Carroll County Public Schools officials told the school board on Wednesday that years of staffing and program reductions have left little easy room to close future budget shortfalls and that the district’s funding position will hinge on state formula changes and the county’s FY27 operating allocation.

"We've cut $40,000,000 over the past decade," Dr. McCabe told the board as staff walked through a year-by-year reconstruction of personnel and program reductions the district made after enrollment declines and state funding drops.

The presentation, led by budget staff, paired a historical inventory of reductions with early revenue estimates for fiscal 2027. Rob Burke said Carroll County government’s FY26 operating plan provides a starting local increase of about 3%, roughly $7.6 million, but cautioned that the district must await the governor’s budget (by law released Jan. 21) and updated wealth-equalization data to finalize state projections.

Board members and staff framed the broader problem around Maryland’s Blueprint law, which defines program-level shares of state and local funding. John O'Neil summarized the difficulty this creates: "We are by per pupil the lowest funded school system in the state," he said, noting the district ranks low in total per-pupil funding even after substantial county contributions over two decades.

Staff emphasized that Blueprint did not create a large new pot of money for many districts; rather, it prescribes how existing funding must be reported and spent across categories. That means increases in some program lines — for example, an estimated rise in the state per-pupil allocation for pre-K — can create compliance pressure because those increases must be coded into the designated bucket rather than used flexibly.

Burke and other staff said work with APA consultants, under a state waiver, has focused on an accounting methodology that establishes a school-level "foundation" staffing baseline; resources above that baseline can then be coded to Blueprint programs. The consultants’ approach, staff said, has significantly reduced the scale of cuts the district was considering earlier this year.

"This work has been valuable," O'Neil said of the consultant effort and the waiver, adding that the accounting changes mean the district does not expect reductions on the scale discussed in the spring.

The board also heard several cost pressures that will shape FY27 planning: charter-school startup costs phased over three years, ongoing cycles to replace student devices, rising utilities and insurance costs, and open contracts for employee salary negotiations. Burke flagged the district’s FY25 year-end fund balance at about $7.2 million (roughly 1.7% of the budget), below the board’s historical midpoints and after transfers to a local infrastructure renewal account that cumulatively totaled roughly $11 million and is now largely spent.

Board members pressed staff on practical and legal limits to moving funds between categories. One member raised the special-education overage — staff said the district spends roughly $18 million more on special education than is reimbursed in combined shares — and asked whether reclassifying work or charging other programs could help. Staff cautioned they must respect IEP obligations and legal reporting requirements and that some recharacterizations remain under technical discussion with consultants.

A board member suggested exploring whether employees eligible for federal plans such as TRICARE might reduce district health-plan enrollment and associated premium exposure; staff said that topic likely intersects with collective bargaining and might be discussed in a closed session after compiling enrollment data.

The board and staff agreed on next steps: updates at the Dec. 10 board meeting, a second work session Dec. 17 with more detailed revenue and expenditure estimates, and the superintendent’s proposed budget in January followed by a public hearing and anticipated board approval in February. The county’s final requested budget is due March 1.

There were no formal votes or motions at the work session.