Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board holds first reading of the 2026–27 budget; projects $325 per‑pupil increase and a $125,400 preliminary shortfall
Summary
At the June 8 meeting district staff presented a preliminary 2026–27 budget with a $325 per‑pupil state funding figure, projected enrollment declines, a roughly $125,400 shortfall and a preliminary levy impact near 7.3%; staff will return with adjustments before the final adoption.
Budget presenter Chris opened the first reading of the district's 2026–27 budget on June 8 and walked the board through revenue and expenditure assumptions.
Chris said the new biennial state budget includes a $325 per‑pupil increase as a baseline, but because districts face declining enrollment and limited general aid, property taxes will likely absorb much of the change. Staff projected a resident student population near 2,700 and used a working assumption of about 60 fewer students in the elementary level for budgeting purposes; enrollment and open‑enrollment shifts will alter final per‑pupil revenue.
Discussion focused on special education high‑cost reimbursement percentages (staff cited state guidance near 45% but recent local results closer to 38–41%), salary and benefit assumptions (a proposed market adjustment of $400,000 and $150,000 for Act 20 obligations), and a targeted $2.3 million in savings from staff reductions/restructuring. Transportation (diesel) and health‑insurance cost changes were called out as upward pressures.
At the time of the first reading staff identified a preliminary shortfall of about $125,400; board members were generally confident the gap could be closed through further adjustments and by monitoring open‑enrollment and hiring outcomes. Administrators said the preliminary tax levy impact on the district as presented was roughly 7.3% (including additional debt‑service payments), but emphasized that the board will finalize levy decisions in the fall and could scale back extra debt payments if preferred. Staff described options for addressing large capital needs, including using fund balance, a state trust fund loan, or altering capital‑budget allocations.
Next steps: staff will model capital‑budget alternatives (including a scenario around $770,000, roughly $1 per square foot) and return with revised budget documents for the second reading at the next board meeting; the board will adopt the final budget at the annual meeting later in the fall.
