines). The motion to approve the purchase was moved and seconded and carried.

Consortium resolution: The board adopted a resolution affirming participation in the Small School District Council Consortium for 2025‑26. A board member asked whether the annual $3,000 fee would come from the general fund; staff confirmed it would.

Student progression plan tabled: The board considered the student progression plan for 2025‑26 and debated placement of newly added alternative education language. Board members said the language appears under the middle school section but not under the high school; statute requires clear description and parental consent timelines. After discussion, the board voted to table the plan so staff can move or duplicate the language appropriately and return a corrected document for final approval.

Votes and procedure: Most motions were approved by voice vote after a motion and second; the transcript records “all in favor, say aye” and “any opposed” calls for several items. The board did not record roll‑call tallies in the meeting transcript excerpts provided. The student progression plan was tabled pending a corrected draft; no final adoption occurred for that item.

The board moved on to workshops and an executive session after the votes.