Kalispell Public Schools to operate on $90.7M budget
State funding and taxpayer money are the primary sources of revenue for the district's budgeted funds, the largest being the general fund. Property taxes accounted for about 33% of funding for the elementary district budget and 32.9% of the high school budget.
The elementary district will operate on a $43.96 million budget, a percentage increase of 6.2% from the 2024-25 budget. Despite the bump, Kalispell Public Schools Finance Director Chris Campbell said the budget may face a deficit, even after the elimination of about 15 full-time-equivalent positions.
"We'll probably face an ongoing challenge on the elementary side indefinitely, until we see some kind of structural, legislative changes. But for this year, they'll be very, very tight," he said during a presentation at an Aug. 12 board meeting before the budget adoption.
The high school district budget totals $46.74 million, a percentage increase of 9.5% over the last school year's budget. The budget is stable, Campbell said, thanks in part to the passage of the $2.97 million general fund levy in May, which helped prevent the elimination of about 20 full-time-equivalent positions.
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING agreements continue through the 2025-26 school year, with certified staff receiving a 10% increase to the base salary and a 2% increase at the top. A first-year teacher with a bachelor's degree will earn a $47,713 salary, for example. Non-union employees will receive a 3% increase for 2025-26.
Kalispell Public Schools ratified the certified staff contract, anticipating that the Student and Teacher Advancement for Results and Success Act, also known as the STARS Act, would earn the Legislature's approval. The act incentivizes Montana school districts to raise teachers' starting salaries in addition to fully funding the Advanced Opportunities Act, which affects dual credit and work-based learning.
The act was signed into law in May and will provide financial relief to the tune of about $900,000 for the elementary district and about $800,000 for the high school district, Campbell said.
"... It was a bet and a risk and one that paid off," he said.
Campbell reiterated the disparity of the state funding formula between elementary and high schools, noting that the district receives $1,450 less per pupil in elementary school compared to the high school level. He said this is compounded by accreditation standards that require smaller class sizes in the elementary grades, necessitating more staff. Campbell and Superintendent Mark Jensen said they have not been provided with a rationale as to why less funding is given to educate elementary students.
At the state level, a decennial school funding interim study is underway. State law requires a school funding interim commission, made up of legislators and members of the public, be formed every 10 years to "to reassess the educational needs and costs related to the basic system of free quality public elementary and secondary schools; and if necessary, recommend to the following Legislature changes to the state's funding formula."
In addition to budgeted funds, the elementary and high school districts hold cash funds. Cash funds fluctuate and cover food service, student activities, traffic education and health insurance, for example.
An interlocal fund is also under cash funds. The interlocal fund contains year-end money from the elementary and high school districts and may be spent on various projects with board approval.
The current balance of the interlocal fund is $2.7 million. Since the interlocal fund was put into place in 2011, the district has used it like a savings account of sorts to accumulate money over time to fund large projects, purchases and other expenses. It has also been used to cover shortfalls and float a loan to the district's self-funded insurance program.
TO ADDRESS budget sustainability, Kalispell Public Schools is proposing changes to how it handles staffing levels and maintenance and building expenses, which Campbell outlined at the August board meeting.
Regarding staffing — the district's biggest expense — administrators are working on creating staffing metrics. The goal of the metrics is to "allow for incremental adjustments, not crisis corrections; provide an objective framework to evaluate future staffing decisions that are transparent, and fiscally responsible; provide consistency and equity in line with enrollment at each building."
The district anticipates completing middle and high school instructional metrics in September. Once completed, the creation of custodial, maintenance, clerical and other support staff metrics will get underway. The district proposes reviewing staff levels in February, after the second statewide official enrollment count is completed (the first is taken in October). State funding is tied directly to enrollment.
"Once that second count is done, we really have a very, very, good idea of what our budget will be for the coming year and we can kind of evaluate our staffing ratios based on current enrollment," Campbell said.
"Whether it's adding or reducing, really, in an effort to avoid any significant types of corrections like we had to do this past year," he added.
Kalispell Public Schools also plans to bring district-level oversight to capital expenditures over $25,000, along with asking school sites to submit needs and wants to further improve financial stability as one of Flathead County's largest employers.
The requests and projects would then be prioritized district-wide to ensure critical needs are addressed over lower-priority projects, which has been an issue in the past, allowing for multi-year planning. Requests would be collected through a standardized form posted in September, with submissions closed in October of a given school year. In November, the district would review and prioritize requests and conduct the bidding process from January through April. The suggested timeline would allow the district to earmark money 14 months in advance to better inform the district of fixed costs and operational budgets.
In his budget summary, Campbell said the district will need to use general funds, building reserve funds and technology funds to address significant deferred maintenance and safety issues.
Reporter Hilary Matheson may be reached at 758-4431 or hmatheson@dailyinterlake.com.
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 hours ago
- Yahoo
California's biggest virtual power plant may get a funding reprieve
California's premier 'virtual power plant' program is already reducing the state's reliance on polluting, costly fossil-fueled power plants. And that's just the start of what the scattered network of solar and batteries could do to stymie rising utility costs — if the state Legislature can stave off funding cuts to the program, that is. So finds a new analysis from consultancy The Brattle Group on the potential of the statewide Demand Side Grid Support (DSGS) program to help California's stressed-out grid keep up with growing electricity demand. The program pays households and businesses that already own solar panels and batteries to send their stored-up clean power back to the grid during times of peak demand, like hot summer evenings. Continuing the program's payments to those customers to make their stored energy available could save all California utility customers anywhere from $28 million to $206 million over the next four years, the report found. The findings come as state lawmakers attempt to rescue the DSGS program from a new round of funding cuts. Last year, California lawmakers slashed DSGS spending to deal with an unexpected budget shortfall. The situation is still troubled this year, and Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has proposed defunding the program further, leaving it little money to pay participants beyond this year. But the program could regain its financial footing if newly introduced legislation becomes law. This week, California Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin, a Democrat, released draft legislation that would allocate money to DSGS from the state's much-contested Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, which is supported by payments from polluting companies. That draft legislation calls for depositing 5% of revenue collected by electric utilities for that fund into a new account to finance DSGS from 2026 to 2034. Lawmakers don't have much time to move the proposal forward, with the state's legislative session ending Sept. 12. Saving the program would be a win for reducing the state's sky-high utility costs, according to Ryan Hledik, a principal at Brattle and coauthor of the report. 'It's cheaper to pay customers to provide grid resources from technology they've already adopted than it is to go invest capital in new stuff,' he said, including the fossil-fueled generators now used to meet peak grid needs. California has already committed billions of dollars on emergency backup generators and on keeping aging fossil-gas-fired power plants open past their planned closure dates, he noted. The high end of the savings DSGS could provide is based on the assumption that it 'would be a substitute for spending money on more expensive emergency resources,' he said. At the same time, DSGS could also bring down the 'resource adequacy' payments shelled out by California utilities, community choice aggregators, and other power providers to secure enough grid resources to meet peak demand in future years. Those costs have been rising in California, though not as drastically as they have in other parts of the country. Since its launch in 2023, the battery program Brattle analyzed, which is one of the four options for customers to participate in DSGS, has grown to a collective 700 megawatts of capacity. The report forecasts the program could nearly double its current capacity to reach 1.3 gigawatts by 2028, covering roughly half the total residential distributed-battery capacity expected to be online in the state by then. That won't happen without state funding for the program, however — and though some state lawmakers are attempting to save DSGS's funding, it remains unclear if the money will be there for future years. Relief on the way? If Irwin's proposed provision becomes law, it would supply roughly $70 million to $90 million per year to DSGS over the next five years, said Brad Heavner, executive director of the California Solar and Storage Association. DSGS needs at least $75 million this year to operate in 2026, according to a letter sent to California lawmakers on Tuesday by 35 companies, trade groups, and advocacy organizations active in solar, batteries, on-site generators, and demand response, including Heavner's group. The amount of funding dedicated under the proposed legislation 'won't be enough for all the program activity we expect — but it will be enough to have a core program,' he said. DSGS's cost-effectiveness, demonstrated by the Brattle analysis, should give lawmakers confidence that the money isn't being wasted, Heavner said. 'It's great that the Brattle study finds there's a two-for-one benefit — every dollar spent here saves two dollars' for utility customers across the state, he said. Brattle's research was funded by Sunrun and Tesla, two companies with longtime programs that sign up customers to make their excess battery capacity available for grid services. Both firms benefit from initiatives that boost the value of the rooftop solar and battery systems they sell to households in California and beyond. But the study also matches broader research on how virtual power plants can reduce blackout risks and electricity price spikes on U.S. grids. VPPs are collections of homes and businesses with smart thermostats, grid-responsive EV chargers, water heaters, and other appliances that can reduce how much power they're using, as well as rooftop solar-charged batteries or generators that can push power back to the grid as needed. Under the Biden administration, the U.S. Department of Energy found that the hundreds of billions of dollars that consumers spend on EVs, rooftop solar systems, batteries, smart thermostats, and other appliances could provide 80 to 160 gigawatts of VPP capacity by 2030, enough to meet 10% to 20% of U.S. peak grid needs and save about $10 billion in annual utility costs. (The Trump administration has removed this DOE report from the internet, but archived versions are available.) VPPs also pass the eye test: They've helped avoid blackouts in Puerto Rico, New England, and California this summer. States including Colorado and Virginia have passed laws or created regulations requiring utilities to expand VPPs. DSGS, for its part, has 'scaled in a way that folks can no longer poke holes in its reliability,' said Lauren Nevitt, Sunrun's senior director of public policy. Sunrun has dispatched hundreds of megawatts from its customers' batteries in California so far this summer, all during hours of the evening when wholesale electricity prices spike above $200 per megawatt-hour. In a two-hour experiment last month, Sunrun and Tesla dispatched 535 megawatts of battery power to the grid in what utility Pacific Gas & Electric called 'the largest test of its kind ever done in California — and maybe the world.' Lining up a steady source of funding for years to come would give these participating companies confidence that their investments in DSGS won't be left stranded by future budget cuts, Heavner said — and encourage even more investment going forward. VPPs on the rise Pressure to curb energy costs is particularly acute in California, where residential customers of the state's three major utilities now pay roughly twice the national average for their power and where rates rose 47% from 2019 to 2023. It is also among the best-positioned states to take advantage of VPPs to rein in those costs. California leads the country in rooftop solar, backup battery, and EV adoption, and a 2024 Brattle analysis found that VPPs could provide more than 15% of the state's peak grid demand by 2035, delivering $550 million in annual utility customer savings. DSGS is only one of a number of VPP options available in California. But advocates say it's by far the most successful in a state that's seen mixed progress on VPPs to date. In the past five years, stop-and-start policies from the California Public Utilities Commission have reduced overall capacity from demand-response programs that pay utility customers to turn down their electricity use to relieve grid stress. DSGS, which is run by the California Energy Commission, has grown rapidly due to a combination of factors, said Edson Perez, who leads California legislative and political engagement for clean-energy trade group Advanced Energy United. It's available to residents across the state, rather than being limited to individual utility territories and programs. It also has relatively simple enrollment and participation rules compared to many other programs, he said. It can be tricky to quantify the costs and benefits of these kinds of programs compared to traditional utility investments in power plants or large-scale solar and battery systems. But Brattle's new report is the 'first analysis of what its value is out in the field,' he said, and the results show 'it's very cost-effective.' Solar-charged batteries are also much less polluting than the state's other emergency grid-relief resources, he said. DSGS is one of a set of emergency programs launched after California experienced rolling blackouts during summer heat waves in 2020 and more heat-wave-driven grid emergencies in 2022. But most of the billions of dollars in emergency funding have gone to fossil-fueled generators. California had spent about $443 million on state-managed generators that burn fossil gas or diesel fuel as of December 2024, and has committed about $1.2 billion to keep fossil-gas-fired "peaker' plants in Southern California open until 2026, well past their scheduled 2020 closure date. 'We're in a statewide affordability crisis,' Perez said. 'Leveraging existing resources out there drives down costs for everyone.' Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Minnesota minimum wage will increase 2.5% to $11.41 per hour on Jan. 1
A server resets tables at a Minnesota restaurant earlier this year. (Photo by Ellen Schmidt/Minnesota Reformer) Minnesota's statewide minimum wage will increase 28 cents to $11.41 per hour on Jan. 1, a 2.5% increase based on the annual rate of inflation. The minimum wage applies to virtually all employees since the Democratic-controlled Legislature eliminated a lower minimum wage for small businesses, workers younger than 18 and workers on J-1 visas in 2024. (As before, tips cannot be counted toward the minimum wage.) Only workers under 20 years old in their first 90 days of training may receive a lower wage of $9.31 per hour starting in 2026. Minneapolis and St. Paul each have higher minimum wages of $15.97 per hour, which will increase with inflation in 2026. Small and micro businesses in St. Paul may pay a lower minimum wage, but the city is phasing in a single minimum wage for all employees by 2028. Minnesota's minimum wage is higher than most of its neighbors' (save South Dakota), but it isn't enough to cover basic living expenses. The cost of living for a childless, working-age adult requires earning $17.68 per hour, according to the state Department of Employment and Economic Development. A household with two children requires two parents earning at least $24.25 per hour. The federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour has remained unchanged since 2009 and is the effective minimum wage in 20 states, including Wisconsin. Minnesota's minimum wage has been indexed to inflation since 2018 but was limited to annual adjustments of 2.5% until last year when lawmakers raised the threshold to 5% to ensure the lowest paid workers receive larger raises in periods of high inflation. The increase will directly affect a relatively small number of workers. Fewer than 90,000 salaried and hourly jobs out of more than 3.3 million in Minnesota were paid at or below the minimum wage in 2023, according to the state's latest minimum wage report. Still, a rising minimum wage puts upward pressure on jobs paying just above minimum wage, creating a ripple effect across a larger number of workers. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Education trust fund proposed to replace school property taxes
(The Center Square) – A new solution for Pennsylvania's perennial struggle over education funding began circulating in the Legislature on Wednesday. This time, Republican Rep. Jason Ortitay, who represents a district southwest of Pittsburgh, wants to establish the Pennsylvania Education Endowment Fund using one-time state asset sales, expanded natural gas drilling on leased lands, a share of gambling revenue, public-private partnerships and investment returns from state bonds. Altogether, Ortitay says the fund's value will grow enough to replace all $16 billion collected from taxpayers to support public schools. 'For decades, Pennsylvanians have demanded relief from the crushing burden of school property taxes, especially seniors, working families, and homeowners on fixed incomes,' he said in a cosponsorship memo. 'Previous proposals to eliminate these taxes have either relied on politically unworkable tax swaps or failed to provide a sustainable funding source for public education.' The endowment fund, he said, would 'chart a different course.' Existing partisan ideology suggests that Democrats, majority party of the House of Representatives and occupant of the governor's mansion, will not want to travel that route. Instead, the chamber's leaders, in concert with Gov. Josh Shapiro, want the state to appropriate more money to public education each year to meet a court order that deemed the commonwealth's current funding levels unconstitutional. Since Shapiro took office in 2023, state funding has risen by over $2 billion. Still, adequacy gaps exist because disparate tax bases mean local support – which covers about two-thirds of education funding in the commonwealth – mean poorer districts can't afford the same resources as their wealthier counterparts. Solve the daily Crossword
