Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jurupa Unified outlines budget assumptions amid enrollment declines, projects deficit spending
Summary
District staff presented the proposed 2026–27 budget, citing enrollment declines (projected loss of 451 students), state budget uncertainties including a Prop 98 ‘‘settle‑up’’ withholding proposal, and an estimated $12 million projected deficit for 2026–27 while maintaining required 3% reserve in multiyear projections.
Paula Ford, presenting the proposed 2026–27 budget on June 16, told the board the district built its plan around current assumptions from the governor’s May revision and the district’s three‑year rolling ADA average. Ford said the district is budgeting on expected declines in enrollment — a projected drop of 451 students in 2026–27, another 360 in 2027–28 and 260 in 2028–29 — and that those declines reduce average daily attendance (ADA) and thus state revenue.
Ford highlighted state‑level issues that could affect the final budget: the governor’s May revise proposes a $3.9 billion Prop 98 “settle‑up” withholding (down from the January proposal), an augmented COLA of 1.44 percent tied to a proposed 14‑week paid pregnancy leave mandate, and increases to special education funding. Ford noted the governor proposed raising the special education base rate from $999 to $1,340 per funded ADA — a change she said would bring roughly $5.5 million in additional special education revenue to the district if enacted as proposed.
The presentation said the district expects to deficit‑spend in the current year and to continue planned deficit spending: estimated deficit spending of $15.2 million in the current year (2025–26) and projected deficit spending of about $12 million in 2026–27. Ford described how one‑time funds (for example, the learning recovery block grant and other federal/state one‑time grants) affect multiyear cash flows and explained that some deficit spending is timing related because one‑time revenues may be spent across multiple years.
Ford described the district’s revenue mix (roughly 78 percent LCFF/state aid, 12.3 percent other state revenues, 3.5 percent federal, and 6.25 percent local revenues) and emphasized that about 83 percent of expenditures are personnel costs. She reiterated that while the district projects ending fund balances and will meet the required 3 percent reserve in each projected year, ongoing pressures from special education, insurance and transportation costs require monitoring and potential program adjustments.
Trustees asked how one‑time carryover and clawback repayments are recorded and whether programs might need to be reduced if state funds do not materialize; staff said there will be follow‑up presentations and that any material changes would be brought to the board with updated multiyear projections. The public hearing on the budget was opened and closed with no public speakers; the budget is scheduled for adoption at the June 23 board meeting.
