Three Village board leans toward $3 million in capital spending; tax-cap estimate would rise to about 4.54%

The Three Village Central School District Board of Education discussed options for next year’s capital spending and how those choices would affect the district’s tax-cap calculation, and the board signaled nonbinding support for using $3,000,000 as the working figure to submit to the comptroller’s office.

Mr. Carlson, who led the budget presentation, told the board that the tax-cap calculation combines several elements: a levy-growth factor tied to inflation (capped at 2%), a tax‑base growth factor reflecting new construction (1.19% for this district), and other items such as building aid and debt service. "So when we do the tax cap calculation, as you know, there's a number of factors that go into determining what the tax cap is each year," Mr. Carlson said, adding that declining building aid (a decrease of a little over $1,000,000 next year) also pushes the cap higher.

Carlson presented three illustrative scenarios: keeping capital at $1.5 million would produce an estimated tax-cap figure of about 3.7%; increasing capital to $2 million would yield roughly a 3.98% cap; returning to the $3 million level used in the prior budget would push the estimate to about 4.54%. He emphasized the board was not making a final commitment and that the formal adoption of the budget will occur April 15. "You are not committing to anything tonight," he told board members, asking only for direction to inform the comptroller filing due at the end of the week.

Committee and board members focused discussion on the district’s most pressing capital needs if funding is increased. Facilities-committee members identified the Setauket cupola and the high school pool’s machinery and dehumidification systems as the top priorities, noting that work on those items could consume most of a $1.5 million package. One committee member warned that failing to address the pool equipment could force the swim program to relocate and raise contractual costs. "The pool also has to get done because we have a lot of people, a lot of our students and residents who use it," a committee member said.

Board members also discussed the trade-offs of including projects in an annual budget versus placing them in a bond. A facilities representative suggested the district could reissue a smaller bond at a later date (for example, in October rather than May) with fewer propositions, while shifting some maintenance into the operating budget. The district noted that building aid is repaid over 15 years and that the district typically receives approximately two-thirds of eligible costs back over that period.

After discussion, the chair called for a nonbinding show of hands on using $3,000,000 as the working capital number for the tax-cap submission; the board indicated support and Mr. Carlson recorded $3,000,000 as the "working number." The chair emphasized that the decision was noncommittal and that the board would adopt the final budget on April 15.

Next steps: Mr. Carlson will file the tax-cap projection with the state comptroller using the board's working direction and the board will continue capital prioritization work ahead of the April budget adoption.