Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brighton board adopts budget to send to voters calling for 3.98% levy increase and $4.75M in reserve use
Summary
The Brighton Central School District board voted to adopt the 2026–27 budget for presentation to voters: the executive proposal would raise the levy 3.98%, use $4.75 million in reserves to lower the tax impact, and reduce staffing by 12.3 FTEs to shave more than $1.2 million in costs.
The Brighton Central School District board voted on April 7 to adopt a preliminary 2026–27 budget that will go before voters on May 19. Superintendent McGawan described the proposal as an effort to balance rising costs with preserving programming and said the plan would require a 3.98% increase in the tax levy; because it is above the state levy limit, the district said the measure would need 60% voter approval.
The executive proposal relies on a mix of spending reductions and reserves: the district plans to draw about $4.75 million from its appropriated fund balance to lower next year’s levy and is targeting staff reductions totaling 12.3 full‑time equivalent positions (a $1.29 million personnel saving), of which nine positions are expected to be eliminated through attrition. The superintendent warned that repeated use of reserves to pay recurring costs would be unsustainable and could force deeper program cuts in future years.
Superintendent McGawan outlined major cost drivers: contractually required salary increases, rising health‑insurance and retiree health costs, and other inflationary pressures. He said the district’s revenue assumptions include a 2% tax cap increase and an estimated 6% rise in foundation aid, producing roughly $2.4 million in additional revenue that does not fully close the gap with rising expenses.
On projected household impact, the presentation said the 3.98% levy would amount to about $285 annually on a $250,000 home (the district used $250,000 as a benchmark for public examples). As a lower‑cost alternative, the district described a contingent budget that would stay within the levy limit and require about $1.24 million additional reductions that would substantially curtail non‑mandated programming in arts, athletics and electives.
The board’s adoption authorizes the district to present the spending plan and the property‑tax report card to voters; the board approved the resolution by motion and voice vote. Next steps outlined by the district include public budget information sessions and the formal budget hearing: budget forums will be held in the coming weeks and the district’s annual budget hearing is scheduled for May 12, with the vote on May 19.
Superintendent McGawan emphasized educational outcomes as a rationale for the proposed investment, citing a high graduation rate and strong AP participation, while acknowledging the “hard” choices behind personnel and program reductions. Board members thanked principals and administrative staff for efforts to limit student impact and asked clarifying questions about specific household dollar effects and assumed home‑value benchmarks.
