Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fy26 Budget Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
MNPS committee keeps FY26 total at $1.382 billion while shifting about 306 FTEs, including special-education roles
Summary
Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools’ Budget and Finance Committee reviewed a proposed FY26 budget amendment that leaves the district’s $1.382 billion appropriation unchanged but reallocates roughly 306.3 FTEs across functions — including a 36.8-FTE adjustment tied to an estimated $2.5 million drop in federal IDEA funding.
Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools’ Budget and Finance Committee heard a presentation from Chief Financial Officer Jorge Robles on a proposed FY26 budget amendment that maintains the district’s previously approved total appropriation while realigning staffing and budget lines.
Robles told board members the amendment does not increase the overall appropriation: “the actual budget is balanced to the original allocation” of $1,382,000,000. He said the amendment records adjustments that have occurred since the original budget was approved so the official, approved budget reflects current allocations and supports clearer budget management.
The amendment records a net adjustment of 306.3 full-time-equivalent positions. Robles said 171 of those FTEs result from the student-based budgeting (SBB) principal allocations that came through the full adjustment process, and 99.5 FTEs reflect corrections in maintenance and transportation where previously reported counts needed adjustment. He emphasized the maintenance and transportation changes “are not new personnel.”
Robles also described a 36.8-FTE adjustment to ensure continuity of support for Exceptional Student Education. He linked those adjustments in part to an estimated $2.5 million decrease in federal IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) funding for FY26 and explained how the state distributes IDEA dollars: the statewide pool and relative district measures (population and poverty) determine each district’s share. “Even if you see an increase overall, if other districts in the state of Tennessee have grown more on other dimensions — either population or poverty — we might see less funds coming to us,” Robles said.
Board member Elrod asked whether the exceptional-education FTEs were new positions. Elrod: “Those are not new positions just like they're not new positions in the transportation and maintenance FTEs.” Robles replied that the majority (about 28 positions) are shifts from federal IDEA funding to local funding and that some positions were newly created during the full adjustment process where principals identified additional needs driven by student populations.
Board member Bloch asked whether the district expects to confront this kind of budgeting trade-off more frequently if federal allocations decline. Robles said the response would depend on the nature of any grant reductions: the district could cover services with local dollars, change how services are delivered, or re-prioritize resources. He also confirmed that legally required IDEA services must be provided even if federal funding falls short.
When asked whether the state had contributed to offset the reduced federal funds, Robles answered no. On how economically disadvantaged counts factor into IDEA distribution, Robles described the allocation formula as including both population measures and poverty factors and characterized the split in distribution criteria as roughly 75%/25% in his explanation.
No formal vote or motion on the amendment was recorded during the committee discussion. The meeting adjourned after board members’ questions were addressed.
The Budget and Finance Committee may return to the amendment if further adjustments, external funding changes, or board direction require formal action.
