Arlington officials outline budget gap, recommend staffing reductions and weigh tax-levy options

Arlington Central School District finance staff presented updated revenue and expenditure estimates and outlined options to close a roughly $7 million budget shortfall, saying the district can narrow but not yet eliminate the gap without choices on taxes or further spending reductions.

Kevin Chilton, the district presenter on finance, told the board that the governor's executive proposal produced $471,357 more in state aid than the district had budgeted at its January 7 starting point. He said updated PILOT payments raised revenue by about $200,000. ‘‘From the time that we started on January 7, we've gotten updated or we've got the latest executive proposal, and that's going to be $471,357 more in state aid than I had estimated at the January 7,’’ Chilton said.

Chilton said the district is combining revenue gains with reductions in expenditure assumptions to reduce the shortfall. He said the Teachers' Retirement System (TRS) employer rate estimate was lowered from 10% to the state-provided 9.59%, producing about a $400,000 reduction in expected expenditures. He also said the district is holding health insurance increases at 8% for planning and may tighten that line further.

Superintendent Dr. Benanti and finance staff said the district had factored in staff changes tied to retirements. Benanti noted 18 staff members announced retirements; the current budget model assumes hiring back 11 of those positions and managing a net loss of seven teaching positions through attrition. ‘‘The net reduction in teaching positions that we included in the model… was 7 positions,’’ Benanti said. He said principals and department leaders will be consulted before changes are finalized.

Tax-levy choices figured centrally in the presentation. Chilton explained the state’s tax-cap formula and said Arlington’s legal limit this year calculates to 3.74%. He described the board’s working baseline near the district’s historical level of roughly 2% and said the district could raise more, but doing so would require community support and possibly a ballot override. ‘‘This year's calculation yields a possible tax cap of 3.74… If we could tax a full 3.74 without having to get a majority vote… across the state, individual districts that have attempted to go over above the cap, the success rate has not been very good,’’ Chilton said.

Benanti and Chilton showed a revised budget model that narrows the gap but leaves a remaining shortfall under the 2% scenario. At one point Chilton described the district’s current modeled differential: with a 2% levy the district is about $2,670,000 short of fully closing the gap; taxing to the calculated 3.74% would cover the difference in the model but is politically and practically challenging. ‘‘So we are sitting at about 2,670,000.00 differential at the moment and a 2% tax increase. That's where we're at today,’’ Chilton said.

Board members pressed for more community education and discussion before settling on a levy target. Board members noted Arlington’s long history of taxing below its legal cap and urged the administration to prepare materials that explain the trade-offs to taxpayers, particularly households on fixed incomes.

What happens next: the administration will return with additional budget detail in meetings scheduled over the coming weeks, including a committee-of-the-whole session referenced for further levy discussion. Benanti said the administration will present recommended budget proposals in early March and that staff will continue to analyze expenditure lines and enrollment projections before firming recommendations.

Ending: Board members did not set a final levy at the Feb. 11 meeting; they asked the administration to provide more detailed scenarios and community-facing explanations ahead of next meetings so the board can decide what levy to propose in its recommended budget.