Rochester board hears budget that narrows gap to $8.3 million, eyes staffing and health‑care costs

The Rochester Public School District board on Tuesday heard a detailed budget presentation from Director of Finance Andy Crogstead outlining a proposed FY26–27 plan that trims an earlier $13.5 million shortfall to $8.3 million.

Crogstead told the board the district now projects general fund revenues near $316 million and is using a combination of higher-than-anticipated enrollment this year, an audit‑identified $2 million of unassigned fund balance and previously authorized fund balance commitments to reduce the shortfall. "Those students became available and we anticipate them rolling forward," Crogstead said about October enrollment counts that raised revenue projections.

Why it matters: the budget translates the district’s strategic priorities into dollars and requires tradeoffs across staffing, site allocations and central cost centers. The presentation flagged three items that drive the budget outlook — enrollment, constrained state and local revenue structure, and rising benefit costs — and laid out how reductions were distributed under the district’s balanced budget model.

Key figures and decisions - Projected enrollment baseline for next year: 17,441 (the administration said it is still projecting a net decline of about 340 students beyond that baseline). - Current projected general fund gap for FY27: $8.3 million (reduced from a July forecast of $13.5 million after revenue revisions and one‑time fund balance uses). - Planned use of fund balance: board-authorized allocations totaling $3 million plus an additional $2 million that came from the audit’s unassigned fund balance. - Total districtwide staffing proposed: 2,622 FTE across all funds; net reduction of about 27.7 FTE from current levels in the proposal. - Healthcare: the budget includes roughly a 19% increase in health‑care costs for FY27; premiums rose 17.5% in the current year, the administration said.

How reductions are allocated: Crogstead and other staff described the balanced budget model (BBM), which sets allocations for learning sites and cost centers and then asks principals and budget managers to make site‑based choices within those allocations. The administration said it used historical vacancy assumptions and a combination of restricted and general fund shifts to reach the $8.3 million mitigation total.

Board discussion and concerns Board members pressed staff on class‑size implications, the middle‑school staffing ratio adjustment, and how many of the proposed FTE reductions represent separations versus internal reassignments. In response, the administration said the middle‑school ratio was restored to its pre‑change level and that elementary class‑size rules were not being altered. On personnel impacts, staff said the reallocation process is still in flux and that some employees have found other positions while others face reductions.

On health care, several directors asked whether a possible future statewide educator health plan would change the district outlook. The administration said the proposal remains fluid and would not be immediate; staff continue to model current local costs and are pursuing new insurance consultant options to reduce premium pressure.

Other budget elements The presentation covered capital and debt adjustments tied to LTFM (long‑term facilities maintenance), the use of restricted compensatory funds and a reallocation approach intended to give schools greater site‑determination in how they spend some dollars. The administration said it plans additional analysis and likely will return next fall with recommendations on whether to expand the BBM’s site flexibility.

Next steps The board will take action on the FY26–27 budget at its June 16 meeting after additional review and final technical adjustments. The finance office said it expects to post budget materials and a line‑by‑line accounting of referendum commitments before final approval.