Beloit School District warned of $4.5 million shortfall; officials outline staff, program and referendum choices

Dr. Anderson told the Beloit School District Board that the district faces an estimated $4.5 million budget shortfall for 2026–27 and a much larger fiscal gap the following year if no structural solution is found.

The superintendent said using fund equity could close next year’s deficit for a single year but warned that doing so would exhaust reserves and leave the district approximately $7.7 million short in the following year. "For 1 year, if you wanted to balance your budgets using fund equity . . . that is a 1‑year solution, but only 1 year," he said.

Why it matters: the presenter said that balancing the budget this year would actually lower the district mill rate from about 5.30 to 5.04 — roughly a 25‑cent decline, or about $25 per $100,000 of assessed value — but also stressed that a lower levy without additional revenue would force reductions in programs and services.

Board members were shown a menu of options Dr. Anderson described as the least‑harmful first steps: selling surplus lots and nonessential property (one‑time revenue), identifying unfilled positions to avoid refilling roles (he estimated roughly $1 million could be freed), and postponing capital maintenance projects that total about $1.8 million in near‑term work (parking and roofs). He also presented recurring savings options including a salary freeze (estimated $1.2 million) and reducing or eliminating some academic addendums and certificated positions.

On student support and programs, Dr. Anderson warned that every option carries costs to services. He noted eliminating four elementary guidance counselors would save about $450,000; cutting nursing staff would reduce an annual nursing line that is "not quite $1.2 million"; and reassigning grant‑funded instructional coaches into classroom roles could yield some Fund 10 savings but cannot replace all positions because of grant rules and program needs.

Athletics and extracurriculars were highlighted as both savings opportunities and potential enrollment risks: Dr. Anderson said dropping middle‑school athletics could save about $80,000 but would erode feeder programs; maintaining the current high‑school slate would require an additional $100,000 because recent budgets were already short. He described a range of targeted cuts — removing JV teams, reducing the number of contests, or trimming assistant coaches — as ways to reduce costs without eliminating every sport, but cautioned these choices would reduce opportunities for students.

Legal and security lines were also reviewed. The district currently spends approximately $500,000 per year on outside legal services; Dr. Anderson proposed evaluating an in‑house attorney (he estimated a full‑time compensation figure around $250,000) to reduce external fees. Outside security and SRO costs total roughly $750,000; the board discussed whether assistant principals or other staffing changes could reduce contracted guard costs while maintaining safety.

On next steps, Dr. Anderson recommended producing a prioritized list of concrete options and the specific impacts of each (staffing plans, program counts, dollar savings) for the board to review and to use in framing any November referendum. He said a referendum would allow the district to present deferred capital items and program restorations to voters rather than making unilateral cuts.

"There are ways that we can get through the '26–'27 budget with the least amount of pain," he said, "but '27–'28 is a larger fiscal cliff if our assumptions are correct." The board voted to move into closed session later in the meeting to discuss personnel matters; the superintendent agreed to produce a written list of the options he presented.

Sources and attributions: All direct quotations and figures were presented by Dr. Anderson during the district budget presentation to the Board of Education.