Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Finance Forecast topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board hears updated five‑year forecast; AEP substation revenue pushed to 2028
Summary
Treasurer Beth told the Board that revenue from the planned AEP substation has been moved back to 2028, shifting projected public‑utility tax receipts; the five‑year forecast still shows a year‑five cash balance just under $6 million and an unreserved balance of about $2.5 million.
Beth, the district treasurer, presented financial highlights and an updated five‑year general‑fund forecast, noting the largest change from the spring forecast was the timing of expected public‑utility tax revenue from a proposed AEP substation.
"I've moved that back again another year," Beth said, explaining that construction has not started and the district does not expect the substation to be completed in time for the earlier lien date. She said the timing shift moved the forecasted AEP revenue into fiscal 2028 (with a larger portion showing in 2029).
Beth summarized other financial details: state funding at roughly 27% of revenue, homestead and rollback reimbursements that increased the district’s receipt to about 48–52% of the budget timing, and interest earnings (about $91,000 for the month; $240,000 for the quarter). She said the year‑five cash balance is projected at just under $6,000,000 and the unreserved balance (after the bond‑retirement set‑aside) is roughly $2,500,000.
The treasurer said the bond levy on the November ballot — if passed — would increase Grandview Yard/TIF receipts and generate about 0.9 mills, approximately $480,000 annually; that projection was not included in the current forecast because the levy had not yet passed. On expenditures she called out a required ELA curriculum purchase (estimated $50,000–$100,000) and a roughly 25% projected increase in electricity costs beginning in fiscal 2025.
Board members asked how the forecast would change if the November levy fails; Beth said the numbers in the current forecast would not change because the levy had not been assumed. Members also discussed planning for capital needs and whether operating funds might need to be redirected over time to address building and athletic complex needs.
Beth closed by noting the finance committee had reviewed the forecast and staff would continue to refine projections as construction and levy decisions become clearer.
