Rockingham County Schools warn of multimillion-dollar state funding gap; consolidation options discussed
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Superintendent staff presented a high-level 2026–27 budget showing a potential ~$6.8 million cut in state funding for Rockingham County Schools if state tax changes hold; staff outlined likely position and dollar reductions, a projected $3.6 million EC shortfall, and asked the board to consider school consolidation and other efficiency measures.
Annie Ellis, presenting the district’s 2026–27 draft budget, told the Rockingham County Board of Education on Feb. 9 that the state’s unresolved budget dispute over personal income tax rates could reduce statewide revenue by about $2.1 billion — roughly translating to a potential $6.8 million loss in state funding for Rockingham County Schools next year. Ellis stressed the figure is a projection and said the district will update numbers when state planning allotments arrive.
Ellis explained the district’s average daily membership (ADM) funding is declining: the district is funded on 10,885 students this year while the planning allotment is 10,740 for next year. That drop, she said, contributes to reduced position allotments (roughly 8.5 classroom teaching positions, one enhancement teacher and two instructional support positions) and an estimated $1,000,000 reduction in dollar allotments. Combined, she said, the positions and dollars approach roughly $2 million of budget impact.
On special education, Ellis said the district’s exceptional children (EC) budget projects a worst-case $3.6 million shortfall for 2026–27 and that EC fund balance has been exhausted in prior years; local dollars will likely need to cover at least $1,000,000 of that gap. She noted the state’s funding cap for EC does not align with Rockingham’s EC population (district ~20% identified while the state cap is cited around 13%), increasing local pressure.
Board members and staff discussed ways to reduce fixed costs, including consolidating buildings. Ellis reviewed a 20-year enrollment decline — from about 14,561 students in 2006 to approximately 10,740 now — and said the district is operating with nearly the same number of buildings, spreading resources thin. A board member asked staff to bring recommendations on more efficient building use to an upcoming work session; staff responded they would prepare options beginning with finance committee analysis.
Ellis listed other cost pressures: rising employer retirement contribution rates (estimated to move from 24.67% to 25%), health insurance increases (from about $8,095 to $8,500 per employee last year), and utility cost increases. She said state planning allotments from the Department of Public Instruction are expected by late February but noted they arrived later last year.
Next steps: finance committee meetings in February to review detailed line-item budgets, a work session on Feb. 23 to present highlights, and a March 9 board meeting when staff will present the final proposed budget for board approval. If approved, staff will forward the budget to county commissioners by the May 15 statutory deadline.
"These are all potential figures," Ellis said, urging continued monitoring. "We are here for the students, so that's our number one priority." The board did not take formal budget action at the Feb. 9 meeting; staff will return with more detailed figures and recommended options.