Coupeville board hears enrollment dip and multi‑hundred‑thousand‑dollar budget shortfalls
Loading...
Summary
Business‑management staff reported March K–12 enrollment at 870 (962 with alternative programs) and said a 3‑year weighted projection of 866 could produce a roughly $723,000 deficit if expenditures are not adjusted; other scenarios shown ranged from about $651,000 to $925,000. The board discussed reserves and potential policy tweaks.
Stacy Larson, introduced to the board as the presenter of the business‑management report, told the Coupeville School District Board on Thursday that March K–12 enrollment was 870 students and that including alternative programs the district counted 962 students. Larson said the district’s running annual average when March is included is about 881 students.
Larson walked directors through enrollment‑projection options the district considered: a one‑year cohort model, a three‑year average and a three‑year weighted average. Using the district’s preferred three‑year weighted average (projected at 866 students), Larson said the district would face a significant budget shortfall unless adjustments are made. The presentation included explicit scenario figures shown to the board: if enrollment fell to 850 students the district would face roughly a $925,000 deficit; a mid‑range scenario near 875 students produced about a $651,000 deficit; the 866 projection corresponded to about a $723,000 shortfall, all shown “without any adjustments to expenditures,” Larson said.
Larson also reviewed month‑to‑date revenue and expenditure charts and the district’s fund balances. She reported an ending fund balance in the general fund of about $819,000 and said the general fund reserve dipped to about 4.3% in February (the district’s stated goal is 6%). Larson told the board she expected a seasonal recovery when taxes and larger revenue receipts occur in the spring but urged caution and close monitoring of spending.
Board members asked for clarifications about the choice‑transfer data that feed enrollment projections and whether the transfer activity represented incoming students, outgoing students or net movement. Larson said the March 20 snapshot showed a net gain (the presentation cited a gain of 55 choice‑transfer students) and that the district would provide an updated report next month with more granular breakdowns by grade and destination. Directors also raised the possibility of changing how the district measures reserves or adopting a rolling average to smooth midyear fluctuations; one board member noted administrator salaries that are not encumbered over the summer would not explain the full magnitude of the balance change.
Why it matters: enrollment drives the district’s state funding and therefore materially affects revenue assumptions. The board received data showing a persistent funding gap under current enrollment assumptions and directed staff to continue tracking transfers and to bring updated projections at the next meeting.
What’s next: staff said they will update enrollment and transfer numbers in the next monthly report and continue conversations with department leads about potential expenditure adjustments and reserve‑policy language.
