Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Locust Valley Central School District presents revised $99,987,243 budget with 1.78% levy ahead of June 16 revote
Summary
At a public hearing, district officials presented a revised $99,987,243 2026–2027 budget that trims spending, lowers the proposed tax‑levy increase to 1.78% and adds a $2.5 million capital transfer for school safety; speakers raised transparency, per‑pupil cost and capital‑reserve questions ahead of the June 16 revote.
Get email alerts on the School Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Locust Valley Central School District officials on a public hearing presented a revised $99,987,243 2026–2027 budget and asked the community to support a revote scheduled for June 16. Dr. Turner said the revised plan reduces the proposed tax‑levy increase to 1.78% while maintaining “core educational programs and safety measures.”
The presentation laid out the math behind “Proposition One,” reporting total general fund appropriations of $99,987,243 (a 1.73% year‑to‑year change) and describing cuts in administrative spending, professional development freezes, delayed facilities purchases and business‑office contract restructuring as the primary savings measures. Dr. Turner said the district intentionally came in 1.06 percentage points under the state’s allowable tax cap (2.84%).
The revised budget includes a proposed $2.5 million transfer to the capital fund for infrastructure and safety work. Dr. Turner described phase‑one elementary door and lock replacements ($150,000) and a phase‑2A secondary‑level package ($950,000) intended to upgrade about 230 doors, install roughly 277 lock sets, add swipe‑card access and magnetic hold‑opens to create a secure perimeter.
Dr. Turner warned of the legal consequences if voters reject the revised budget again. He said New York State Education Law would require the district to adopt a contingency budget that freezes property tax revenue at last year’s level (0% increase), limits spending to ordinary and legally mandated expenses, and bars non‑contingent items. He listed likely cuts under a contingency budget, including elimination of elementary clubs and before‑school band and orchestra; removal of late buses and overnight field trips; termination of driver’s education and the after‑school EMT program; cuts to summer academic interventions and recreation; and withdrawal of operational financial support for senior centers and community use of facilities.
Public commenters pressed the district on fiscal strategy and transparency. Mike Sher, a Bayville resident, said he reviewed both budget versions and found net reductions of about $264,121 but questioned staffing levels and per‑pupil spending, saying the district appeared to be spending “over $50,000 per student.” He suggested consolidating underfilled school buildings to reduce costs. Another speaker, identifying as a parent, urged voter turnout and defended smaller class sizes as a community draw.
Steve Makoszi asked about the capital reserve balance and whether the district could defer this year’s $2.5 million capital transfer. Donna Jones, the interim business official, said the district’s aggregate fund balance is $19 million and agreed to provide the specific capital reserve figure the next day; administrators noted that the district uses cash transfers to avoid long‑term interest on bonds and that an up‑to‑date building condition survey identifies capital needs exceeding available reserves.
Several residents and former board members, including John Deltado, criticized long‑term spending growth and questioned recurring costs such as late‑bus contracts and litigation expenses. Michael Lidle said the primary concern for many voters is transparency, citing difficulties obtaining full line‑item detail and FOIL requests; he asked for clearer multi‑year capital and litigation budgets so taxpayers can assess sustainability as enrollment declines.
Board and administration representatives answered technical questions about capital planning and contracting. Donna Jones said the construction manager contracts for the library and parking‑lot projects have been vetted, carry insurance and performance requirements, and that selected projects are scheduled to begin the following week. Dr. Turner emphasized that prior voter‑approved capital referenda (high‑school parking lot, library, cafeteria) are funded separately from the annual operating budget and will proceed regardless of the revote outcome.
Procedural business concluded with the board adding and unanimously approving a consent‑agenda item to appoint an impartial hearing officer in a due‑process matter (student identifier ending 5454); the board then moved to adjourn. Administrators also announced the regular June board meeting would be moved from June 17 to June 24 because of the election and the revote timeline.
The revote on the revised 2026–2027 budget is scheduled for Tuesday, June 16, from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. at Bayville Intermediate School, MacArthur Primary School and the Brookville Reformed Church.

