Beaverton SD 48J projects multi‑year shortfall; staff allocations and levy volatility singled out

Beaverton School District 48J leadership presented a budget briefing at the board’s Jan. 27 retreat that outlined a near‑term operating gap and multi‑year risks, and proposed staffing‑allocation changes developed by the district’s Large SAM committee.

Associate Superintendent Mike Schofield said the district’s 2024‑25 resources were about $750 million with expenditures near $586 million and that the adopted 2025‑26 budget anticipates roughly a $20,000,000 operating deficit. “You’re not gonna vote on anything today… We are not asking you to take a vote,” he told the board, stressing the session was informational and focused on process.

The presentation projected a roughly $25.4 million deficit in 2026‑27 and a substantially larger cumulative shortfall by 2028‑29, driven in part by pension (PERS) changes and the scheduled end of certain PERS rate credits and debt service. Schofield said the district expects the expiration of a rate credit and remaining pension debt to create a significant increase in employer retirement costs in future biennia.

On staffing, district leaders said an accelerated enrollment decline would reduce positions under the district’s current staffing allocation model: roughly 54.8 fewer licensed positions, 9.7 fewer classified positions and five fewer administrative positions, offset by an increase of about 45 special‑education paraeducators per the existing formula. Shelly Regiani, who led the Large SAM work, described the committee’s five meetings and said members used the district strategic plan and an equity lens when developing options for preserving classroom services while seeking efficiencies.

Schofield also identified a revenue risk in the district’s local option levy. He estimated a roughly $5,000,000 shortfall in levy collections next year — the equivalent of funding about 30 classroom teachers compared with earlier levy projections — and explained that property‑value “compression” can make levy receipts volatile year to year.

Smaller grant shortfalls were also noted: staff estimated approximately $706,000 for IDEA special‑education and roughly $470,000 for the Student Investment Account (SIA). Leadership said those gaps could be handled by shifting costs to the general fund or trimming specific services, and that federal funding outcomes (Congress/the Senate) remain uncertain.

What’s next: district staff said they will publish a 12‑minute “budget listening and learning” video in February, gather community, staff and student feedback through February with analysis presented in March, and return in May with formal budget recommendations. Schofield emphasized transparency and repeated that no formal board action was requested at the retreat.

The board asked procedural and substantive questions about how SAM changes would operate at the building level, thresholds for staffing decisions, and how overlapping cuts (for example, simultaneous reductions to specialists and to federal‑funded positions) could compound impacts on specific student groups. Staff repeatedly noted the numbers were preliminary and that direct‑certification and March enrollment updates could change allocations before budget adoption.

The retreat adjourned after the governance and policy items on the agenda. The district’s next steps will be public outreach in February and a March report back before formal May budget consideration.