Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Forecast topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Princeton board approves financial forecast, discusses levy impacts and state risks
Summary
The board approved the district's September financials and a multi-year forecast tied to a recently passed $12.8 million levy, discussed a transfer of $8 million to capital funds, enrollment uncertainty, and possible state legislation (House Bill 309) that could affect levy collections.
Get email alerts on the Budget Forecast topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Princeton City Schools Board of Education approved the September 2025 financial report and a multi-year financial forecast on Oct. 13, following a detailed presentation from district finance staff.
Treasurer and administrative staff explained that the district moved $8 million out of the general fund into capital funds earlier in the year to prepare for planned capital outlays; that transfer reduced the general-fund cash balance but was undertaken with stated intent and planned expenditures in the capital outlay and permanent improvement funds.
Finance staff highlighted the impact of the district's recently passed $12,800,000 levy, noting that Princeton will only realize the full revenue in the first full year of collection because of the district's fiscal-year timing. The forecast also reflects changes to the state funding formula, which currently uses fiscal year 2022 salary data for base costs; presenters warned that base-cost freezes and other formula choices limit state funding growth.
Trustees asked about enrollment trends, including counts related to the Scarlet program, and discussed cost-per-pupil figures: presenters cited figures in the $18,100'$18,357 range and noted a daily per-student cost of roughly $102. The treasurer warned of legislative volatility and specific bills to watch: House Bill 186 (no expected impact to Princeton as described at the meeting) and House Bill 309, which meeting presenters described as potentially allowing county budget commissions to reduce collections on levies approved by voters. A board member characterized that bill as an "attack on public schools." The board discussed advocacy strategies and continuing engagement with state legislators.
On a roll-call vote the board approved the financial report and the forecast as presented and indicated it will return if legislation requires forecast adjustments.

