Northwestern Lehigh board revisits elementary reconfiguration amid multi‑year budget shortfall

Northwestern Lehigh School District administrators told the school board that the district faces an estimated $1,800,000 budget gap and presented staffing and facility scenarios, including an elementary reconfiguration, that could reduce recurring costs.

Superintendent Dr. Sysnovik led the presentation and said the district is preparing the proposed final budget over the next two weeks and is currently projecting a 4% Act 1 millage increase for 2025–26 as the working assumption. Christy (business manager) presented fund‑balance projections that show using different millage options would substantially change how much of the district’s reserves are needed to balance the budget.

Board members were shown elementary staffing slides that compared the current configuration to several consolidation scenarios. Administrators said one modeled reconfiguration — moving to a K–3 / 4–5 alignment in the two elementary buildings — could reduce the number of elementary sections and yield roughly $450,000 in annual staff‑related savings. Administrators also reported that transporting 14 students across elementary boundaries currently costs about $100,000 a year; returning those students to their home schools in a consolidation scenario would reduce that transportation expense.

Dr. Sysnovik emphasized that the consolidation scenarios are not recommendations for 2025–26. "None of those are our recommendations," she said, and staff told the board that any reconfiguration would require a year of planning and community engagement and could not be implemented for 2025–26 without additional work.

Board members sought detail on how special education, related arts and extracurriculars would be affected. Andrea (board member) asked whether counts for special education and gifted students were separately double counted on some slides; administrators confirmed the special populations are included in overall enrollment totals and explained how co‑teaching and pull‑out services work. Transportation director Troy said preliminary routing simulations are possible and that vendor data (First Student) makes initial cost modeling straightforward, but a deeper operational analysis would be required to show exact bus counts and schedules.

Christy gave the revenue scenarios tied to the Act 1 index: a 4% millage increase would raise about $1.3 million and reduce the planned use of fund balance; a 3% increase would bring roughly $1.0 million; a 2% increase, about $686,000. Using the 4% assumption for the proposed final budget, staff projected a June 2026 fund balance near $16.8 million under current expenditure projections, and warned that multi‑year projections show the fund balance declining substantially by 2027–28 if revenue and expenditure trends continue.

Board members expressed divergent priorities: some said they want to revisit reconfiguration because of both educational benefits and recurring savings; others stressed the need to focus on student experience and asked for careful community outreach. Multiple members asked staff to prepare a more detailed cost and implementation analysis before the board would consider any formal proposal.

Administrators said next steps are: staff will prepare the proposed final budget assuming a 4% millage increase for the May workshop and present deeper analyses on reconfiguration only if the board directs staff to proceed with that scope of work. The board has scheduled a workshop on May 7 and a regular meeting on May 14 where budget items will be discussed further.

Ending

The board did not take a final vote on school reconfiguration at the meeting; the finance presentation framed the reconfiguration as a potential multi‑year option that would require more study. Staff will prepare the proposed final budget (presented with a 4% millage assumption) and return with additional analyses if the board requests them.