HIGLEY, Ariz. — Higley Unified School District officials presented three options for the fiscal‑year 2026–27 maintenance and operations (M&O) budget on Tuesday, laying out tradeoffs between using reserves, cutting staff through attrition or making deeper reductions that could affect classroom capacity.

Superintendent Lawsonhiser told the board the district faces roughly $7.8 million in pressure — about $3.0 million from projected enrollment declines and $4.8 million tied to a phasedown of a local override. “The first part is the $3,000,000 — that’s enrollment loss,” Lawsonhiser said as he outlined the calculations.

Why it matters: The choices would affect staffing, programs and how much of the district’s carryforward reserves are used. Administrators estimated the district will end the current year with roughly $19 million in M&O carryforward and about $15 million in the classroom site fund (CSF), figures they used to model the three options.

What the options would do: Option 1 would target a $3.0 million reduction tied to enrollment loss and rely more on carryforward to preserve existing programs; administrators estimated the staffing impact at about 29 teacher/teacher‑support positions and six non‑teacher roles, applying mostly to areas where enrollment shrinks. Option 2 is a midpoint reduction of roughly $3.5 million. Option 3 would be the deepest near‑term cut — roughly $4.9 million — and was modeled to remove about 52 instructional/teacher‑support positions and 11.5 non‑teacher positions, providing the largest near‑term structural buffer should state funding not materialize.

Compensation and funding tradeoffs: The presentation included examples of pay adjustments and their cost. A 2% increase for CSF‑eligible employees was modeled at about $900,000; a 3% increase for hourly/non‑teacher staff was presented to address rising minimum wages and avoid salary schedule compression. Lawsonhiser emphasized these were illustrative figures, not final proposals.

Board reaction and next steps: Trustees pressed staff on whether natural attrition and vacancy savings could absorb reductions without layoffs. The district noted it historically hires a large number of teachers in a year (roughly 90 hires last year), and said attrition plus vacancies could cover some reductions but not all. Trustee Van Hook and others asked for a breakdown of vacancies by type (teacher, special education, classified) and the dollar value associated with vacant positions; staff agreed to provide that detail ahead of a final decision. Finance director Miss Rushcamp said the administration will return on Jan. 27 seeking a board decision after members have had time for individual follow‑ups.

From the board dais: President Amanda Wade framed the choice as a community question, asking residents to consider whether they want the district to spend down reserves or support a future override. “Every single one of our schools is an A,” Wade said, arguing the district’s academic performance and staffing are part of the calculus.

What’s next: The board will receive additional data, including vacancy‑savings detail and updated insurance/utilities estimates, and will be asked to select one of the options at its Jan. 27 governing‑board meeting.