Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District Finance Enrollment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tempe Elementary board hears Auditor General risk analysis after 11% enrollment drop since 2021
Summary
District staff warned the governing board that a decline of about 1,300 students since 2021 and the expiration of ESSER funds elevate long‑term financial risk, though current reserves and bond funds limit immediate danger.
Tempe Elementary School District staff told the governing board on Feb. 5 that the district has lost about 1,300 students — roughly 11% of enrollment since 2021 — and that the drop poses a long‑term financial risk unless the district increases revenue or reduces expenses.
The presentation by district finance staff explained that state funding follows enrolled students, and the enrollment decline reduces operating revenue. The staff member leading the presentation said the district’s carryforward reserves have been boosted by federal ESSER funds and voter‑approved overrides and bonds, but warned those one‑time offsets will not sustain enrollment‑related shortfalls indefinitely.
District staff laid out the numbers and why they matter. The presenter said the enrollment decline since 2021 is roughly 1,300 students (about 11%) and 16% compared with 2017. He said budget reserve (carryforward) balances rose to about $11 million this year because ESSER allowed some regular maintenance and operations (M&O) costs to be paid from federal funds. The presentation also noted a capital override and bond funding that have helped the capital fund remain above $10 million in recent years.
"ESSER is gone, so that's not gonna continue to go up," the presenting staff member said, adding, "I would bet that this factor would be a risk factor next year because that balance of the reserve is gonna go down." He told the board the district had shifted some District Additional Assistance (DAA) toward M&O this year (about $4 million to M&O and $1.2 million to capital, he said), and cautioned the Auditor General flags repeated patterns of redirecting capital money to operations.
Board members pressed for context and options. Board Member Lehi praised transparency and urged the district to publicize the financial story so the community understands tradeoffs. Board Member Terry asked how much would be saved by closing a single school building if staff were reassigned rather than laid off; the presenter said precise figures depend on the school but estimated the staffing cost savings for the district’s smallest sites would be "about 2 to 3 million" and reiterated that staff comprise roughly 80% of M&O expenses.
The presenter recommended the district pursue both revenue options (programming and recruitment) and expense adjustments (right sizing staff over time) rather than rely on one approach. He emphasized that current reserves and bond funds reduce short‑term risk but that the district must act proactively to avoid longer‑term structural deficits.
Board members asked follow‑up questions about programmatic strategies to attract or retain students and about the timing of reserve declines; the presenter said the lapse of ESSER funds and continued enrollment declines are the principal drivers of the projected pressure.
The presentation was an informational item; no formal action was taken on Feb. 5.
Looking ahead, the presenter said staff would continue to model scenarios and bring recommendations to the board for possible program changes, staffing adjustments, or other actions to align expenses with long‑term enrollment trajectories.
