Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Forest Grove SD 15 presents 'life of a dollar' breakdown of its budget
Summary
A Forest Grove School District presenter outlined a visualization that tracks a single dollar through the district budget, saying 66 cents goes to staff and classroom supplies, with further allocations for transportation, facilities, instructional resources, technology and emergency reserves.
A presenter for Forest Grove School District (Forest Grove SD 15) outlined a visual approach to the district budget, urging officials and the public to "follow the specific intentional journey of just one single dollar" to connect line‑item numbers to classroom outcomes.
The presenter said the chart shows 66 cents of each dollar goes to school staff and classroom supplies — the district's "most critical investment" — and later described "total human staff costs" as 85% of the district's entire budget; the presenter did not explain how those two figures relate.
The presentation broke the remaining dollar into broad functions the district says support daily learning. A 17‑cent portion covers operations: 5 cents for transportation (buses and drivers), 8 cents for safety and facilities maintenance and 4 cents for central services such as human resources and payroll. A separate 5‑cent block funds targeted student resources — 3 cents for instructional materials (updated curriculum, textbooks and lab equipment) and 2 cents for extracurriculars including athletics, arts and clubs.
The presenter described the final 12 cents as a protective layer: 2 cents for modern technology, software and cybersecurity and 10 cents held in emergency savings intended to prevent unexpected crises from immediately disrupting classroom operations.
Throughout, the speaker emphasized people as the central investment: teachers, instructional assistants and school principals (correct spelling: principals) were presented as the core of the learning environment. The presenter closed by framing the budget as interlocking pieces that help students reach their potential and graduate prepared for a choice‑filled life.
The district did not provide a reconciliation or additional documentation in the presentation to clarify apparent numerical overlaps (for example, how the 66‑cent classroom allocation corresponds with the 85% figure described as "total human staff costs"). The presenter also did not provide itemized dollar totals or the fiscal year covered during the remarks; those details were not specified in the presentation.
Next steps: the presentation functioned as an explanatory tool rather than a formal vote or policy decision; no motions or votes were recorded in the transcript.
