[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6281820,"mediaKeyId","2601905-143891b23dd00c8bee05accffa10d5e5","parentId",2601905,"title","Board hears $375.1M proposed budget and tax‑levy calculation; district projects $16M year‑over‑year increase","audioSeconds",884,"startMs",5171000,"endMs",6055000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2601905-143891b23dd00c8bee05accffa10d5e5&start=5171&end=6055","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2601905-143891b23dd00c8bee05accffa10d5e5/thumbnail_5171000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6281820/New-York/Board-hears-3751M-proposed-budget-and-taxlevy-calculation-district-projects-16M-yearoveryear-increase","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6281820-32ab454fd52e5218ba886982ae75fc77/orig.mp4?Expires=1770991071&Signature=FFEa3MBdKVE3kdt7hgKBMnYMUbr3CIWp0vhC1gpaXNlngdfEeRkEfTebeRA9dMHHpdy5Mf~sKQY0ofLVV9qTQ6FKRm2AINaH8zJ1PgZaz4XMHGDeopvPZzfmPEnwmm7fs17DG4qhZ6Bxj1L0FzrDbNHn88PL9kZo68lS~o~TWC1Y7Ra5StcL6iDbLQ0uV9kGy0CQaeiuftfXdcl4enSMG-L2nKtGPv0xhAGS7I1RBjuqBMy6lj2f-OU9x9FuAzWY0FKoYhmzEexqM1H4SGMHt0gNBUm0UXMLRScCq4h~j53LkS1xjGdDrqdqUyXwh2H27iZgYRZj33XAdfEty~q6pQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-03-12T15:34:40Z","article","The Newburgh City School District presented a draft $375,100,000 budget for 2025–26 at the March 11 Board of Education meeting, representing a projected $16 million increase over the prior year and a 4.5 percent budget change year‑to‑year.

Assistant Superintendent for Finance (presenter listed as Miss Roaring) and budget staff detailed factors driving the increase, including projected new out‑of‑district and in‑district special‑education placements, a growing contract‑for‑excellence set‑aside and capital exclusion amounts used in the state tax‑levy calculation. Administration said it anticipates a net increase of 34 special‑education placements and used a rough per‑student tuition estimate of $100,000 to project an added $3.4 million in tuition costs for 2025–26.

Roaring told the board the district completed its tax‑levy calculation and the allowable levy limit for 2025–26 is $117,300,000, an increase of about $3,700,000 (3.28 percent) over the levy submitted to voters in 2024–25. The calculation incorporates multiple state factors outside the district’s control, including local tax base growth, pilot payments and a capital exclusion tied to projected debt service less state building aid (the district cited a roughly $4 million capital exclusion amount in the calculation).

The administration said key revenue assumptions include a flat tax levy, projected increases in utility tax receipts and projected excess‑cost aid increases; the presentation also included an estimated $5.2 million appropriated fund balance to support the budget. Presenters warned of federal and state funding risks — notably the potential loss or reduction of school‑meal funding and changes to Title and IDEA grants — which could materially affect revenue and require adjustments.

Contract‑for‑Excellence set‑aside funding, a portion of foundation aid that must be earmarked for specified categories, is expected to grow from roughly $17.7 million in the current year to about $21,955,979 for 2025–26 (the presenters said 75 percent of that set‑aside must go to the district’s highest‑need schools). Administration outlined proposed uses including added coordinators for restorative justice, AIS teachers, social workers, bilingual teachers and other positions targeted to data‑driven needs.

The budget calendar shared with the board sets presentation of the acting superintendent’s proposed budget on March 25 and a potential board adoption on April 8 in alignment with the adopted calendar. The district also briefed the board on additional budget changes under consideration: targeted staffing additions and reductions, locker‑room repairs and playground replacements identified by the insurer. The presenters said several staffing reductions and administrative reconfigurations were proposed and that notifications would be provided after March 17.

Board members asked for clarity on staffing changes and on the involvement and start date of a budget‑consulting firm recently contracted to help the district; the board was told the firm’s no‑later‑than start date was discussed for March 15 and that the board would be notified when the firm began work.

Ending: The acting superintendent’s proposed budget will be presented to the board on March 25; the board may adopt the budget on April 8. Any changes after state budget adoption or federal grant adjustments could require further revisions and identification of offsetting revenues.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","BOE Regular Meeting - March 6, 2025 - 6:30PM","oneSentenceSummary","Officials presented a draft $375.1 million budget for 2025–26 — a proposed $16 million (4.5%) increase — and a tax‑levy limit of $117.3 million; administration cited rising special‑education placements, contract‑for‑excellence set‑aside growth and capital exclusions as key drivers.","taxTitle","Newburgh City School District, School Districts, New York","taxId",14388,"location","New York","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6281825,"Parents, players press board to reinstate Newburgh coaches after locker‑room incident; board schedules personnel review",3475,1679000,5154000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2601905-143891b23dd00c8bee05accffa10d5e5&start=1679&end=5154","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2601905-143891b23dd00c8bee05accffa10d5e5/thumbnail_1679000.jpg","/articles/6281825/New-York/Parents-players-press-board-to-reinstate-Newburgh-coaches-after-lockerroom-incident-board-schedules-personnel-review","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6281825-63709e6698d42e6782ce475ba63c049c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770991071&Signature=F5woE8gmOndQX2Fj4vlrLc-~gnLa~SUiy9zQHysGcFAHvANp9KYCui5u7A6ioeE-31SY40iJnC8ycAtICfgwtR2k13XRdhNiAT2YrvNFFPAYyJ9LQwUGj8NChToaImRCbrqtx6xlftmiFN8nQCqrI~UZbekbgXFRZrVKRtAGPEMTsEyM-CL25YYFVGxduxPWc8bKTYTiSmqsUzdVBoxcNa~ll~hARCg7wue4kTVpGQYQcpPsvOUAliqg95GqgYYaQmd2ASjMyfbS9LkJCsAWkXkJOYENSwzNeBdar1dlmIX3VNS2wF~xpEcg03V7jpKEnYdNbcHfayEtvrRhEzhugw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A sustained wave of public comment from parents, former players and current students urged the Newburgh City School District Board of Education on March 11 to reverse or revisit the district’s decision not to rehire several Newburgh Free Academy football coaches after an October locker‑room incident.

Speakers described the coaches as mentors and program builders and said the wider community would be harmed if the coaches do not return. “This coaching staff has dedicated so much of their personal time to build this program,” parent Rick Seglio told the board. Numerous student speakers described the staff as father figures and credited them with academic and athletic opportunities.

Multiple public speakers said the district’s locker room and supervision problems contributed to the incident and pressed the district to assess facilities, security and athletic‑department oversight. “Please see this locker room incident as a whole for what it truly is, a fundamental breakdown of an established system of control,” parent Yael Seglio said, asking the board to “acknowledge this colossal breakdown.”

Several speakers said the district has not provided sufficient information about the investigation. Virginia Hoffman, a parent speaker, said protocols for a bullying investigation committee were not followed and asked that camera footage — which she described as taxpayer funded — be released to the public. “Why was this ignored?” Hoffman asked, referring to district bylaws she said require a multi‑member bullying investigation committee.

Board counsel Michael Shaw read a statement near the end of public comment saying the board intends to have the football coaches’ evaluations revisited and to place that matter on the personnel committee agenda for March 20, 2025, at 6:45 p.m. The board later voted to enter executive session to discuss “employment history of particular employees and advice from legal counsel,” with several central office staff members requested to attend.

Board members pressed for a prompt review. “What do we need to do as a board, as a district, to revisit that decision that was made?” Board member Robert Howard asked after public comment, saying student athletes were being hurt by the lapse in spring preparations. The board passed a motion to go into executive session; members discussed inviting the deputy superintendent and others into that session.

The transcript reflects competing claims about who did and did not follow protocol, the state of the locker‑room facilities and whether the district’s athletic director followed required procedures. Several speakers said the locker room had not been renovated despite prior allocations for work, and speakers described problems with access control and equipment staging.

No formal reinstatement of any coach occurred at the meeting. Instead the board directed that evaluations be revisited in a personnel‑committee meeting and moved to executive session to review personnel history and receive legal advice. The transcript records public speakers saying an investigation into the October incident has been ongoing for 126 days; some speakers referenced DA involvement but the board did not announce a prosecutor’s determination during the meeting.

Ending: The personnel committee meeting on March 20 and the board’s executive‑session review are the immediate next steps recorded in the transcript; the board’s public record will show any personnel outcomes after the committee and executive deliberations conclude.","Dozens of parents, current and former players urged the Newburgh board to reinstate long‑time football coaches removed after a locker‑room incident; the board voted to revisit coach evaluations and moved into executive session to discuss personnel and legal matters.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6281830,"External auditors give Newburgh district a clean opinion but record $54.6 million in adjustments",564,71000,635000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2601905-143891b23dd00c8bee05accffa10d5e5&start=71&end=635","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2601905-143891b23dd00c8bee05accffa10d5e5/thumbnail_71000.jpg","/articles/6281830/New-York/External-auditors-give-Newburgh-district-a-clean-opinion-but-record-546-million-in-adjustments","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6281830-ad05d2e700c516a061d79a6f84d2d725/orig.mp4?Expires=1770991071&Signature=cXTQk9je3bzNZpwqU3u-Tq-rMT3z42bvsRJ4zlhb~R-3vA0eHmVYg9xYGHpfBnG1tmBdhqLjFguQojEU~GqlVvcsvH1n5JJ6VEBTsPvPuEx0iLDcNf9DnUIqbFOZn9elDpaKKu4KNnOQ9M82BgB-UFeSSz63yJUUfB6q8VYhHncBM9V0iscO0kareov~AeeOpMANGbwLxlOWXYnSPKChwBNrc4WjH88CraenRytgQRh5x77RjUOQxVVQXo60arWoyylS5pxnKC3A4XP~jO0r2crlfoETZ6-vYH7ztCEY6NVURsCLRrNMa4D7hG1gWmykJYzHPeCSQ0mCwFrlDNlcMQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Newburgh City School District received an unmodified (clean) audit opinion for the year ended June 30, 2024, but external auditors reported 28 adjusting journal entries totaling about $54,551,000 and several control findings at the Board of Education meeting on March 11.

Doug Zonen, partner with the EFPR group, and Dave Gable, the firm’s director, presented the findings. “The total of the 28 adjustments was $54,551,000,” Zonen said during the presentation. The auditors said they would issue five separate reports connected to the audit, including a basic financial‑statement opinion, a single audit under federal uniform guidance and a management letter.

The nut of the audit: after the adjustments the auditors concluded the district’s financial statements conform to generally accepted accounting principles for governmental entities and issued an unmodified opinion dated Dec. 20, 2024. But the auditors identified a material weakness in internal control related to accounting records and significant audit adjustments and recorded a long list of reclassifications and corrections.

Among the larger changes the auditors described were corrections to taxes receivable and related deferred tax entries of about $2.9 million; the recording of a prior‑year receivable and deferral from New York State of about $7.9 million; reversal of accounts payable related to bond anticipation note activity of roughly $5 million with related interest of about $600,000; and reclassification of roughly $8 million in judgments and additional $7.3 million recorded as accounts payable for related items. Capital‑fund activity required about $15 million in adjustments for bond proceeds that had been recorded as revenue instead of receivable.

Audit leaders also told the board the district’s extra‑classroom activity fund review was near final and that the federal single‑audit of the Education Stabilization Fund — which aggregates several COVID‑related grants including ESSER and ARP sub‑grants — resulted in an unmodified compliance opinion. The auditors reported the district received roughly $23,200,000 in Education Stabilization Fund monies.

Board member questions focused on scale and timing. When asked how long the audit took and when fieldwork began, auditors said planning began in July with fieldwork in September and final completion in December after the district provided additional reconciliations and supporting documents. On whether the findings reflected malfeasance, the auditors said no: the issues were attributable to poorly maintained accounting records rather than detected misappropriation. “At no time did we detect anything that would rise to the level of misappropriated funds,” Zonen said.

The auditors also reported a late filing of the financial statements to the New York State Education Department (the Oct. 15 statutory deadline was missed and the statements were filed in late December) and identified the district’s unassigned general‑fund balance at 5.03 percent of the prior year’s tax levy, exceeding the 4 percent limit in New York State property tax law by roughly $4.6 million. The auditors pointed board members to the detail and the tax‑cap calculation in the audit report.

Board members did not take formal action on the audit presentation at the meeting; auditors answered questions and provided the board with the final reports and a management letter for follow up. The administration and audit committee will receive the written reports and consider the management‑letter recommendations for internal controls and timing.

The audit presentation and the auditors’ slides reviewed internal control testing steps taken (cash receipts, disbursements, payroll, bank reconciliations, grant reconciliations and other routine areas) and noted the district followed applicable federal and state auditing standards during the review.

Ending: The auditors said they would issue final written reports consistent with their oral presentation; the district will need to address control weaknesses and the late filing in its follow‑up to the audit committee and in internal remediation plans.","External auditors told the Newburgh City School District board they will issue an unmodified (clean) opinion on the year ended June 30, 2024, after 28 adjusting journal entries totaling about $54.55 million; the auditors also flagged a late financial statement filing and a general‑fund balance slightly above the state limit.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board hears $375.1M proposed budget and tax‑levy calculation; district projects $16M year‑over‑year increase

Parents, players press board to reinstate Newburgh coaches after locker‑room incident; board schedules personnel review

External auditors give Newburgh district a clean opinion but record $54.6 million in adjustments