Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the District Finance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Hoover City Schools CFO reports majority of budget spent through seven months; business actions approved

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

CSFO Melinda Bach presented April financial statements showing general fund expenditures at 87.9% of budget for seven months, a reserve of 12.13 months, special revenue spending of $17.4 million (75% of budget) and payroll and cash‑displacement figures; the board approved business action items by voice vote.

Melinda Bach, chief school financial officer for Hoover City Schools, delivered a summary of the district's general purpose financial statements and told the board the district has spent the bulk of recurring operating funds through seven months of activity.

"Included in your packet is a summary of general purpose financial statements for the month ending 04/30/2025," Bach said. She reported general fund expenditures of 87.9% of budget for the seven months covered, and current reserves equal to 12.13 months.

Bach also briefed the board on capital and special revenue spending: the district continued payments on roofing projects, the stadium/theater modernization at Hoover High, elevator upgrades and other building projects. Special revenue expenditures for seven months were $17,400,000, approximately 75% of that budget, and the district expects many federal funds to be expensed during the school year with reimbursements following.

Bach reported cash displacements of $4,964,353.10 for FY25 and noted May payroll at $14,153,327.45.

After the financial presentation the board moved, by voice vote, to approve the business action items on the agenda.

The financial packet in the meeting materials includes additional line‑item detail; board members did not ask substantive follow‑up questions during the public presentation.