Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fullerton School District previews 2026–27 budget; projects roughly $1 million surplus amid enrollment decline
Summary
District staff said the state May Revision lifts Prop 98 and special‑education funding, helping the Fullerton School District present a proposed 2026–27 budget that shows about a $1 million one‑time surplus next year despite a projected decline in enrollment. The board held hearings and will adopt the budget June 22.
The Fullerton School District on Tuesday received an informational presentation on the proposed 2026–27 budget that projects roughly a $1 million surplus for next year but warns of tighter out‑year finances if state assumptions change.
Dr. Copelan, who presented the proposal, said the governor’s May Revision increased Prop 98 by about $6.4 billion compared with January, producing a combined LCFF increase of roughly 4.31% (the statutory COLA of 2.87% plus a proposed 1.44% discretionary boost). He said the state is also proposing a significant special‑education base‑rate increase, which the district estimates will yield about $4.55 million in additional revenue. “Prop 98 funding is approximately $6.4 billion higher than what was proposed in January,” Dr. Copelan said. “This is positive news for school districts throughout California.”
The presenter walked trustees through estimated actuals for 2025–26, enrollment assumptions and multi‑year projections. District staff are projecting funded ADA of roughly 10,599 for 2026–27 (a decline of about 280 students) and an unrestricted ending balance next year of approximately $24.4 million, of which about $3.5 million is unassigned one‑time money.
During board questions, a trustee asked how the district manages position control while enrollment declines. Dr. Hammet said the district uses an outside demographer and staffs on a school‑by‑school basis: “We base our staffing projections based upon enrollment … then we make adjustments at every school,” Dr. Hammet said, noting that staffing counts include not only classroom teachers but RTI teachers, special‑education staff, counselors and other certificated positions.
Trustees also pressed staff on risks tied to the governor’s proposed “settle‑up” or holdback of some Prop 98 funding. Dr. Copelan said the district is planning for a worst‑case scenario in its assumptions and would report any material changes after the governor signs the budget. “We’re planning on this manipulation thing to happen,” he said, and staff modeled conservatively to protect monthly obligations.
Board members asked about a proposed new 14‑week paid pregnancy disability leave and potential substitute‑cost impacts; Dr. Copelan said the budget includes a $450,000 estimate for increased substitute costs, acknowledging that the figure could vary by a few hundred thousand depending on staff demographics.
The presentation also reviewed other funds: food services (which saw increased expenditures this year), Measure N building fund activity tied to central kitchen work, developer fee revenue variability and the district’s deferred maintenance and restricted fund balances. Dr. Copelan thanked budget staff for reworking the plan after the state May Revision and said the item was informational tonight; the board will consider final adoption at its June 22 meeting and will update the public if the governor’s final budget changes material assumptions.
What happens next: The board held a public hearing on the budget during the meeting and recorded no public comments; staff plan to return June 22 for final action and to post updates following the governor’s signature.
