Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the School Budgeting topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

North Muskegon board adopts 2025–26 and 2026–27 budgets, approves property‑tax levy form

North Muskegon Public Schools Board · June 23, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The North Muskegon Public Schools board voted to adopt final budgets for 2025–26 and proposed budgets for 2026–27, approved the L‑4029 property‑tax levy form, and authorized bookkeeping moves to shift technology and capital costs into the sinking fund to ease pressure on the general fund.

The North Muskegon Public Schools board voted to adopt the district’s final 2025–26 budget and to approve the proposed 2026–27 budget after a budget hearing and a presentation from district staff.

Mark, who led the board through the budget presentation, said revenue estimates rose by about $85,000—largely from state grants and one‑time payments—and that the presentation reflects several expense pressures, including increased benefits tied to retiree payouts and higher substitute costs. He told the board the presentation shows a pattern of deficits under current assumptions but that the district is using fund transfers and sinking‑fund options to limit near‑term impacts.

Mark highlighted that special‑education costs remain a significant local burden, saying the district faces “unfunded” special‑education costs he estimated at about $841,000 and that the county’s Act 18 mill funding is insufficient to fully cover those expenses. He also described the school bond loan fund (SBLF), noting the district’s SBLF balance and a repayment schedule that, barring new debt, would begin repayment around 2030–31. He told the board the district expects to borrow roughly $187,000 to cover an expected November SBLF payment of about $282,000 because only about $95,000 is currently available in that account.

To protect the general fund, Mark proposed and described moving roughly $132,000 from the general fund into the new sinking fund to cover instructional technology (Chromebooks, software) and additional transfers of capital/renovation line items into the sinking fund—moves he said would reduce pressure on the general fund by roughly $182,000 under his assumptions.

After discussion and brief public comment, the board adopted the final 2025–26 budget and approved the proposed 2026–27 budget during roll‑call votes recorded in the meeting; the chair announced the motions carried. The board also approved the L‑4029 property‑tax levy form required for setting the district’s levy, and approved updated non‑affiliated handbooks for administrative and clerical staff (step/compensation updates).

The board’s decisions follow the staff presentation and reflect a mix of one‑time state grants, continuing operational costs, and locally managed fund transfers to stabilize the general fund. Next steps include implementing the approved budgets, managing SBLF cash flow through short‑term borrowing as described by staff, and monitoring state budget developments that could change aid levels.