Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget And Studies topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board considers outside fiscal and staffing studies to address $2.1M shortfall
Summary
Trustees discussed commissioning outside operations and staffing studies after a board member said the district faces an approximate $2.1 million deficit; estimated study costs ranged from about $15,000 to $40,000, with one example around $32,000.
A board member told the Keystone Central SD trustees on July 2 that the district is entering the fiscal year with an approximate $2.1 million deficit and urged commissioning outside consultants to identify savings and restructuring options.
During the work session a trustee explained the rationale: an outside review can provide "a fresh set of eyes" to identify streamlining opportunities and lessen board bias when considering difficult budget choices. The trustee proposed two studies — an operational/efficiency review and a staffing study — as tools to produce evidence-backed recommendations trustees could either implement or reject.
Trustees discussed likely costs and timeframes. Acting superintendent Dr. Lonaconis said a comprehensive firm might charge roughly $15,000–$20,000 at the low end and up to $40,000 at the high end, citing a recent example that cost about $32,000 and took four months to complete. Multiple trustees cautioned that the value of a study depends on whether the board later adopts recommended changes.
"Are you going to follow the study? Are you going to implement? That's the key," Dr. Lonaconis said, noting that some districts commission reviews and then decline to act on recommendations. Other trustees echoed concerns about spending on a study while budgeting from a deficit but suggested that study-driven savings could offset up-front costs.
No formal motion to hire a consultant was made at the work session; trustees agreed to gather parameters and guidance and to consult with the acting superintendent about timeline and scope before bringing a recommendation to the voting session.
Next steps described on the record include defining the study parameters in coordination with administration and returning to the board with cost and scope options at future meetings.
