Apple Valley Unified board hears LCAP update and a proposed 2025–26 budget projecting a slim reserve and multi‑year recovery plan

The board held two public hearings: one on the 2025 Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) and one on the proposed 2025–26 operating budget.

LCAP highlights: Patrick Sauer summarized changes made after county review—including added student group breakdowns, clarified prompt language, and a 15% threshold definition for material differences between budgeted and expended amounts. Trustees asked for a glossary of abbreviations and clarification about counts of specialized positions (the administration said the figure 73 includes multiple job classes and that some figures may be adjusted after an audit).

Budget overview: Mr. Schulenberg (budget presenter) reviewed estimated actuals for the current year and detailed assumptions for 2025–26. He reported combined estimated current‑year revenues just above $251 million and an estimated combined ending fund balance of about $17.9 million. For the current year, he cited unrestricted deficit spending (on the order of roughly $11–12 million) and, looking ahead, projected LCFF revenue around $189 million for 2025–26 and combined expenditures near $253 million.

Reserve trajectory: Under the budget assumptions presented, the proposed 2025–26 ending unrestricted reserve was projected at roughly 3.2% (below the board policy target of 5%). Multi‑year projections showed a path to strengthen reserves over two subsequent years—assuming reductions or revenue changes—including a second‑year estimate increasing the unrestricted reserve to roughly 4.4% and a third‑year projection above 5.0% if planned reductions are implemented.

Trustee questions: Board members asked for clarifications on enrollment assumptions (especially the number of TK seats and TK add‑ons), the process by which personnel reductions and program prioritization will be made, details on the $73 specialized positions referenced in the LCAP (district staff said that count includes multiple categories and may be audited), and the district’s plan to track TK enrollment in August. Trustees requested more granular retiree/health‑benefit counts and were told administration would provide those figures.

Why it matters: The proposed budget requires the board to weigh one‑time funding and grants, multi‑year revenue assumptions, and possible reductions to meet reserve targets. Administration flagged three items to watch—state budget (Prop. 98) maneuvers, the discretionary block grant language, and PERS/STIRS costs—and outlined next steps for finalizing the adopted budget as state action is completed.

Next steps: Administration will provide follow‑up materials requested by trustees (glossary of student group abbreviations, retiree/OPEB counts, TK enrollment figures in August) and will return with final budget figures after the state budget is enacted.