A $3.1 million budget shortfall due to potentially retaining seven positions funded by grants that will end this September, a decrease in state aid, and a transportation contract that’s gone up by more than $500,000 has triggered a tax cap alert for Batavia City School board members.
That is, at least some of them have agreed they would consider overriding the state-mandated tax cap increase, which for the city district is .72 percent. Members had a first go-round of the 2024-25 budget during Monday’s board meeting.
“If it is coming down to it, we’re going to have to look at every option,” Vice President John Reigle said.
Business Administrator Andrew Lang presented projected revenues and expenditures, retaining current staffing, busing and programs. The proposed general support budget would be $6,977,767, or an increase of $505,98; an employee benefits increase of $657,194; transportation, which just received a five-year ok from the board for $3,310,108 for the first year, or a 20.2 percent increase and provides transportation for students from home to school, athletic events, field trips and summer home to school.
What Lang calls the rollover expenditure budget includes current staffing of seven full-time, long-term substitutes that have been funded through COVID-19 grant money of $5,804,256 that will end in September, five full-time social workers funded through a full-service community schools grant, five full-time instructional staff retirement replacements, all departmental requests for equipment and supplies, and two full-time school resource officers, one of which is funded with those COVID-19 grant funds about to expire in six months.
Items that also will roll over and cannot budge are salary increases in accordance with collective bargaining agreements and individual contracts and projected employer contribution amounts for employee and teacher retirement systems, he said. There is also a free school supplies for all students program, also purchased with COVID funds.
All totaled, the 2024-25 budget would be more than $62 million, at $62,052,726, compared to the current year’s budget of $58,875,814, for a difference of an additional $3,176,912.
As for overall enrollment projections, those are expected to gradually decline, Lang said. Numbers had dipped to 2,006 in 2021-22, and then rose back up to 2,031 in 2022-23, 2,072 in 2023-24, and then slipped back down to 2,047 in 2024-25, and are projected to fall to 2,034 in 2025-26 hover around there in 2026-27, fall again to 2,022 in 2027-28 and bounce back to 2,046 in 2028-29. Numbers have been nowhere close to the all-time high of 2,167 of 2019-20.
Those extra positions were added three years ago with COVID funds as a measure to deal with the aftermath of shutdowns and what educators believed was an issue of students struggling with social-emotional learning and related academic achievement.
“So there are some things that we need to be thinking about,” Superintendent Jason Smith said, referring to what he believes was “learning loss” attributed to COVID-19. “So we saw last month our test scores have been competitive. I’m not excusing the damage the pandemic caused, but it’s been four years … at some point, you can say the gap has been closed. Yes, we still want to give services to kids. We have seen some nice improvements across the district, and we still have some more work to do. But we also have to be careful that if we absorb that amount of almost $6 million into the general fund, which is what the plan is now, that may not be the most fiscally prudent thing to do.”
Lang recommended that the next steps would be to increase the revenue by appropriating additional reserves, increasing the tax levy, and/or continuing to lobby for additional state aid. Expenses can be decreased through attrition and no additional hiring, he said, consider what to do with those grant-funded positions, and there’s an option not to replace the retiring personnel for more savings.
Board member Alice Benedict asked about transportation.
“We also have flexibility on transportation too, do we not?” she said.
Smith initially said no.
Benedict pursued her line of thinking, adding that busing is not mandated, so the district is not bound to provide it.
“It’s something that can be looked at,” Smith said. “I’m not sure it’s something we would do.”
“Having lived here all my life, transportation has changed quite a bit,” Benedict said.
Smith said he believes there will be more Foundation Aid to come from the state. He turned to the board and asked if members wanted him to return with budget recommendations, and if there was any interest in exceeding the tax cap.
“I would,” Board President John Marucci said as Reigle also weighed in.
“We never want to, but I think it’s an option we have to look at,” Reigle said.
He wanted to make sure that the SROs and school safety remained in place, and no board member suggested cutting any personnel at this point. Smith said that the administration would return with recommendations at the next meeting.
The group plans to meet at a budget workshop on March 12 at the District Office. A proposed budget is to be adopted by April 22 and be available for public review by May 6 and presented during a budget hearing at 6 p.m. May 14. A district vote will be on May 21.
