Wallingford-Swarthmore SD finance committee outlines 2026–27 budget choices, recommends using reserves to smooth tax impact

The Wallingford-Swarthmore SD finance committee on Dec. 16 received a data-heavy budget briefing that left administration and board members debating how much of the district’s one-time funds to apply to the 2026–27 budget and what Act 1 index range to use for planning.

Administration (Speaker 2) reviewed the 24–25 audit adjustments and described steps taken to improve financial reporting, including daily reconciliations and a three-year averaging approach for volatile revenue streams (transfer taxes, delinquent taxes and interest). The district reported final 24–25 budgeted revenue of $101,451,766 and budgeted expenditures of $102,437,505; actual revenues collected were reported at $101,039,491 (about $400,000 below budget), and administration said these numbers will serve as the baseline for multi-year planning.

Officials also described state and federal revenue variances. The district’s Ready-to-Learn block grant was reported as $252,951; a tax-equity supplement of roughly $736,000 is expected to be credited next year. Administration said the district missed out on spending the full ARP/ESSER allocation and therefore forfeited approximately $600,000 that had to be returned or reclassified.

A major point: the district’s taxable assessed value declined by roughly $6.5 million across its four servicing jurisdictions, to a reported $2,586,000,000, which reduces the maximum revenue available under the Act 1 index. Administration said that, based on current figures, a full 3.5% Act 1 increase would generate about $2,365,000 next year — approximately $203,000 less than earlier estimates because of the assessed-value decline.

To address near-term cost pressures, administration recommended using a portion of the district’s one-time surplus (reported as roughly $2,200,000) to replenish committed reserves and help mitigate tax impacts: suggested moves included roughly $500,000 back to the self-insurance committed fund, about $558,000 to the real-estate committed fund, and the remainder to the debt-service committed fund to support the approved 10-year capital plan. Administration said all recommended transfers require full board approval.

Doctor Johnson framed the broader budget challenge: even if the district levies the full Act 1 index, cost growth and fixed contractual obligations could leave the district roughly $2.6 million over budget for 2026–27 unless reductions are identified. He recommended developing a board resolution next week giving administration a planning range for the Act 1 index and direction to pursue reductions that are ‘‘furthest from the classroom.’’ He cited a planning upper bound of up to $5.2 million in possible reductions as a scenario for administration to analyze.

Board members and members of the public pressed for details: which committed funds would be tapped, how long one-time fund use could be sustained, whether the district’s staffing growth justified current headcount, and how comparable districts were chosen for benchmarking (Unionville, Radnor, Upper Dublin and Rose Tree Media were named as comparators). Administration said organization charts, comparator lists and the PA Economy League enrollment projection are posted on the district website and pledged to email interested residents and post audit drafts when available.

No final tax-rate decision was made; the committee asked administration to return a draft resolution for board consideration that would set a planning range for Act 1 and outline spending priorities and reduction strategy ahead of formal budget adoption next spring.