Everett school board workshop flags legislative risks, urges prudence in 5-year budget

Everett Public Schools board members heard a detailed budget briefing March 3 that asked them to weigh near-term fiscal risks from the state legislature while maintaining prudent staffing and fund-balance targets.

Presenter Andy Tres told the board the district is working through its annual budget-development cycle and will incorporate legislative outcomes into its spring budget update. "At the minimum we thought this would cost us about $1.3 million," Tres said of one proposed sales-tax change that initially appeared to include K–12 services and could have affected both the general fund and capital-projects fund.

Why it matters: the district relies on state revenue and enrollment-driven allocations to fund staffing. Tres flagged three legislative items of particular concern — proposals affecting the transition-to-kindergarten (TK) program, reductions to Running Start funding that reduce the district's enhanced factor from 1.4 to 1.2 FTE, and a proposal to extend bus depreciation schedules to 15 years — and explained how each would change revenue or program access.

Details and context: Tres said the House and Senate budget proposals largely mirror the governor's guidance for this short two-year-session year and that many changes are programmatic rather than general-fund increases. On transportation, extending depreciation could reduce the district's vehicle-fund capacity to replace buses as quickly as before; because Everett contracts for bus services, operations are unlikely to change immediately but the transportation vehicle fund will face pressure. On Running Start, Tres said the change reduces the enhanced funding factor that reimburses districts for students earning college credit, limiting how much college credit students may access under the current funding structure.

Treasury and reserves: staff reminded the board that district policy sets a minimum fund balance at 5% and staff prefers a 6% target to provide a buffer; Tres estimated that 6% corresponds to roughly $4 million. Staff's five-year forecast shows the near-term deficit narrowing but may require modest adjustments (on the order of roughly 0.5% of total expenditures) in some years to preserve the 6% buffer if legislative outcomes reduce revenues.

Costs and contracts: Tres noted two major open contract negotiations this year—teachers and paraeducators—and flagged an early estimate of an 18% increase in insurance costs that has not yet been finalized. She also reiterated that some substitute-health-benefit proposals currently lack state funding and would amount to an unfunded mandate for districts if enacted without additional state resources.

Board response and next steps: directors praised staff for transparency and thanked voters for passing a recent levy and bond that helped stabilize near-term finances. Tres said the district will hold additional fiscal advisory meetings in March, provide a board update on April 21, hold a first reading of the operating budget in July and aim for final adoption on August 18.

Closing note: Superintendent Dr. Saltzman reminded the public the district monitors positions weekly to control costs and described the district's posture as fiscally prudent after prior reductions. "Every dollar that we spend goes towards our students," he said.

The board provided no formal votes on policy at the workshop; the presentation will inform later budget readings and the adoption process.