Carlynton SD work session presents proposed $39.5 million budget, flags 4.4% tax-rate assumption and approves finance items

The Carlynton School District board reviewed the proposed final 2026–27 budget at a work session and moved the plan forward for public posting and final consideration. The district presenter reported revenues of $39,504,362 and described an anticipated draw on the fund balance of about $362,782; administrators said they will recheck totals before posting the proposed final budget for the required 30-day public inspection ahead of the June 16 meeting.

Keith, the district presenter identified repeatedly in the transcript, told the board the revenue mix in the proposal is roughly 64% local, 32% state and 5% federal, and that personnel costs are the largest expense (about 66.7%). He identified contractual wage increases and debt obligations — including charter-school tuition obligations — as major drivers of next year's expenditures and said contract settlements remain the largest fiscal unknown ahead of final adoption.

Board members pressed the presenter on specific pressures. One member noted that out-of-district special-education tuition can range “between $40,000 a year to $60,000 a year in some cases, [to] $108,000 a year per student,” and that transportation to those placements further increases costs. The presenter and several members said those individual cases can swing the budget significantly and are a recurring source of year-to-year volatility.

The presenter also described the impact of county reassessment activity and the common-level ratio (CLR). He said a CLR-related reduction in assessments lowered assessed value by about $3.9 million, reducing local revenue available to the district; he said he will verify assessed-value figures before the final posting. The district's homestead-reduction allocation was reported at $972,084 and the presenter said 3,117 homeowners applied for the reduction, producing a typical reduction in tax liability of about $311.87 per qualified property.

Officials showed a five-year projection that uses scenario modeling to test tax-rate assumptions and long-term fund-balance effects. The current presentation used a 4.4% tax-rate assumption in its example (displayed as a user-adjustable line in the model) to illustrate how modest, repeated increases or flat revenues can drive future fund-balance declines; the presenter described the model as a tool to identify when administrators must act to avoid large deficits.

During discussion, one board member urged that communications to community members include clear trade-off information: if the board were to impose a 4.4% increase, what specific programs or positions would the district retain, and what would be cut if the tax increase were not adopted. The board agreed administrators will prepare clearer comparative materials for the next review, including a historical chart of past tax-rate changes and an explanation of optional versus required spending.

The board moved two consent items tied to the budget presentation. A motion to approve Section E (finance and agreements) was made and seconded; the board conducted a voice vote, the chair called for ayes and members responded on the record, and the motion carried as reflected in the transcript. The board also moved and seconded Section F (personnel) and approved that item by voice vote as recorded in the meeting transcript.

Procedurally, a member asked what would happen if only five members attended the June 16 meeting and three voted against the budget. The board confirmed that five affirmative votes are required for passage; administrators emphasized the importance of attendance to meet the threshold.

Next steps: the proposed final budget will be posted on the district website and at district buildings for the 30-day public inspection period required by the Act 1 timeline. Administrators said they will finalize assumptions and bring the budget back to the board for final approval at the June 16 meeting.