Chisago Lakes board hears FY26 budget presentation, approves contracts and routine items

The Chisago Lakes School District Board of Education on Monday heard a presentation on the district—s proposed fiscal 2026 budget, received enrollment and audit updates from staff and approved a set of routine items including donations, collective bargaining agreements and a pass‑through levy for the region—s long‑term facility maintenance program.

Director of business services Robin (last name not specified in the record) presented financial assumptions and multi‑fund projections the district used to build the FY26 preliminary budget. Staff are using a projected student enrollment of about 3,200 for the coming year; Robin said audits will begin in September and much preparatory work will occur over the summer.

Robin told the board the district expects general‑fund revenue of about $47.9 million and general‑fund expenditures of about $48.9 million under the current assumptions, producing planned deficit spending in restricted categories while holding the unassigned general‑fund balance roughly steady. The presentation noted the district—s unassigned general‑fund balance was about 6.6% as of June 30, 2024, and under current projections would be roughly 6.5% by the end of fiscal 2026. The district policy target is 7%–10% of general‑fund expenditures.

Robin said salaries and benefits represent the largest share of general‑fund spending (about 72%), state formula aid accounts for the bulk of revenue (about 80% of general‑fund revenue), and property tax levy revenue is roughly 12.5% of the general fund.

Staff described several assumptions and changes the budget reflects: a 2.74% increase in the state general education formula for FY26 (the legislature set a floor and ceiling for future increases), a modest decrease in compensatory revenue (Robin estimated the district—s compensatory aid would decline by about $60,000 under the new formula and transitional "hold harmless" arrangements), and continued proration of special‑education transportation reimbursements (reported to be funded at 95% in the coming year under current law). Robin also said the Legislature provided a statewide appropriation for summer employment that should cover costs for the current and next summer.

Robin identified planned set‑asides in the FY26 assumptions: assigned funds for self‑insurance, startup funds for a Wildcat Academy program and money reserved for curriculum and long‑term facility maintenance (LTFM) needs. She said the district will bring additional LTFM detail to the facilities committee in July.

The board and staff also discussed enterprise funds. Robin said the food service fund is being intentionally drawn down for planned equipment purchases (about $220,000 in FY26, including ovens and cafeteria fixtures) and that the food service fund had a small planned deficit of roughly $30,000. Community service (community education, preschool, early‑childhood family education) was reported as healthy: staff reported roughly $3.3 million in revenue against about $3.1 million in expenses and an expected ending fund balance of about $776,000.

Superintendent Brian Dietz placed the budget discussion in a broader context of post‑bond campaign work and community listening. Dietz said staff will return with survey results and consultant findings at a July study session and that the district is considering a possible February election timeline for future ballot work, noting state reporting deadlines make a November special‑election timeline impracticable this cycle.

Votes and approvals

The board approved several routine and administrative items on the consent agenda. The board accepted donations (total $7,570) earmarked to school programs and activities; approved annual membership or resolution items such as the district—s Minnesota high‑school membership resolution (procedural, no substantive change reported); recertified new census estimates for the district (staff reported the district—s population estimate had increased by roughly 400 since 2020); and approved the SCRED long‑term facility maintenance (LTFM) pass‑through levy portion the district will collect (staff said the district—s portion is about $35,000 and that the pass‑through does not affect the district—s own LTFM levy).

The board adopted policy 721 following staff and auditor recommendations to raise the equipment capitalization threshold from $5,000 to $10,000 in response to Governmental Accounting Standards Board guidance.

The board approved collective bargaining agreements and master contracts brought to the meeting: custodial and food‑service agreements were both approved after bargaining teams reported they met within district budget constraints. Staff reported the custodial package carried a total package percentage in the 7% range and the food service package came in at about 6.95%. Board members and administrators described the negotiations as more collaborative than in prior years and credited that approach for quicker resolution.

What did not change or require board action

The presentation and discussion did not adopt a final tax levy or an adopted, legally binding FY26 budget at this meeting; staff described the schedule for levy and audit work that will come later in the summer and fall. Robin said auditors will present final audit reports when the audit work is complete, likely in December. Facilities and bond follow‑up work is scheduled for a July facilities meeting and a July 15 work session.

Why this matters

Board members and staff framed the budget conversation as a stewardship exercise: the district is operating with fewer dollars than the statewide average per pupil while trying to maintain service levels. Staff emphasized the district—s limited margin relative to its policy target for unassigned fund balance and the sensitivity of revenue assumptions to state formula changes. Dietz summarized the board—s posture on finances this way: "we're doing the very best we can with what we have."