Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Budget Overview topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Pleasantville proposes $65.1 million 2026–27 budget with tax levy just under state cap

Pleasantville Union Free School District Board of Education · April 9, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Pleasantville Union Free School District proposed a $65,114,168 budget for 2026–27, a 3.39% increase from last year and a 2.96% proposed tax‑levy rise that officials said remains under the state tax‑cap calculation. Presenters flagged salary, health‑insurance and special‑education placement costs as the largest expenditure drivers.

The Pleasantville Union Free School District on its budget night presented a $65,114,168 proposed spending plan for 2026–27 that officials said would increase the tax levy by about 2.96%, keeping the district “just under” the state tax‑cap calculation.

District business leader John Chow summarized major expenditure drivers, saying contractual salary increases are budgeted at 4.76% and employee benefits show a net increase of approximately $480,000 driven largely by a projected $631,000 rise in health‑insurance costs, partly offset by a projected Teachers’ Retirement System rate reduction of $288,000. "I'll just highlight the large increases," Chow said during his presentation.

Why it matters: the tax‑levy increase is the figure that affects homeowners. Chow said the budget’s proposed levy increase of about $1,256,495 is below the district’s allowable cap under the state formula and that the district is presenting a balanced budget with estimated revenues to match the $65.1 million spending plan.

Supporting details: district presenters said charges for services (including tuition for out‑of‑district special‑education students and reimbursements from merged athletics programs), projected state aid based on the governor’s executive budget, and higher anticipated interest income all factor into the revenue side. Chow noted the state budget had not been finalized and the district’s numbers are based on the governor’s executive budget and local adjustments.

Contingency risk and timeline: presenters reviewed contingency rules if voters reject the proposed budget. Under New York rules the district’s contingency levy may not exceed the prior year’s levy; meeting materials show that achieving a contingency levy would require roughly $1.256 million in reductions. The board and superintendent warned that contingency cuts would largely fall on personnel and programs, with long‑term implications for the district’s services. The district scheduled a public hearing on May 5 and the budget vote for May 19, with a possible revote on June 16 if needed.

What’s next: the board will present the property‑tax report card and budget notice after adopting the budget; officials said final assessed valuations and tax rates are subject to assessor grievance adjustments and will be finalized later in the summer.

The district said full presentation slides and supporting data are posted on the district website.