As enrollment declines continue to squeeze the budget, Boulder Valley School District Superintendent Rob Anderson is worried a bill that would overhual the state’s school funding formula will make it even more challenging.
“If this were to pass, that we need to prepare for a different future here in BVSD,” Anderson said. “These conversations get tougher and tougher.”
Anderson at Tuesday’s school board meeting called on the community to join him in lobbying against House Bill 1448, which was spearheaded by House Speaker Julie McCluskie, a Democrat.
The bill’s goal is to create a more equitable funding formula by increasing resources to students living in poverty, learning English and receiving special education services. Small and rural districts would also get extra money. But less money would be allocated to districts with a high cost of living, like Boulder Valley.
The new formula would be phased in over six years and add about $500 million in revenue. To pay for it, the plan is to spend $84 million a year from either the state’s general fund or the state’s $1.5 billion education fund.
The bill has received mixed support from school districts.
While districts with higher poverty levels that would benefit with increased funding recently testified in favor of the bill, others – generally large, suburban districts – were opposed, Along with Boulder Valley, those opposed include Adams 12, Cherry Creek, Littleton and Douglas County. Concerns include that the changes simply shift money around without adequately funding schools.
Anderson said his concerns include the sustainability of the changes, as well as the “unpredictability” of the new formula.
“Nobody knows what it will really actually do,” Anderson said. “These are big shifts.”
Along with talking about potential school funding formula changes, the school board heard an update on next school year’s budget.
On the revenue side, the district is expecting an additional $8.4 million in state per-pupil funding, as well as about about $4.6 million from the $141 million allocated statewide to reduce the budget stabilization factor. The budget stabilization factor allows the state to use promised K-12 education funding in other areas of the budget.
Chief Financial Officer Bill Sutter said continued enrollment declines mean the district is seeing a smaller revenue increase than in past years, even as costs continue to rise because of inflation.
“The decline in enrollment is taking the big bite out of the new revenue,” he said.
On the expenses side, the district is still negotiating salary increases with its employee groups. Giving all employees a raise to mirror the state’s 5% inflation rate would add up to about $17 million — and the district only has about $8.7 million left in its general fund to spend on ongoing expenses, based on its preliminary budget.
The district also is spending about $3 million on its preschool program to make up the amount that’s not covered by the state’s Universal Preschool program.
Along with ongoing expenses, the budget includes about $18.4 million in reserves the district expects will be available to spend on one-time needs.
Proposals for that money include a $2.5 million staffing reserve to cover the cost of hiring teachers and other staff members at schools where enrollment comes in over projections or to keep teachers when enrollment comes in under projections.
About $4.2 million would go to curriculum materials, while $800,000 would be spent on special education support. Another $500,000 would be spent on the Grad Plus initiative that’s designed to better prepare students for success after graduation.
The school board plans to vote on a final budget in June.
