Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Budget Shortfall topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Clover School District projects $5 million operating shortfall; board weighs cuts, fees and modest tax options

Clover School District Board of Trustees · May 11, 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

District staff presented a roughly $5 million gap in the 2026 operating budget driven by teacher pay increases, new‑school operating costs and other recurring items. Trustees discussed targeted cuts (substitutes, apps, Apple lease, police traffic costs), revenue ideas (athletic and virtual course fees, surplus sales) and the timing of possible millage changes.

CLOVER — District finance staff told the Board of Trustees at a special work session that preliminary calculations show roughly $145.9 million in projected operating revenue against about $151 million in projected expenditures, leaving an approximately $5 million shortfall the board must address before adopting its final budget.

Dr. Quinn, who led the workshop presentation, said state budget changes increase available education funding but do not fully cover local cost pressures: “The key points I wanted the board to understand is the big red bucket where we get most of our funding — we are harmed in that because we only get 72% instead of 75%,” she said, explaining why a state‑authorized teacher pay raise still leaves Clover about $1.4 million short of the local share.

The shortfall stems primarily from two recurring cost areas: the local share of the teacher pay increase (the district estimates a $2,600 total per teacher cost including fringes, with the state covering part) and recurring operating costs for three new schools now opening. Finance director Mr. Love presented the revenue and expenditure picture and said staff used preliminary state aid numbers from Ways and Means and local property/auto assessments to reach current estimates.

To close the gap staff proposed targeted reductions totaling about $1.2 million so far and additional policy and program changes that could yield more. Specific items discussed included a $500,000 reduction to the substitute budget by eliminating permanent daily subs and trimming collaboration‑day coverage; $300,000 in Apple lease savings ($100,000 annually); roughly $266,000 in IT software savings; and about $295,000 in one‑year cuts to instructional apps using carryover funds. Mr. Ruth also identified roughly $62,000 in possible reductions among underutilized mental‑health or drug programs.

Safety and operations costs factored into the discussion: staff said they currently hire four off‑duty York County deputies to manage traffic at Crowders for roughly $1,600 per day and flagged a plan to seek Department of Transportation approval to route traffic to an existing signal that could halve that expense.

On the revenue side trustees discussed reinstating a $100 fee for certain initial‑credit virtual classes (with exemptions for students on free or reduced lunch and for required credit recovery), pursuing athletic participation fees (peer districts range from $60 to $150 per year or per sport), and selling surplus computers (estimated $200,000–$400,000). Dr. Quinn said these steps could reduce what the board must ask of taxpayers but cautioned about access and equity implications for families.

Board members pushed staff for a deeper review of bus‑related overtime and field‑trip costs, which are a major overtime driver. Mr. Love described transportation procedures and a volunteer rotation for trips and committed to a ‘deep dive’ to quantify overtime and compare the cost of hiring more part‑time drivers versus continuing current overtime practices. “We want to do a deep dive into that and then bring you back a number,” he said.

Trustees repeatedly emphasized competing priorities: several said they were reluctant to forgo teacher and support‑staff compensation increases because doing so would harm recruitment and retention, while others urged exhaustive review of non‑personnel costs before endorsing any millage increase. Board members asked staff to return with a balanced budget option next week. The board also noted possible future relief when bond payments begin to phase out in 2027–28 or if new commercial tax base additions arrive that could reduce millage pressure.

The board did not take a final vote on the budget at the session; staff will return with revised projections and options for a vote at a subsequent meeting.