School Board cuts property tax rate, adopts budget
BY JENNIFER CABRERA
GAINESVILLE, Fla. – At the September 9 special meeting, the School Board of Alachua County adopted its FY2025-26 budget and property tax millage rate.
At the beginning of the meeting, Vice Chair Tina Certain announced that Chair Sarah Rockwell and Member Thomas Vu were participating virtually; she said Rockwell is still recuperating, and Vu was in Washington, D.C., at a conference.
Consultant Judith Marte presented the budget, which totals $604,094,340, less than the previous year’s adopted budget of $612.8 million.
The General Fund budget is $349,885,334, which includes $21 million in transfers from capital funds; last year’s adopted General Fund budget was $339 million.
Click here to view the Executive Summary of the FY2025-26 Budget.
Property tax rates
The property tax rate will be 6.251 mills, 0.01 mills less than last year’s millage but 5.07% above the rolled-back rate of 5.8402 mills.
Certain asked Marte for the district’s financial condition ratio as of June 30, and Marte said she would provide that to school board members the next day. Rockwell asked whether the amount being transferred from capital funds is comparable to the amount transferred by other school districts, and Marte said she didn’t have the list with her but promised to send it the next day.
Member Janine Plavac made a motion to approve the resolution setting the property tax rates, and Member Leanetta McNealy seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
FY2025-26 budget
McNealy made a motion to approve the budget, and Plavac seconded the motion.
Rockwell pointed out that the base student allocation increased by less than 1%, which “does not come close to keeping up with inflation… We’re trying to do the same or more with what is functionally less money.” She said she was pleased with the fund balance, which she described as “very healthy,” but she noted that about $7 million of those funds will be spent in the 2024-25 budget year.
Certain said she had hoped for information about the number of students (FTEs) expected to enroll in district schools this year, but Marte said she did not have a presentation prepared on that. Certain also said she was “a little bit uneasy because I don’t know where we are with staffing,” and Marte said that information would need to come from Human Resources, but “I think Ms. Terry will tell you that what she currently has available is not up to her standards. We want to make sure the numbers we give you are correct.” Marte mentioned that a new Budget Director would start the next day.
Patton said the FTE calculation performed last March was more accurate than the previous year’s: “You’re within 75-80 kids.”
The budget motion passed unanimously.
2024-25 financial statements
The last agenda item was the approval of the 2024-25 Annual Financial Report and General Purpose Financial Statements. The total fund balance of the General Fund is 12.63% of the General Fund as of June 30, compared to 12.2% a year ago.
Certain pointed out, “and I bring this up every year that I’ve been on the board… We spend more in General Fund than estimated revenue, and you can only do that for so long.” She said the General Fund expenses in the 2024-25 fiscal year were $6.9 million above the revenues, and the overage was $635,000 in Food Service, “which — usually, that’s not the case for Food Service.”
Certain acknowledged that the transfers from capital funds are legally allowable: “We’re complying with the law, but — and this is my view — I feel the State is kind of abdicating their responsibility to cover expenditures, and since they don’t want to give us any State money, they open the floodgates for how we can use the 1.5 mill capital funds.” She noted that the capital funds are the only source to address air conditioning, roofs, and athletic facilities, so transferring that money to the General Fund reduces the district’s ability to build and maintain capital assets.
Plavac made a motion to accept the financial reports, McNealy seconded the motion, and the motion passed unanimously.
Judith Marte didn’t seem well prepared.
“Rockwell asked whether the amount being transferred from capital funds is comparable to the amount transferred by other school districts…” If she and the rest of the Board was concerned with what other districts were doing, the SBAC wouldn’t be on the State’s shait list.
Another stupid, albeit fake concern of Rockwell’s: she “pointed out that the base student allocation increased by less than 1%, which “does not come close to keeping up with inflation…” Has she been learning about inflationary pressures during her time off?
Where was that concern when they were giving teachers and staff a 1% raise, but the Superintendent a 20%+ raise? Those teachers who are indoctrinated into voting for these Board members may want to do what your profession stands for – educate yourselves. This Board and Superintendent doesn’t care about anything other than making sure you fall in line and your vote for 1 mill.
Are we paying for the ‘conference trip’ to DC?
$604M divided by 30,000 students is $20K per student. We could rent a storefront for $2k per month, add $1k per month for utilities, $1k per month for insurance, and $100k for equipment (5 year amortization) -> Total annually = $68k. Then, hire a PhD instructor for $130,000 annual salary and 1 assistant at $60,000 each. Grand total = $258k annual. Then teach 26 students for $10,000 each, and they would get a much higher quality education.
Of course, the cost SHOULD go way DOWN if done on larger scale. Where is all the money going????!!!!
Superintendent and her minions from South Florida would be a good place to start, but I don’t think the Board is going to volunteer or let that information go without a fight.
Yet another Democrat budget spending more with fewer students attending public schools. Maybe our school district should pay more attention to teaching the basic subjects and less attention to the woke agenda. That, and a strategic plan/discipline program might entice more students into the schools.
On a monthly basis this board reminds us that none of its members have the managerial skills needed to manage a half billion dollar enterprise in what has become a highly competitive market for students and skilled staff.
Good question, Mo Betta. Something about this budget doesn’t make sense. Maybe a board member could tell us where the money is going. Unfortunately you cant get an answer since their policy is to not dialog with the public.
Man, I haven’t paid attention to AC budgets before. Shame on me. But $604m seems… a lot… am I missing something. That’s half a billion dollars…. Am I missing something? What is the list of things this pays for? Shouldn’t we have, oh I don’t know, roads that don’t suck for that amount of money?
Uhm, Ranch..you do know the school board has NOTHING to do with our roads…