LESD administration lays out $3–4M in potential cuts; board asks for more modeling before decisions

Litchfield Elementary School District administration presented a menu of potential budget reductions on Jan. 27 that staff say could approach the district’s target of $3–4 million in savings, but board members pressed for more detailed, site- and grade-level modeling before any recommendation.

CFO Juan and administrative staff framed the discussion around long-term revenue pressure: declining enrollment, the end of federal COVID (ESSER) funding and rising operating costs such as a cited 14% increase in electricity from the district’s provider. Administration said earlier internal surveys of principals and instructional leaders produced a prioritized list of levers that staff then modeled for potential savings.

Key levers presented

- Calendar/furlough adjustments: Staff proposed reducing six days for 12-month employees (roughly a 2% reduction in workdays) and smaller reductions for 9/10-month staff, with estimated savings of about $34,000 per day and total savings from several calendar and administrative changes of roughly $258,000. Administrators cautioned these changes would pressure HR/payroll operations and reduce planning time.

- Special-education contracted services cap: Administration proposed capping some high-cost contracted instructional assistants and prioritizing district hires; staff said they will negotiate with vendors and limit the use of the most expensive contractors.

- Printing contract and school allocations: Moving desktop printers to a per-page service plan and standardizing devices was estimated to save $30,000–$40,000 versus current ink/cartridge spending; staff also proposed a 5% reduction in school budget allocations per student as a manageable lever according to principals and office managers.

- Stipends and Continuous Learner Project (CLP): Administration suggested moving certain district-paid stipends (for example, a yearbook stipend that totaled $19,800 last year) to site-funded arrangements or into the Continuous Learner Project framework so costs are borne at the campus level rather than district-wide.

- Class-size adjustments: Using a model that applied ratios from 2018, administrators estimated reducing general-education teacher positions by about 30 and saving approximately $1.8 million, largely through attrition rather than layoffs. Staff emphasized that modeled averages often differ from site realities and said they would override models where necessary.

Board response and next steps

Board members voiced repeated concern about middle-school class-size jumps (for example proposals moving some middle-school ratios from 32 to 36), and some favored incremental scenarios (e.g., increasing class sizes by one student district-wide rather than returning fully to 2018 ratios). The board requested grade- and site-level impact analyses, strict guardrails for when additional sections must be added, and alternative modeling showing smaller raise scenarios (1%, 1.5%, 2%) versus other levers.

Administration also provided funding context: the district’s weighted average daily membership of 14,588 and current per-pupil amount of $5,113.26, which makes a 2% inflation adjustment worth roughly $1.5 million in additional revenue if the state provides the full adjustment. Administration summarized that the levers discussed could amount to about $3.4 million in potential savings, then asked for continued conversation and for staff to return with more precise options ahead of the March budget decision timeline.

Votes at a glance

- Adoption of agenda: Motion to adopt consent agenda moved by Mister Owens, seconded by Miss Moran; roll-call yays recorded by Miss Wallace, Mister Mikes, Mister Owens, Miss Moran and President Zaidema (motion passed).

- Adjourn: Motion to adjourn moved by Mister Owens, seconded; roll-call yays recorded by Miss Wallace, Mister Mikes, Mister Owens, Miss Moran and President Zaidema (motion passed).