Waconia board outlines 2025-26 budget adjustments including technology, special education and deans of students

Superintendent Herzlich presented high-level proposed budget adjustments for fiscal year 2025-26 at the Waconia Public School District meeting, asking the board for broad consensus to include several items in the draft budget.

The package included proposed one-time and ongoing items. Instructional-technology replacement (interactive whiteboards) would be funded from the districts learning and development restricted fund; the superintendent said the district expects some drawdown of that restricted balance for one-time purchases. For special education, the district proposed expanding staffing with an additional 0.6 board-certified behavior analyst, adding a birth-to-5 program, and increasing occupational therapy by 0.4 FTE. Director of Special Education Paul Tortoff explained that the district bills Medical Assistance for medically necessary services (occupational therapy, speech, nursing and related services) and that reimbursement receipts must be spent to benefit special education students, making those hires an allowable restricted use.

Herzlich also proposed creating or continuing positions funded by restricted revenue: a literacy lead required under Minnesotas Read Act with literacy-incentive aid to support the role, and maintaining two "deans of students" positions that had been funded in the current year by a $50,000 grant; she noted those positions could be vulnerable in later years if revenue falls but recommended carrying them forward for now. The district proposed a community education coordinator position to expand programming with the goal of increasing fee-based revenue in the community education fund; the superintendent said fund 4 has been healthy but said the position would be vulnerable if community education fails to grow revenues.

Board members asked about timelines and sustainability. Herzlich and staff said positions proposed in restricted funds are expected to have ongoing revenue sources (medical assistance reimbursements, literacy incentive aid, community education fees) and therefore not to draw down general unassigned fund balance; the instructional-technology line was noted as the primary restricted-area drawdown. Board members asked whether the community education coordinator would pay for itself; staff said they expect to evaluate revenue growth over the fiscal year and would report back if deficits emerge.

After questions and discussion, the superintendent said she took general consensus from the board to include the proposals in the upcoming budget work leading to adoption; no final adoption vote took place that night.