The Douglas Unified District governing board voted to approve a revision to its fiscal year 2025–26 annual expenditure budget after an administrative presentation and a public hearing at which no members of the public spoke. The revision reduces the maintenance and operations (M&O) budget by $328,219 to reflect a weighted average daily membership (ADM) decline of 61.3627, moving the M&O total from $26,733,210 to $26,404,991.

At the statutorily required public hearing, district finance staff presented the enrollment and revenue changes underlying the revision. "The difference between what we adopted in July and what the revision is now is a reduction of 61.3627 ADM, which represents a reduction in the budget of $328,219," said Mister Sotto, who summarized the figures for the board. He also noted a small capital increase: "We gained $2,273" in district additional assistance for capital.

Superintendent Anna Samaniego told the board she is proceeding cautiously but urgently. "No action is going to be taken, no decisions have been made, but I think we need to get ahead of the ball and just pre-plan," she said, announcing plans to form an internal budget committee made up of staff and board members to develop options for the 2026–27 planning cycle. The committee will review staffing levels, underutilized facilities, program sustainability and transportation routes, Samaniego said.

Board members pressed staff on revenue assumptions and on the district's prior practice of using other funds to subsidize M&O. In response, Mr. Sotto and other finance staff said the board previously authorized using up to $500,000 from auxiliary funds and that the district is likely to rely on that authorization this year. Mr. Sotto also warned the board that high health-plan utilization has increased projected insurance costs: "Looking at our utilization rate, we're probably looking anywhere from a 30 to a 40 percent increase with Blue Cross Blue Shield for the 2025–26–27 school year," he said, and described a planned RFP for health insurance and exploration of trust arrangements as potential cost mitigations.

Board members who spoke—among them Mister Smith and Miss Selchow—supported forming a study session and committee to identify options that minimize impacts to direct instruction. Mister Miller moved to approve the revision; Mister Smith seconded. A roll call vote was taken and the revision was approved by the members present.

What happens next: the board directed staff to convene the internal budget committee after the holidays, with the committee expected to bring recommended scenarios and any required policy or staffing actions to a future work study session for board consideration.