Tempe Elementary board approves administration—s $7.4M package of budget cuts to avoid projected deficit

The Tempe Elementary School District governing board on Monday voted unanimously to accept Superintendent Driscoll—s recommended package of budget reductions intended to close a projected $7—7.6 million shortfall for the 2026—27 school year.

Administrators presented three paths: do nothing (which would risk a roughly $7.6 million overspend next year), adopt the recommendation (a menu of targeted reductions designed to produce about $7.4 million in savings) or send staff back with alternative proposals. The board selected the administration—s recommendation and authorized staff to implement it.

The package includes a mix of district-level and site-level reductions the administration said would affect roughly 71 full-time-equivalent positions across categories (some positions are currently vacant). Key line items the administration estimated: eliminating one prep period (teaming) at middle schools ($1.4 million), reducing district staffing ($1.25 million), consolidating middle-school ELA into an ELA block ($1.23 million), reducing literacy specialists/teaching-and-learning coaches ($1.1 million), outsourcing overnight custodians ($1.1 million), eliminating a paid workday for all employees (roughly $408,000) and removing paperwork stipends ($341,000). Superintendent Driscoll said the plan does not include school closures and that some responsibilities could be absorbed by grants or Title I allocations where permissible.

"Every one of those cuts represents a person in our district," Driscoll told the board, adding administrators tried to minimize the effects on students and staff. CFO Eric Thompson had earlier outlined the district—s fiscal picture: last year the district recorded about $102 million in revenue against nearly $108 million in expenditures, and enrollment has been declining 1.5% to 2% annually, reducing state funding tied to student counts.

Board members pressed for detail on which positions are vacant and which are filled, and for assurances about how outsourcing would affect long-tenured staff. District staff and a facilities/HR representative said vendors they— consulted had indicated they would explore retaining current employees and that the district would try to create processes giving existing staff preference where feasible. The administration also said roving (district-level) health assistants were among the roles proposed for reduction but that site-based nurses would remain.

Trustee comments emphasized the human impacts of the choices. One trustee said the cuts represented "tough" but necessary choices; another urged the district to preserve core services such as school nurses and arts programs where possible.

Board member [motion mover recorded on the public record] moved to accept Option 2 (the administration—s recommendations) with caveats to minimize people—s hardship; the motion was seconded and carried by unanimous voice vote. The board directed administration to continue consultations with employee groups, pursue alternative funding when lawful, and return with implementation steps as needed.

What happens next: Administration will work through personnel and collective-bargaining processes, determine which positions are vacant versus filled, and present final implementation items and job-description changes to the board for later approval. Trustees said they expect transparency with staff and the public as details are finalized.

Vote at a glance

- Motion: Accept administration—s recommendation (Option 2) to close 2026—27 projected gap via the proposed menu of cuts - Moved: Board member (public record motion; mover indicated in meeting minutes) - Seconded: Board member (public record second) - Vote: Unanimous approval (voice vote)

Budget context and limits

Administrators warned the estimates depend on assumptions: a 2% decline in student enrollment and a 2% employee raise (each 1% raise costs roughly $1 million). The district also carries reserves (carryforward) that would be used to soften immediate impacts but cannot sustain continuous overspending. Board members asked administration to quantify how many actual filled positions each line-item affects and to prioritize supports for students and high-need programs.

The motion directs staff to proceed with the recommended package while returning with implementation details and opportunities for employees where feasible.