Hopkins presents FY26 first‑read budget with a roughly $7 million structural gap; staff outline cuts and reallocations
Summary
District leaders briefed the board on a proposed FY26 budget that begins with a roughly $7 million shortfall driven by flat enrollment, rising transportation costs and salary/benefit pressures; staff described targeted reductions, use of restricted balances and further work before a June 10 final vote.
Hopkins Public School District staff presented the first read of the proposed fiscal year 2026 general fund budget and described a multi‑million dollar structural shortfall they are addressing with a mix of reductions and one‑time resource reallocations.
What the district said about the gap: Staff framed the shortfall as the result of flat/near‑flat enrollment, rising operating costs and state formula revenues that have not kept pace with district expense growth. Transportation costs were singled out as a major driver: staff said transportation expenses that had been roughly $6.5 million pre‑pandemic are approaching $11 million in the current cycle. The district initially projected a roughly $7 million budget gap under conservative revenue assumptions (2% state basic revenue inflation and a 4% COLA estimate for bargaining units).
How staff propose to close the gap: District leaders said they would combine expenditure reductions with limited use of restricted fund balances and reassignments to lower the shortfall. Proposed items discussed included: - Reconfiguring substitute staffing ($400,000 savings cited) - Using capital project levy categories for some costs currently paid from the general fund - Reallocating some costs from general fund to proprietary funds where statute allows (nutrition, community education) for utilities and like costs - Using some restricted safety and grant dollars for programs previously funded from the general fund - Reducing some extra payments and consolidating costs where feasible
Class size and program trade‑offs: Staff and board members discussed the likely effect on site staffing and course offerings. Principals will use available discretionary dollars, categorical dollars and added FTE where most needed; district leaders said they had prioritized protecting direct classroom instruction but acknowledged trade‑offs. Public commenters and board members raised concerns about single‑building allocation rules (Eisenhower’s three‑program structure), cut impacts to electives (music, languages, AP/CIS) and the need for clearer, school‑by‑school FTE impact reporting. Staff said they would provide more granular class‑size and enrollment modeling for a follow‑up board meeting and the final budget vote on June 10.
Next steps: Staff will finalize reductions and reallocations and return with a structurally balanced recommended budget for board action at the June 10 meeting. The district emphasized that further savings will require difficult program decisions or additional revenues.
