GUILDERLAND — The school district here is facing a $3.1 million gap between projected revenue and projected expenses for next year.

Assistant Superintendent for Business Andrew Van Alstyne showed the school board on Dec. 10 what a rollover budget — keeping the same staffing and programs as this year — would look like.

Next year’s budget is projected at $130 million, an increase of 4 percent over this year.

His presentation a year ago on a rollover budget showed a gap of $1.7 million. In the end, voters handily passed a $125 million spending plan for this school year.

On Dec. 10, Van Alstyne noted that the “significant structural deficits” Guilderland had faced a year ago “were improved by increased state aid.” He noted that the district’s Foundation Aid “increased quite a bit last year.”

On the revenue side for next year, Van Alstyne projected the same amount in state and federal aid as this year: roughly $41.2 million. His projection draws nothing from the district’s fund balance or rainy-day account.

This leaves taxpayers with the lion’s share of support at about $84.5 million.

Van Alstyne noted that last year, Governor Kathy Hochul had proposed eliminating the hold harmless provision, which allows districts with declining enrollment to still get the same amount in aid.

Guilderland’s enrollment is declining just slightly.

The legislature balked at this and hold harmless was preserved this year with the Rockefeller Institute for Government studying the Foundation Aid formula to “make recommendations for potential policy change,” Van Alstyne explained.

The Foundation Aid formula, established in 2007, was designed to account for what it costs a district to educate each student, with more money allocated for districts that have more economically disadvantaged students, or more students with disabilities, or more students from other countries learning English.

The Rockefeller Institute’s report came out on Dec. 2 but Hochul has now backed away from eliminating hold harmless.

“So it’s not quite clear where Foundation Aid and state aid are going,” said Van Alstyne. “So we will be even more anxiously awaiting the governor’s executive proposal next month.”

With the incoming Trump administration, Van Alstyne said, “There’s also uncertainties about federal policy and how that may or may not affect aid we receive from the federal government.”

Guilderland gets about $1.9 million in federal grants for required services.

“Were these funds to either be decreased or be reallocated by the federal government,” said Van Alstyne, “we would have to provide those services using other revenue sources.”

Expenditures

The biggest increases in next year’s projected budget are for salaries and benefits.

For districts across the state, roughly three-quarters of expenses are for salaries and benefits, Van Alstyne said, noting, “We are in that same position.”

Instructional salaries are up 4 percent to about $57 million while support-staff salaries are up 4.2 percent, at about $9 million.

The contractual salary increases total $2.6 million.

Contracts are expiring this year for six different bargaining units and will have to be negotiated.

“The historical anomaly here is the health-insurance increase,” said Van Alstyne. “We’re projecting a $2.2 million increase in health insurance. That is unusually large.”

Pension costs are also increasing so the projected cost for benefits next year is about $35 million — an increase of 9 percent.

Costs for equipment, supplies and textbooks, contracted services, and BOCES services are each up 2 percent.

Debt service and interfund transfers are down 8.4 percent to $8.8 million.

“Do you have any good news?” board President Blanca Gonzalez-Parker asked Van Alstyne at the end of his presentation.

What’s ahead?

The district will be “getting input from stakeholders and the community” in the months ahead, said Van Alstyne, and then the superintendent’s budget will be presented to the board on March 4.

Voters have their say at the end of May.

The district is also engaging in legislative advocacy, Van Alstyne said. “We want a formula that’s fair, that’s predictable, that allows us to make accurate predictions for not just the current year but future years.”

Typically, the board members weigh in on their priorities after the first presentation on the rollover budget but Superintendent Marie Wiles put off that discussion.

“This is the portion of the development process where you give us some thoughts about the big picture,” she told the board. “Like: Should we be contemplating piercing the tax cap? Should we be looking at using our fund balance? What should our priorities be? …

“Honestly, I think … what Andrew’s presented you tonight is quite a bit of uncertainty,” said Wiles, advising the board members to discuss their thoughts on the budget at their next meeting in January.

“You just don’t have enough information,” said Wiles, “other than fairly bad news.”