Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Monticello schools project tighter budgets after enrollment drop; district outlines $1.8M–$2.5M adjustment targets
Summary
Director of Business Services Tina Burkholder told the Monticello School Board that enrollment declines are shrinking state aid and that the district will need multi-million-dollar “budget alignment” actions across scenarios to preserve an 8% fund balance.
Director of Business Services Tina Burkholder presented the Monticello Public School District’s revised general-fund forecast on Jan. 27, telling the school board that lower enrollment and shifts in state aid require multi-year budget adjustments to maintain the board’s fund-balance policy.
"Overall, our revenue budget is going down about 300,000," Burkholder said in presenting a revised revenue and expense picture and a set of three scenarios tied to likely state funding changes.
Why it matters: The district reported an October 1 head-count shortfall that reduced levy and state-aid projections. Burkholder said the district now expects to need between $1.7 million and $2.5 million in budget alignment in coming years — depending on state funding for general education and other one-time aids — to keep the district’s fund balance near its 8% lower target.
Burkholder said the district’s October counts were down roughly 120 students overall: 25 fewer in kindergarten, 14 fewer in grades 1–5, 46 fewer in grades 6–8 and 35 fewer in grades 9–12. That drop decreased both levy collections and state-aid estimates in the revised forecast.
She also highlighted specific revenue and expense drivers: a roughly $300,000 reduction in compensatory (title-like) funding under the new state formula; recognition timing for a multi-district COPS grant; and a small wellness credit tied to the district’s Medica insurance change. On the expense side, Burkholder said about 2.6 speech FTEs went unfilled and those services are being contracted, shifting money from salaries to purchased services. She said the district also added transportation routes this year, increasing purchased services costs.
Burkholder presented three scenarios that vary only by the legislature’s likely increase in general-education aid: scenario 1 assumes a 2% increase, scenario 2 assumes 2.5%, and scenario 3 assumes 3%. Under her baseline assumptions — including a 13% cap on health-insurance increases for the district and modest increases in other operating costs — the district would need roughly $2.0 million in budget alignment for fiscal year 2025–26 under the baseline scenario, then roughly $2.5 million the following year to land fund-balance percentages in the board’s targeted 8–16% range. More favorable state aid reduces those alignment targets slightly; less or no aid would raise them.
Burkholder emphasized that some items remain uncertain and that the forecast does not include special-education cooperative activity, which the district tracks separately. She said the district is monitoring possible legislative action to extend hold-harmless funding for compensatory aid and to continue summer-unemployment funding that affects district revenues.
Board members asked for follow-up analysis on several items, including what the budget committee should examine in depth and the impact if the district receives the roughly $300,000 in compensatory aid the presenter flagged as at risk. Superintendent Eric Olsen noted ongoing efforts to increase enrollment and pursue grants to mitigate cuts.
No formal action was requested at the meeting; Burkholder said the scenarios will be used to guide deeper budget-committee work and future board decisions.
Burkholder closed by reminding board members why maintaining a fund balance matters: unexpected enrollment shifts, extra transportation routes and weather-driven utility spikes can quickly erode operating flexibility, she said.
