Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Frankford Township school budget keeps programs intact, board approves 4.33% tax-levy increase
Summary
The Frankford Township Consolidated School District board approved the 2024–25 budget that leaves programming intact but raises the general fund tax levy about 4.33% to cover fixed-cost increases (health benefits, salaries, insurance); roll-call approval passed with one no vote.
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Frankford Township Consolidated School District board approved the district’s 2024–25 budget on May 17, adopting a general fund tax-levy increase of roughly 4.334% to cover rising fixed costs while keeping all programs intact.
The budget presenter told the board that salaries and extra compensation account for about 62.3% of the budget, health benefits are projected to rise 9.66% (about 16% of the budget), and other mandated costs — transportation, property insurance and workers’ compensation — are also increasing. The presenter said roughly 86% of the budget is fixed cost, leaving about 11.8% as discretionary spending.
“All programming will remain intact,” the Superintendent said, noting that preserving programs was a priority in developing the proposal.
As presented, state aid to the district increased by about $41,000; the presenter said the state’s funding formula and caps limited an otherwise larger increase and explained that allowable adjustments (primarily for health-benefit cost growth) permit the district to exceed the 2% tax-cap. The presenter gave the following budget totals: a general fund increase of about $440,099, a total tax-levy increase including debt service of $441,004.87, and average residential impacts of approximately $212.72 for Branchville and $128.31 for Frankford.
The presentation also described revenue strategies: timing network and wireless upgrades to capture a 50% E-rate reimbursement, expanding shared services to reduce costs, and increasing tuition slots for out‑of‑district students (the presenter estimated roughly $172,000 in additional tuition-related revenue, emphasizing that tuition offsets costs rather than generating net profit and that audits can later adjust final amounts).
Board members asked clarifying questions about tax-cap mechanics and allowable adjustments; the presenter explained health-benefit increases and limited enrollment adjustments are typical reasons districts may exceed the 2% base cap.
On the motion to accept the consent agenda and budget items, the clerk conducted a roll-call vote. The record shows the following votes: Chris Dexter — yes; Charlene Molnar — yes; Chelsea Stoll — yes; John Tiger — no; Kate Adam — yes; Jesse Vaughn — yes; Caitlin Fredo — yes; Andy Jask — yes. The motion carried.
The board moved quickly through the public comment period (no speakers) and closed the meeting after noting several upcoming dates and a request for chaperones for the eighth-grade dance on May 31.
Next procedural steps: the budget is approved by board action on May 17 and will proceed to the usual post-adoption reporting and any required audits; no additional board action was announced at the meeting.

