Springfield Township SD presents first look at 2025‑26 budget, proposes 4% tax increase and use of fund balance

Springfield Township School District finance staff presented a first‑look 2025‑26 budget to the district finance committee on March 7 that assumes a 4% tax increase (the Act 1 index), projects about $74.6 million in revenue against slightly more than $76 million in expenditures, and anticipates using approximately $1.68 million of fund balance to cover the gap.

Miss Green, staff member, ran through revenue and expenditure assumptions, saying the budget was built to the Act 1 index (4%), which she noted equates to about 1.5637 mills and would generate roughly $2.06 million at current assessments. She said the district used conservative revenue assumptions, budgeting state and federal allocations at current levels rather than optimistic projections. Miss Green also reminded the committee that ESSER (federal COVID relief) funding expired in September 2024 and will not be part of next year's revenues.

School administrators told the committee that contractual obligations and personnel costs account for the bulk of expenditure growth. Dr. Yannickone, administrator, and others noted the district settled major contracts this year (including multi‑year STA and Act 93 agreements) and is in year three of the STA contract; staff said salary and benefits make up roughly 89% of expenditures and that health‑care and retirement costs (PSERS) rose. Committee members and administrators described a tight labor market that has pushed wages and substitute costs upward and emphasized the district's effort to remain competitive in the county.

The proposed budget includes a small set of neutral‑funded position changes and three modest supplemental stipends: a secondary strings teacher funded by retirements and schedule adjustments, a stipend for a long‑running Relay for Life adviser, and additional coaching support for girls volleyball and wrestling. District administrators said these staffing changes were covered through attrition or neutral reallocations and were not intended to expand the district's overall staffing footprint materially.

On capital and facilities, staff described the property committee's forthcoming April meeting to review a capital assessment plan produced by Dewey CHA that will inform a five‑year capital plan and a five‑year operational plan for smaller projects. Staff also said the district expects debt service to rise after a proposed partial funding of a middle‑school renovation via additional bond issuance; the presentation included a precautionary estimate for annual debt service and noted final financing costs will depend on market conditions when bonds are sold.

Fund balance and reserves drew substantial committee discussion. Staff described fund balance as cash reserves generated by prior surpluses and said the district currently holds roughly $20.5 million in fund balance. Committee members asked how much of that is unassigned and available for discretionary use; staff explained Pennsylvania law allows up to 8% of the budget as unassigned fund balance and said the district typically targets 6–7% unassigned with the remainder assigned to capital or other specific purposes. Staff also said investment income from fund balance is already factored into projected revenues.

Staff characterized the first‑look budget as conservative in its revenue assumptions and responsible in addressing contractual obligations while attempting not to cut programs. Miss Green and Dr. Yannickone said the administration will continue to refine projections, that April 11 is the next meeting to present a proposed final budget, and that the board would consider final approval in June. They also said if dealer pricing for buses falls within discussed parameters a separate motion to authorize two bus purchases would appear on the March 18 full‑board agenda.

Ending: The finance committee took no formal vote on the first‑look budget March 7; staff will return with a proposed final budget in April and seek board approval in June. The committee requested additional detail on unassigned vs. assigned fund balance and on expected investment income to inform decisions about the use of reserves.