Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District budget presentation flags structural deficit risk despite ADA gains; board receives proposed 2025–26 budget for review
Summary
Business services staff presented the proposed 2025–26 Perris Union High School District budget on June 2, warning of a structural budget gap driven by declining enrollment and rising costs; trustees voted 4–0 with one absent to receive the budget for review ahead of adoption on June 18.
Candace, the business services presenter, told the Perris Union High School District board on June 2 that the proposed 2025–26 budget reflects improved attendance capture this year but faces ongoing structural pressure: rising personnel costs, insurance increases and enrollment decline are projected to outpace revenue in out years unless actions are taken.
Staff said the district’s multi‑year projections are anchored in assumptions about COLA (projected at 2.3%), enrollment and ADA capture. Presenters highlighted an improved ADA capture rate (staff cited a 90.34% capture), steps to refile prior year P2 reports to recover previously unclaimed ADA revenue, and one‑time state proposals that could provide additional funds if finalized (e.g., restored learning recovery funds and discretionary block grants) but emphasized those are conditional on the final state budget.
Candace walked trustees through expenditure drivers including step/column salary increases, health and welfare cost growth, and employer pension (PERS/CALSTRS) trends. She said the district began 2024–25 overstaffed on certificated FTE (about 14 FTEs) and is projecting eight FTEs overstaffed for 2025–26 if enrollment trends continue, which contributes materially to future multi‑year deficit projections. The presentation also warned of large insurance premium increases districtwide.
On financial outcomes, staff described a movement from an earlier projected deficit to a net increase in the ending fund balance for the current year, tied primarily to improved ADA capture and interest revenue, but they projected a $2.9 million deficit for 2025–26 under current assumptions. Candace framed deficit spending as a condition "when school districts' expenses exceed the revenue in a given year" and distinguished temporary, one‑time deficits from structural deficits that require policy choices.
Board members asked for comparative analyses of district office staffing and requested an evidence‑based study before making reductions; members emphasized protecting classroom teachers and evaluating program effectiveness. After discussion, Trusty Garcia moved and Trusty Hall seconded a motion to receive the 2025–26 district budget for review and consideration; the motion passed four in favor with one absent. The budget will be considered for adoption at the June 18 meeting and must be filed with the county or by July 1, 2025, per presenter guidance.
