Wallingford‑Swarthmore presents reorganization to trim costs, limit use of fund balance
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Administrators proposed a four‑tier reorganization and budget phases intended to reduce reliance on fund balance, forecasted pre‑net savings of roughly $2 million and recommended eliminating or not refilling up to 19 positions while adding two supervisory instructional posts; the board will consider the plan Feb. 23, 2026.
Wallingford‑Swarthmore School District administrators on Feb. 17 presented a reorganization and multi‑phase budgeting plan aimed at reducing projected future deficits and avoiding deeper reliance on fund balance.
Dr. Johnston (administration) described a four‑tier reorganization that would discontinue five administrative positions, redistribute duties, create two new supervisory instructional positions and remove a set of non‑administrative roles (several of them currently vacant or long‑term substitutes). "When you add up the other lines ... it's a total of 19 positions total that we're recommending for reduction," Johnston said, and the plan estimates roughly 3–4 actual separations after accounting for bumping and transfers under Pennsylvania law.
The business office presented the budget‑phase framing and gave concrete figures for planning comparisons. Ms. Mosley, who led the finance updates, told the committee the district is aiming for a budget near a 3% Act 1 index and urged caution about running down fund balance: "Fund balance should be used for a rainy day. It should not be used to cover ongoing operational costs," she said.
Administrators and the business office gave sample dollar figures. The presentation listed the total cost for the six teachers‑on‑special‑assignment (TOSA) roles in 2026 at about $762,000 (salary and benefits for the long‑term substitute staffing model used this year). By contrast, the two new supervisory instructional positions were budgeted at about $400,000 (all‑in, salary and benefits). The administration described the overall pre‑net savings from the proposed reductions as nearly $2,000,000 but cautioned that bumping, transfers and final contract/insurance numbers will change the net savings.
Committee members and the public pressed for details: how the remaining $3.5 million gap (between savings and the district’s projected fund‑balance run‑rate) will be closed, whether proposed fee increases (Policy 707) will suppress community use, and what contingency steps exist if state revenues or prescription and insurance rates shift. Administrators pointed to recent cost‑reductions and one‑time revenue items (adjusted PISA/PEERS rates, cyber‑charter tuition reform, and an extraordinary special‑education reimbursement program) that improve the near‑term outlook and said some fund balance use remains likely next year, but that the plan would make the pattern more sustainable.
The administration asked the full board to consider the reorganization plan at the Feb. 23 meeting; if approved, staffing changes would be implemented beginning July 1 and specific staffing reductions would return to the board for action in March and April as required by state law and bargaining rules.
Board members thanked administration for transparency and asked for clearer communications to staff and the public about which positions would be eliminated, how bumping would be handled and how community programs would be prioritized under tighter budgets.