Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Westchester SD 92-5 board hears tentative FY25 budget; special-education and transportation costs cited as main drivers of projected shortfall

Westchester SD 92-5 Board of Education · June 7, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a June 6 special meeting the Westchester SD 92-5 board heard a tentative FY25 budget presentation from finance officer Dennis, who highlighted higher transportation reimbursements, rising benefit costs and sharply increased out-of-district special-education tuition as the main drivers of a projected midhundred-thousand-dollar deficit; tentative approval is planned for June 20 and final adoption by Sept. 30.

The Westchester SD 92-5 board on June 6 heard an overview of the district’s tentative fiscal 2025 budget, with finance presenter Dennis saying the document is a working plan that will be updated before final adoption. The board was told the tentative budget is required for public notice and that a tentative approval is expected at the June 20 meeting, with final adoption by Sept. 30.

Dennis summarized revenue and expenditure assumptions underpinning the draft. He said the district is budgeting to collect about 97% of property-tax levies, has used conservative placeholders for private-facility tuition and special grants, and expects transportation-reimbursement numbers to firm in July. “Tentative budgets are tentative,” Dennis said, noting some categorical payments and reimbursements often lag actual spending and can arrive in future fiscal years.

On the expense side, Dennis told the board employee benefits are projected to rise 7–9%, which he estimated at roughly $1.2 million. Salaries in the draft rise about 3.8%, while capital outlay is much higher because the district plans significant projects. Dennis said those capital projects and increases in out-of-district special-education tuition together drive the district’s projected short-term deficit.

Special-education placements that send students to therapeutic day schools or private facilities were a focus of questions. Dennis explained the mechanics: the district must incur the tuition expense in the current fiscal year and is later reimbursed, often quarterly, by the state. “We have to incur the entire expense in fiscal 24,” he said, and then the district receives reimbursement over subsequent payments, which can cause a temporary shortfall on paper.

Board members also queried the budget assumptions for new hires and how benefit placeholders could affect the deficit. Dennis said he used conservative family-benefit estimates for new positions and expected more precise salary and benefits figures by August; he anticipated the tentative deficit would narrow by the June 20 update and further by the final September adoption.

Dennis provided line-item context: the tentative budget shows roughly $15.2 million in property-tax revenue, state sources and categorical payments that will shift when precise transportation and private-facility tuition reimbursements are recorded, and a total-expenditures projection that is about $1.9 million higher than FY24, driven primarily by benefits, capital spending and special-education costs.

The board received the presentation and reserved detailed review for the June 20 meeting, when the finance office will present updated figures and the board is expected to vote on tentative approval.