Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Budget Projection topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Greendale projects $769,000 preliminary deficit for 2025–26 under current assumptions

Greendale School District Board · January 13, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Preliminary 2025–26 forecasts project a $769,007.54 deficit under current assumptions; a scenario adding per‑pupil increases and a 60% special education reimbursement would yield a projected $1.25M surplus, administration said.

District business staff presented early budget assumptions and a Baird forecasting model for 2025–26. "We show total projection of expenditures of $38,629,006.69 for expenses, and that's versus revenues ... $38,059,015.00," Mr. Mitchell said, summing to a projected deficit of roughly $769,007.54 under current assumptions.

Why it matters: the projection influences staffing, programming and any potential referendum discussions. Administration listed key baseline assumptions: a three‑year enrollment average of about 2,331 students, a projected 4% decrease in general state aid (about $859,000), no ESSER or ongoing DPI mental health grant revenue assumed, and conservative inflation and bargaining cost estimates.

What administration presented: Mr. Mitchell outlined expense assumptions including 4% for teacher salary adjustments, 2.5% for other staff, a 5% projected increase in health/dental and utilities, and transportation increases matching current contracts. He also said the model included $2.5 million of nonrecurring operational referendum funds in the projection.

Alternative scenario: administration showed a scenario where adding $415–$430 per pupil and a 60% special education reimbursement would raise revenues to $38,273,008.45 and produce a $1.25 million surplus for 2025–26, a change that would largely depend on state action and WASB advocacy.

Board questions: members asked whether Act 20 reading curriculum reimbursement should be counted; administration said DPI finance guidance advised not to build that expectation into the preliminary budget due to timing and legal uncertainty. Administration reassured the board that a balanced preliminary budget would be produced before required approvals later in the budget cycle.

Ending: administration emphasized these are early projections and said staff will return with further scenarios and adjustments as the bargaining and state budget picture clarifies.