Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Central York board reviews proposed $121.7 million 2026–27 budget, recommends 3.5% tax increase

Central York School District Board of School Directors · May 5, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

School finance staff presented a proposed $121.7 million general fund budget and a recommended 3.5% tax-rate increase that would raise the millage to 24.247, produce about $2.6 million in local revenue and increase the average homeowner bill by $141.11.

The Central York School District board heard a detailed presentation on May 4 of the proposed 2026–27 general fund budget that projects $121.7 million in expenditures and a projected ending fund balance of $18.8 million.

Mister Spatero, the district’s finance presenter, said the administration is recommending a 3.5% tax-rate increase — moving the millage from 23.4271 to 24.247 — which the district estimates will generate about $2.6 million in additional local revenue and raise the average homeowner’s annual tax by $141.11 (about $11.76 per month). “Our projected ending fund balance for this year is 18,800,000,” Spatero said during the presentation. The revenue breakdown presented included local revenues, state revenues and federal revenues as summarized for the board.

Officials told the board that local revenues comprise the majority of the district’s receipts (the presenter said local revenues account for roughly 71% of total revenues, with real estate taxes making up most of that total). State and federal revenue lines were included but staff cautioned some amounts are conservative because the state budget had not been finalized; the presenter said the district budgeted only half of the ‘‘adequacy’’ portion of certain state allocations until the state budget is settled.

The presentation also addressed the expenditure mix: salaries and benefits were shown as more than 70% of total expenditures, and staff noted the budget includes increases for contract salary steps and rising health insurance costs. The proposed budget increases the district’s transfer to capital reserves to $2 million to support upcoming facilities work.

Board members asked for clarifications on unassigned fund balance rules and how the district will comply with the state’s 8% cap. Spatero said staff will work with auditors and bring a resolution to reclassify portions of the fund balance from unassigned to committed or assigned so the district meets the requirement when the audit is finalized. “We will bring a resolution to the board to request for a modification in our unassigned fund balance to move those amounts from unassigned to committed or assigned so that way we comply with the 8 percent rule,” he said.

Directors also pressed staff on pension costs and state subsidies. Spatero noted the upcoming PSER rate was forecast at about 33.59% and explained the district receives about half of pension contributions back through the state reimbursement line. The presentation detailed other cost drivers the board may face, including cyber charter costs, special education staffing needs and long‑term capital projects.

Staff reviewed a list of upcoming facility projects — including HVAC, turf and boiler replacements — that together could total roughly $35–$40 million over multi‑year planning. Spatero said the district has applied for a $5 million grant for the North Hills HVAC project and that, if awarded less than full funding, the district could shift priorities to other capital work.

The board was told the proposed final budget is scheduled for adoption at the May 11 meeting, with the final board approval of the budget on June 15. Questions and followup requests from board members focused on final audit numbers, the timing of state budget actions, and further detail on capital‑project phasing.

The board did not adopt the budget at the May 4 meeting; staff said the recommended action is expected at the May 11 meeting after minor adjustments and updated April month‑end figures.