The Mountain View Whisman School District presented its first interim budget report and fiscal outlook, and trustees asked staff to plan for roughly $9 million in ongoing expenditure reductions as they prepare recommendations for January.

At the Nov. 18 meeting, Chief Business Officer Dr. Westover and Director of Fiscal Nadia Pongo walked the board through assumptions, revenue changes and program costs. Dr. Westover said the district’s board policy aims for a 17–20% reserve level and noted that a large share of spending is personnel; he told trustees that special education’s total cost is about $21,800,000 with an encroachment of about $19,000,000 onto the unrestricted general fund.

Staff assessment: the first interim (actuals through Oct. 31) shows a projected net decrease of roughly $4.7 million with a first‑interim reserve level of about 33.33% in the current year, but a structural deficit of about $11.3 million for the 2026–27 year under the district’s low‑revenue assumptions. Dr. Westover presented an illustrative staff planning target of $9,000,000 in ongoing reductions and a menu of example measures — district‑office efficiencies, school‑site reorganization, combining classes, reorganizing after‑school programs, and more drastic illustrative scenarios such as closing one or two schools — noting the list was illustrative, not prescriptive.

Why it matters: staff said assessed value growth (a primary revenue driver) has slowed and the district can no longer rely on prior "release valves" (parcel tax or shoreline payments) to close gaps in the out years. Shoreline revenue was reported at about $7.7 million this year and projected at $7.0 million the next year. Dr. Westover warned that unchanged spending trajectories would lead to longer‑term fiscal stress: "If we continue spending at the rate that we're spending, we will put ourselves into a fiscal crisis," he said.

Board and community reaction: trustees pressed for granular data — including totals that combine contracted staff with district FTE — and asked for cost and program‑impact analyses. Several trustees emphasized prioritizing student‑facing programs and favoring reversible cuts where possible. A public commenter challenged the reliability of the district’s multi‑year projections, saying prior predicted deficits had not materialized and urging trustees not to cut student programs; she warned against "fear mongering." Staff and trustees replied that the current slowdown in assessed value growth is supported by assessor data and that the district must plan for both conservative and best‑case scenarios.

Decision and next steps: the board voted unanimously to approve the 2025–26 first interim budget report and gave staff the direction and target number for planning (staff said $9 million would be used as an illustrative planning target). Trustees asked staff to return in January 2026 with specific proposals informed by an Orenda review and additional analyses.

The district will refine the list of proposed reductions, show program‑level and site‑level FTE and dollar impacts (including contracts), and present specific recommendations in January.