Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Emporia council backs level school funding amid dispute over methodology and representation
Summary
After reviewing proposed FY2026-27 allocations, the council — all members except Councilwoman Alvina Matthews — supported level funding for school operations and directed staff to revise the school funding resolution for placement on the May 5 agenda; councilors pressed for greater transparency and questioned ADM-based allocations.
Emporia City Council debated local school funding at its April 30 budget work session and directed staff to revise a proposed school funding resolution for the May 5 council agenda after most members signaled support for level funding.
Finance Director Alicia Hargrove reviewed the proposed FY2026-27 allocations: Greensville County proposed contributing about $6,068,334 (the school division requested about $6,839,663), while the City proposed contributing about $4,651,705 (the school board requested about $4,951,705). Hargrove noted a Davenport & Company model that used Average Daily Membership (ADM), state funding, and local revenue to estimate equitable shares; that model showed the city's ADM-based share would be roughly $5.78 million, meaning the city's proposed contribution remained more than $1.1 million below an ADM-based allocation.
Council members discussed the measures and the broader issue of governance and oversight. Councilman James C. Saunders said he would not support increasing city contributions while the city lacks representation and oversight within the school system and preferred level funding. Councilman Mark Lilly said council has consistently sought a formal agreement on funding and representation and supported level funding until such an agreement is reached. Councilwoman Alvina Matthews expressed concern about the impact of reduced funding on students and urged caution, saying the schools continue to serve city students regardless of governance disputes. Vice Mayor Clifton Threat said he remained concerned about funding for facilities that school officials had previously labeled unsuitable for occupancy and reiterated council's requests for more information and progress on representation.
Ms. Hargrove also reported updated enrollment figures as of March 31, 2026: the city ADM was approximately 853 and the county ADM approximately 979, lower than the ADM figures originally used to prepare the proposed budget (895 city, 949 county). After discussion, council supported level funding for school operations with Councilwoman Matthews dissenting; staff were directed to revise the proposed school funding resolution and place it on the May 5 City Council agenda for further consideration.
The council’s direction does not constitute final appropriation. Staff will provide the revised resolution and any supporting data for council review before final budget decisions and potential adjustments.
