RPS board previews balanced‑budget model changes; staff proposes modest reallocation of compensatory aid

Rochester Public Schools finance staff on Dec. 2 previewed proposed enhancements to the district’s balanced‑budget model that would change how compensatory and achievement‑integration dollars are allocated and increase principal flexibility over certain support positions.

"What we're proposing is that we would remove 20% of that as we are permitted to do by state law, and we would allocate much of that 20% to some of our sites that have limited compensatory dollars and have no title funding," Director of Finance Andy Krogstad told the board as he outlined the plan to capture a portion of site compensatory revenue for district‑level set‑asides.

What staff proposed: The main items previewed for formal action on Dec. 16 included:

- A modest accounting and allocation change that would move certain discretionary (printing/copying and site supplies) allocations into the balanced budget model to increase principals’ visibility and flexibility. - A proposal to allocate 80% (rather than 100%) of a site’s compensatory revenue directly to that site; state law permits retaining up to 20% for targeted allocations to schools with low compensatory revenue and no Title I funding. - An accounting shift for achievement and integration aid so that the same total dollars would be administered through general fund allocations at district level and then backfilled into positions required by the achievement/integration plan. - Moving school counselors out of fixed allocations and into the flexible funding category so principals can prioritize among counseling, social‑work and other support positions as local needs dictate.

Board concerns and staff responses: Several board members asked for clearer, school‑level modeling of effects before voting. Director Whitehorn and others urged caution about draining resources from high‑poverty schools; Superintendent Brad McCall said he would not advance any change that he believed would "undermine the amazing work" at schools serving high concentrations of poverty.

Krogstad offered an example projection for one school (Elton Hills) showing an estimated net change on the order of $14,000–$15,000 under one hypothetical allocation scenario and said the proposed formulas are still being refined.

Tradeoffs and governance: Staff emphasized the proposal would preserve statute‑required uses for compensatory dollars while using limited district set‑asides and general‑fund swaps to provide targeted support to schools that historically have had lower per‑pupil compensatory resources. The superintendent and finance staff said every building staffing plan will continue to require central review and approval before implementation.

Next steps: The board will consider formal action on the budget‑model enhancements at the Dec. 16 meeting; staff committed to returning with clearer visuals and per‑school impact examples before that vote.