Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District Finance Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Washoe, Carson City and Clark districts report gains from new funding but warn of shortfalls and federal uncertainty
Summary
Superintendents and finance chiefs from Washoe, Carson City and Clark County told the subcommittee they used recent state funding increases to raise pay, preserve staff and expand services, but they reported projected deficits, at-risk funding volatility and federal grant uncertainty that could force cuts.
Leaders from Nevada's largest school districts presented how they have used the legislature's recent funding increases and raised concerns about coming budget pressures, federal grant uncertainty and the volatility of at‑risk funding formulas.
Washoe County School District Superintendent Joe Ernst and CFO Mark Mathers said the district used roughly $100 million in additional base per-pupil funding last fiscal year and about $16 million in the current fiscal year to preserve positions, increase compensation and invest in interventions, early childhood and support for high‑need schools. Ernst said the district targeted resources to the 18 lowest-performing schools (the "comprehensive school collaborative") with instructional coaches, long‑term substitutes and kindergarten supports; he presented winter assessment improvements in reading and math at participating campuses.
But Mathers warned of fiscal strain next biennium if base per‑pupil funding does not rise: Washoe entered its FY26 budget process with an estimated $9.7 million deficit before mitigation steps, he said. Mathers and Ernst also said at‑risk funding calculations have produced volatile allocations since the state changed metrics (from direct certification and free-and‑reduced lunch measures to a grad-score model), which shrank the number of students counted as at‑risk in some districts and complicated multi‑year staffing decisions.
Carson City Superintendent A.J. Fueling described similar patterns in a smaller district: recent compensation raises materially improved recruitment and retention and lowered vacancy rates (district-wide vacant benefited positions declined from about 7% in 2023 to roughly 2.7% the most recent October), but the district still faces high costs for intensive behavioral supports. Fueling noted Carson City has about 13.92% of enrollments classified as receiving special-education services and described a district-funded elementary behavior program (nine intensive students) that costs about $500,000 annually.
Clark County Interim Superintendent Brenda Larson Mitchell, CFO Diane Bartholomew and Chief Academic Officer Dustin Mansell reported Clark County used SB231 and other funding to increase compensation, add targeted pay for hard-to-fill positions and expand supports. Clark said it had significantly increased hires this year: the district reported hiring about 2,703 licensed professionals and 2,339 support professionals this school year compared with lower figures previously; its projected vacancies for next year were roughly 394 licensed and 328 support positions. Clark officials also described a large carryforward balance that rose during the pandemic as ESSER spending and noted they do not expect the recent carryforward trend to continue once relief funds lapse and schools spend previously accumulated balances.
All three districts told the subcommittee they remain concerned about federal funding uncertainty: short notice or changes in liquidation periods for federal grants can force districts to reassign or rescind planned contracts and programs. Members of the subcommittee asked for additional data on at‑risk funding counts, carryforward balances and how districts would adjust if federal supports decline.
Ending: District leaders said recent state investments have improved teacher retention and student supports, but they urged lawmakers to consider stable revenue and fixes to at‑risk allocation methods to avoid abrupt cuts in coming years.
