Seaford board hears proposed $86 million‑range 2026–27 budget, tax levy at 2.26% cap

Seaford Union Free School District business official Miss Mezer presented the district’s proposed budget for 2026–27, reporting a modest budget‑to‑budget increase of 1.42% and that the district intends to set its tax‑levy increase at the allowable cap of 2.26.

The presentation said state aid will be lower than the prior year — primarily because of a loss of building aid — and confirmed the district will file the state property tax report card after the board adopts the budget resolution. Miss Mezer told the board the district has factored an assumed 6% CPI for a transportation contract renewal and described two proposed reserve uses for employee benefit liabilities and other needs.

Why it matters: the board presents an adopted budget to district voters on the statewide vote date. Miss Mezer said a budget defeat would require either immediate adoption of a contingency budget or a revote (noting June 16, 2026 as a possible revote date) and quantified required reductions of $1,450,843 if the budget fails.

Key numbers and projects from the presentation included a reported overall budget figure read aloud in the meeting (transcript formatting of the total was unclear in the record) and these clearer items: a 1.42% budget‑to‑budget increase; a projected tax‑levy increase of 2.26% (the tax levy cap); a capital‑projects interfund transfer described as $1,390,250 for debt service; and a capital allocation of $920,000 for three projects (middle school bathroom renovations, middle‑school gym window replacement, and exterior classroom access at the high school). Miss Mezer also noted completed capital work from the prior year (playground, library renovation, cafeteria work) and a pending dust‑collection system for the high‑school wood shop.

Miss Mezer explained transport contracting and reserves: the budget assumes the second year of a multi‑year transportation renewal under the district’s RFP, with CPI indexing used for renewal (6% projected), and that approval of the budget would constitute approval of that five‑year renewal term’s next year.

On next steps, Miss Mezer said the district will file the property tax report card after adoption, present the budget to PTA groups in April–May, hold a formal budget hearing (May 6), and place the proposed budget before voters on the statewide budget vote on May 19. She emphasized that residents vote on the tax levy amount the district proposes, while tax rates are dictated by county assessments.

The board later moved grouped agenda items (see meeting record). The presentation closed with the board thanking Miss Mezer and administrators for preparing the materials. The board had not recorded a final public vote on the budget in the provided transcript excerpt; the district’s posted budget documents (district website) will have the full numeric detail for voters.