New Prague Area Schools board reviews budget scenarios; no structural cuts for 2025-26

Superintendent Andy presented the school district's Planning for Success follow-up and told the board that "we did not need to make structural budget reductions for the 25-26 school year." The presentation reviewed the district's current financial position, prior reductions, and several scenarios the board could consider if additional structural reductions become necessary.

The presentation summarized why the district has room this year: higher-than-expected enrollment, savings from an early-retirement incentive and reduced operating costs (for example, less snow removal). Superintendent Andy said the district's unassigned fund balance has grown to about 13 percent, above the board policy target of roughly 8 percent.

Why it matters: the presentation laid out concrete savings options and the likely programmatic impacts of each so the board and the public can weigh tradeoffs if revenue shortfalls reappear.

Most significant specifics presented

- Prior reductions: the superintendent said roughly $6,600,000 (about 14% of the operating budget) was reduced in the spring 2023–2024 processes. Those steps are credited with creating the current cushion.

- Transportation: increasing walking distances could reduce bus routes. One scenario — increasing elementary walk distance by 0.5 mile and secondary by 0.5 mile — was estimated to save about $140,000 (equivalent to removing roughly three routes). Moving to the state maximum walking distances in a larger scenario could save about an additional $70,000 (total savings just over $200,000). The superintendent cautioned that longer walks would make buses fuller, lengthen routes and could require bell-time adjustments.

- Class-size adjustments: elementary staffing is driven by cohort sizes. The presentation estimated that modest class-size increases made earlier equated to about 5 FTEs and roughly $400,000 in savings. A hypothetical larger increase could save about $360,000 more (approximately 4.5 FTE), with average classroom sizes rising substantially in some grades (the example on the slide showed up to 32 students in fifth grade under a more aggressive scenario). The superintendent warned this is a "slippery slope" that would erode services and that cohort fluctuations affect calculations year to year.

- Secondary schedule options: at the middle school, the board heard two options. Option 1 — move from a seven-period day to a six-period day — would mainly reduce elective opportunities and save about 6 FTEs. A deeper cut combining a six-period day with class-size increases could yield two additional FTE savings (about eight FTE total) but would push core class sizes higher. The high school faces similar options: a six-period day would reduce elective offerings; adding class-size increases could produce an estimated additional 3–4 FTE reductions. The superintendent said last year's changes already reduced middle-school staffing by nine FTE.

- Facilities and strategic planning: the superintendent reminded the board the district's facilities task force — about 35 stakeholders representing schools, families and the community — is prioritizing long-term facility maintenance needs and is expected to present a recommendation in March or April. The district is also updating its strategic plan for District 288 (Southwest Metro).

The superintendent repeatedly emphasized that the presentation was informational, not a request for immediate action: "Tonight is really more about information than acting on any of these." He warned that reductions are difficult to reverse: "once you take these away, you don't bring them back." Several board members stressed safety and community impacts when discussing transportation options.

No formal board action was taken on the budget scenarios at the meeting. The superintendent said that if the board later requests structural reductions of $250,000 or more, administration would return with prioritized proposals and estimated savings for board direction.