Lexington One board gives direction to advertise fiscal 2025–26 budget with full ‘Option 3A’ package

The Lexington County School District One Board of Trustees on May 20 completed a second reading of the district’s fiscal year 2025–26 general fund budget and directed administration to advertise the budget at the maximum level presented (Option 3A), which includes roughly $11 million from fund balance to cover “would like to do” additions.

Board members, the superintendent’s office and finance staff spent more than two hours questioning assumptions, revenue risks and planned new positions before arriving at that course. Finance director Lindsey Miller outlined a still-open state funding question that could increase district revenue by about $750,000 if the legislature changes the charter-school weighting in the state aid formula; she also described recent increases the district must absorb, including higher workers’ compensation and property insurance quotes and rising state costs for hazardous-route pay and stop adjustments.

“Right now, that is just in discussions…if we did have the change, it did look like it would increase, potentially, our revenue by $750,000,” Lindsey Miller, chief financial officer, told the board. Miller said the district reran projections through April 30 and still expected “a pretty much break-even year” absent additional legislative changes.

Why this matters

The board’s maximum-advertisement direction preserves the widest set of options for the June public hearing and final vote while complying with state advertisement rules. Advertising the larger estimate allows the district to reduce the advertised amount later if new revenue materializes; state law forbids increasing the advertised maximum after publication.

What was proposed and debated

District leaders presented three options: Option 3A (the most expansive, $11 million from fund balance), Option 3B (about $9.7 million from fund balance, a narrower package) and a more conservative base option limited to mandatory and recurring needs. Key additions in the “would like to do” list included: - Special education supports: additional academic and behavior coaches (request originally for three of each; the budget would add at least one additional academic coach and one additional behavior coach districtwide), intended to raise IEP implementation consistency and teacher capacity. - Elementary math coaches: converting each school’s current 0.5 FTE math coach to full time at several elementary schools (principals listed this as their top request). - Middle school behavior interventionists: positions targeted to the two middle schools with the greatest Tier 2/3 behavioral needs (Carolina Springs Middle and White Knoll Middle were named in discussion). - Additional assistant principal positions and middle school academic interventionists (some already contingency-approved earlier in the budget process). - A custodial services specialist (to support more than 300 custodial staff and to supervise facilities inspections and onboarding). - Middle- and high-school athletics allocations (a request to add $10,000 per middle school and $5,000 per high school across the district). - Technology and systems: an add-on to the Frontline HR system for recruiting and dashboards and a student discipline management system (Simple Discipline) piloted this spring.

Board members pressed for measurable outcomes tied to the new hires and programs. “Trust but verify,” said Dr. Davonna Price, describing her willingness to support the package so long as administrators deliver clear metrics and targets for return on investment.

Fiscal safeguards and timeline

Miller said the district’s adjusted budgeting practices show the district is positioned to use fund balance for multiyear transitional support, and she estimated the current assigned and unassigned fund balance could sustain the 3A additions for several years in preliminary modelling. She cautioned that final numbers still depend on legislative actions (the charter weighting discussion and other provisos) and on updated state revenue reports expected in the coming days.

Board members sought, and administration agreed to develop, specific key performance indicators (KPIs) for each newly funded position or program (for example, coach activity measures, discipline referral reductions and academic-growth targets) and to return results in regular reports so the board can evaluate effectiveness before committing to the positions as permanent ongoing costs.

Process note

Under South Carolina law the board must advertise the maximum proposed budget before the public hearing. Legal counsel explained the board may reduce the advertised amount before final adoption but may not raise it from the advertised maximum.

What the board decided

Members did not adopt a final budget on May 20. Instead they gave the superintendent and finance staff direction to advertise the FY2025–26 general fund budget at the Option 3A maximum so the district can proceed with legal notice and later revise downward if new state revenue arrives. The board set the third and final reading and public hearing date for June 10, when the board expects to have updated state revenue information.

Looking ahead

Administrators will prepare the advertised document for public posting and incorporate the board’s request for measurable KPIs tied to each would‑like‑to‑do item. The public hearing and final adoption vote are scheduled for the board’s June meeting, after the district receives additional state revenue updates.

Ending

Board members said they preferred preserving options for the June hearing rather than limiting the district’s ability to act if new revenue arrives. Several trustees expressed concern about long-term sustainability of fund-balance-funded positions and confirmed they expect administration to supply the requested performance metrics at regular intervals.