Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Northern Lehigh previews preliminary $43M budget, warns of $1.5M shortfall and possible tax increase
Summary
District leaders outlined a preliminary 2025-26 budget showing a roughly $1.5 million structural gap, a proposed 5.5% tax-index posting, and multiple capital proposals including a potential bond and a high-school flooring grant; administrators recommended balancing one-time purchases with targeted tax or fund-balance use.
Northern Lehigh School District officials on the finance committee presented a preliminary 2025-26 budget that shows a $1.5 million shortfall after current revenue projections and proposed one-time purchases.
The presenter said the preliminary expenditures run just under $43 million while current revenues fall short; using fund balance and other adjustments reduces the gap but does not eliminate it. "Our current fund balance this year is just over $18,000,000 right now. It's $18,040,000," the finance presenter said, citing the district's multi-year reserves.
Why it matters: the board faces choices that affect long-term capacity to fund capital projects and staffing. Administrators recommended using some fund-balance money for one-time purchases, pursuing grant revenue, and considering a tax increase in combination with fund-balance use to close the gap and create capacity for future construction or renovation projects.
Key details: the presentation identified several cost drivers. Transportation contract overtime and rising PSERS and health-care costs were highlighted. The administration included a possible new bond payment of $505,000 in the preliminary budget tied to a proposed middle-school/common-campus plan; the presenter said that line could be removed if the board decides against proceeding. The presenter also outlined a high-school flooring grant that would cover the majority of a $1.2 million project, leaving the district with an estimated 25% share of about $270,000 on the grant portion and up to roughly $694,000 if the district chose to finish additional, non-grant-covered areas.
Board members asked for prioritization of capital work after hearing the facilities list. One board member pressed administrators on whether restroom renovations should be prioritized over a $425,000 flooring spend: several trustees said they want firm estimates for bathroom upgrades before committing to large flooring expenditures.
On program and staffing questions, administration recommended adding one special-education teacher to create an emotional-support (ES) classroom at Slatington Elementary and one paraprofessional to Peters Elementary (first grade targeted), along with two paraprofessionals tied to the new ES classroom. Administrators said those positions could be funded over time in part by reducing outplacement costs for students currently educated outside the district.
Charter school spending was also reviewed: the district currently reports about 124 students enrolled in outside charters (43 brick-and-mortar and 81 cyber), with combined charter tuition approaching $2.23 million. The presenter noted a proposed state House bill to cap cyber-charter regular-education tuition (discussed at the state level) that could reduce outlays if enacted.
Next steps: the administration asked the board to adopt a preliminary budget at the April meeting so the district can avoid a special June meeting and continue refinement before final adoption in June. The board asked administration to return with specific cost estimates for bathroom work, and to provide more detail on fund-balance uses and the bond timing before making final decisions.
