Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Forecast topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Treasurer: five‑year forecast shows multi‑year deficit risk if levies do not pass
Summary
The district treasurer told the board that, under current assumptions, the five‑year forecast shows roughly $900,000 in deficit in fiscal 2029 and about $3.9 million in fiscal 2030 if renewal levies fail; health insurance and wages were cited as key cost drivers.
Get email alerts on the Budget Forecast topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Waterloo Local treasurer presented the district’s five‑year forecast and warned that the district faces material deficits unless levy renewals pass and state funding assumptions hold.
Under the forecast scenarios presented, the district could be roughly $900,000 in the red in fiscal 2029 and about $3.9 million in the red in fiscal 2030 if current levies do not pass or funding assumptions change. The treasurer emphasized the limits of forecasting: “we can't assume that a levy is going to pass,” and noted the state timing changes that require filings in October and February in the current cycle.
The presentation cited three drivers of the gap: heavy reliance on local taxes (about 54% of district funding), projected increases in wages and benefits (wages and benefits were described as roughly 72% of the budget), and volatile health‑insurance costs (the treasurer discussed recent large premium increases and forecasts of double‑digit percentage changes in some years).
Officials also described a state budget guarantee embedded in recent funding legislation that prevents districts from receiving less than a baseline (noted as the fiscal 2021 level) while that guarantee remains in law; administrators cautioned that such guarantees are subject to change in future budget bills.
The treasurer noted changes to filing deadlines and the forecasting cycle enacted in the state funding bill and said the board will revisit projections at mandated filing times. Board members asked clarifying questions about assumptions for employee benefit increases and property‑value growth; administration said some items (collective bargaining outcomes, future levies and state legislative actions) remain uncertain and will affect later forecasts.
The board approved the forecast as presented, with administration noting further conversations and potential ballot planning as next steps.

