Scotia‑Glenville officials present $69.2 million 2025–26 draft budget; board asked to identify cuts to meet tax‑levy cap

Superintendent Susan Schwartz and district business staff presented a first‑draft $69.2 million budget for 2025–26 and warned the spending plan would increase roughly $4.1 million, or 6.33 percent, compared with the current year. The presentation at the board meeting focused on major cost drivers — rising health insurance and specialty drug costs, increased special‑education tuition, and the scheduled end of several payment‑in‑lieu‑of‑tax (PILOT) agreements — and asked trustees to identify negotiables and nonnegotiables as they work to meet the state tax‑levy cap.

"So that'll give you sort of the big‑picture start," Superintendent Susan Schwartz said as she opened the budget discussion and asked board members to ‘‘always keep our kids at the center of your thoughts.’’

Drew, the district staff member who presented the fiscal numbers, said the district is "looking at a $69,200,000 spend for 25‑26, or going up by $4,116,000 or 6.33% increase." He attributed most of the gap to a handful of line items: health and dental costs, a spike in specialty drug spending for the district's self‑insured Highmark plan, and higher special‑education tuition from new out‑of‑district placements.

Drew told the board that health and dental costs are a major driver, with an estimated increase of about $1.7 million (roughly 17 percent) and that specialty drugs are projected to push the self‑insured drug portion up "at least 30 percent" for the coming year. He said the district had budgeted for four out‑of‑district special‑education placements but has 13 new students this year, producing a roughly 40 percent increase in related tuition expense.

The presenter outlined revenue changes that affect the district's available room under the tax‑levy cap. Three PILOT agreements are ending this year and will move onto the town tax rolls; the assessor's conservative estimate in the presentation was $21.5 million of assessed value shifting from PILOTs to the tax roll, which the district expects would add about $581,000 of tax revenue under current tax rules (the district noted final tax‑rule calculations are not set until May).

Drew summarized the district's options and timetable: trustees must give a directive about the levy direction by March 1 and may change that directive up until budget adoption. He said the first draft would require roughly $3.9 million to balance or would put the district about $2.85 million over the tax cap if no reductions are made.

Board members pressed staff on vulnerabilities and mandates. One board member asked whether the more than $1 million special‑education increase was tied to the 13 new students; the questioner, citing the mandate, said, "that's not like we have a choice in that." District staff responded that federal funding for IDEA and other title grants covers part of the cost this year but that if federal entitlements were reduced in future years, the impact on the district budget would be substantial.

Schwartz and staff said they will gather board preferences about program reductions or other changes and present specific options at future meetings. The superintendent said the board would be mindful of state mandates (for example, graduation credit requirements) while identifying possible reductions.

Votes at a glance

- Resolution 7: Motion to increase the maximum income level for granting a partial exemption from real property taxes for persons 65 or older pursuant to Section 467 of the Real Property Tax Law — motion made and seconded; approved by voice vote (no opposition reported in the record).

- Resolution 8: Motion to accept a gift/donation to Lincoln Elementary — motion made and seconded; approved. The agenda listed $500 but the resolution text was corrected in the meeting to read $5.50.

- Resolution 9: Motion to approve the memorandum of agreement between Scotia‑Glenville Central School District and the Scotia‑Glenville Administrators Association — motion made and seconded; approved.

- Resolution 10: Motion to approve the revised cell phone allowance as submitted — motion made and seconded; approved.

- Communications/staffing: Motion to approve communications, staffing items 1–6 and placement of students with disabilities as needed — motion made and seconded; approved.

What happened next

Board members and staff announced ongoing work on district goals (instruction, personnel, operations, facilities), upcoming facility projects including vestibule construction, and continued work on electric‑vehicle infrastructure at the transportation facility; staff noted federal and state funding uncertainty could affect any final decision. The superintendent said a summary article will be posted on the district website and asked board members to bring their negotiables and nonnegotiables for the next budget discussion.

The meeting also included routine updates from the PTA, the audit committee and policy committee and recognition of student extracurricular achievements.

(Reporting note: specific vote counts were not read into the record; motions were approved by voice vote with "Aye" responses recorded and no opposition reported.)