Kenai Peninsula Borough School District projects $8.6 million FY27 shortfall, asks borough for $62.36 million in support

Zarena Voydovich, the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District finance director, told the borough finance committee the district’s preliminary FY2027 budget shows roughly $140.97 million in projected revenue and about $149.57 million in expenditures and transfers, producing a projected deficit of about $8.6 million.

The figure is driven by state foundation funding that the district projects at roughly $80.71 million for FY27 and a larger required local contribution after a recent increase in assessed property values. “We have an $8.58600000 shortfall,” Voydovich said while walking the committee through the foundation formula and the district’s enrollment and ADM calculations.

Voydovich said the district used a detailed enrollment process for FY27—advancing grades at brick‑and‑mortar sites, principal input, charter and alternative‑program projections, and a three‑year kindergarten average—to produce a projected headcount of 8,104 students (including preschool). Using the foundation formula steps (school‑size adjustment, district cost factor, special‑needs and vocational multipliers, then adding correspondence students at a 0.9 multiplier), she reported an adjusted ADM the district uses to calculate state revenue.

Superintendent Clayton Holland and board president Jason Torianan described three scenarios the district prepared for the assembly: one aligned with borough administration’s initial target, a second based on last year’s funding, and a third “cap” scenario that the district said it did not fully flesh out because it would be difficult to reach. Torianan told the assembly the board passed a preliminary budget the night before and asked the borough to fund at least $62,359,080 to restore many of the cuts proposed in the preliminary plan. “Please fund us, at least to the $62,359,080 and that would put us in a spot where we can add back a lot of the PTR cuts,” Torianan said.

District presenters said the preliminary plan already includes difficult reductions: closing three school buildings and consolidating one program, cutting positions under some scenarios, and deferring hires until funding is certain. Officials warned that hiring delays risk losing candidates in a tight labor market and that some closures are final under the board's vote and state reporting process.

Committee members pressed the district on specific impacts: how many positions are unfilled (district staff said fewer than five certified openings and a smattering of classified vacancies); how many special‑education students are affected at closing schools; and whether additional borough funding would reopen the closed schools. Holland said votes taken by the board to close schools are final for that process and would be submitted to the state; he said the scenarios do not include reopening closed schools or pools even under the cap scenario.

The district and several assembly members also discussed the growth of correspondence/homeschool enrollment and the fiscal and accountability implications. District officials said correspondence programs use a 0.9 multiplier for ADM and reported that correspondence testing outcomes differ from brick‑and‑mortar testing; Torianan and Holland described the trend of some families leaving brick‑and‑mortar schools and the compounding effect that program migration can have on course offerings and elective opportunities.

Officials also described the risks of bringing a new charter (Nikolaevsk) on board: startup costs are accounted for in the scenarios and the district projects about 40 brick‑and‑mortar and 50 homeschool students for that charter, but enrollment that does not materialize would create a revenue/expenditure imbalance.

Next steps: borough administration said it will provide the committee with a schedule and answers on timing and hiring impacts promptly; the district noted it must file its November enrollment estimate (used for foundation funding) and has deadlines in May and a final budget deadline in mid‑July. The finance committee adjourned after introducing additional consent‑eligible ordinances and grant acceptances for later hearings.

Provenance: district presentation and ensuing Q&A, SEG 018–SEG 1716.

Ending: Borough staff promised follow‑up information on timing and openings to reduce hiring hold‑ups; no final assembly vote on district funding occurred during the committee meeting.