Wallingford‑Swarthmore board adopts $105.35 million 2025‑26 budget, greenlights 10‑year capital plan

The Wallingford‑Swarthmore School Board on June 18 approved a $105,352,610.45 final general‑fund budget for the 2025‑26 school year and adopted a 10‑year capital plan intended as a planning roadmap for facilities work.

Duana Mosley, the district’s business administrator, told the board the administration recommends a 2.85% tax increase to balance the budget and cover rising personnel and insurance costs. Mosley said the net increase to the budget since the May proposed version is $165,342.93, driven largely by settled employee compensation plans and updated insurance premiums.

Mosley said the administration plans to use about $1.6 million from committed fund balances — including a $500,000 draw from the district’s self‑insured fund — to help offset the tax increase and recommended moving future year surplus funds into the district’s debt‑service committed fund balance to reduce millage pressure as the capital program advances.

Why it matters: the budget funds new positions and several multiyear investments while seeking to limit tax growth by using one‑time fund balances and reallocated dollars. Voters who watch local school finances track millage changes closely because the district relies heavily on residential property tax revenue.

Mosley told the board the final expenditures total $105,352,610.45 and that the administration’s recommended millage would set Nether Providence and Rose Valley at 30.9182 mills and Rutledge and Swarthmore at 31.1711 mills. She reported the district’s collection rate this year was about 99.6% and that delinquent tax receipts recently increased, which affected revenue projections.

Board discussion and administration clarifications

Board members emphasized the difference between approving a capital plan and approving specific construction projects. "The capital plan is really just a road map for the district," board member Dr. Grande said, adding the plan focuses on sequencing and broad scope, and that each project will still require detailed design, updated cost estimates and separate approvals.

Dr. Grande said the board’s vote authorizes the administration to begin initial steps on the first project — the high school — including soliciting project‑management proposals, but does not finalize project scope or authorize construction financing.

Several board members defended hires included in the budget as either cost‑effective conversions of contracted services to in‑house positions or as direct instructional supports. Board member Mr. Miller noted some positions were previously purchased as contracted services and argued bringing them in‑house can reduce long‑term cost.

Key numbers and changes cited by administration

- Final budget (expenditures): $105,352,610.45.
- Net change since the May proposed budget: $165,342.93 (Mosley attributed most of this to settled salary and benefit amounts).
- Recommended tax increase: 2.85%.
- Projected millage: Nether Providence/Rose Valley — 30.9182 mills; Rutledge/Swarthmore — 31.1711 mills.
- Committed fund balance use recommended: roughly $1.6 million (including $500,000 from self‑insured reserves), leaving an estimated unspent committed balance of about $2.9 million after the recommended transfers.
- Noted insurance premium increases: roughly $54,000 total for property and related lines; workers’ compensation increase of about $22,000; umbrella liability patch increases noted by Mosley.
- Personnel changes: the budget includes 19 added positions overall; Mosley gave examples of reclassifications and net costs when contracted services were converted in‑house (for example, two athletic trainer positions reported as a net $25,000 cost; two behavioral health counselors as a net $40,000; two non‑certified nurses as a net $80,000, after reallocating professional services dollars).

Public questions and board response

Members of the public raised concerns during audience recognition about the number of new positions and long‑term tax impacts. Rhoda O’Donnell, a Swarthmore resident, said she was “angry” about adding 16 new positions and noted potential long‑term household tax increases if similar proposals continued. Dave Saratore, a Nether Providence resident, asked about year‑end unspent balances and requested the capital plan be compared to earlier deferred‑maintenance priorities.

Administration and board members responded by pointing to reallocation savings, conversions of contracted services to in‑house staff, and the capital plan’s purpose as a planning tool rather than immediate construction authorization. Dr. Grande and other board members repeatedly urged the public to consult the district’s capital‑plan materials posted on the district website for project details and timelines.

Formal actions

- Motion to approve the 2025‑26 final general fund operating budget (as presented): moved, seconded and approved by roll call, 8–0. Yeas recorded: Mrs. Dolan; Dr. Grande; Mr. Miller; Mrs. Whatman; Mrs. Witzett; Mrs. Williams; Mrs. Wachowski Smith; Mr. Henry.
- Motion to adopt the 10‑year capital plan (as attached): moved, seconded and approved by roll call, 8–0. (Board discussion clarified this vote adopted the planning document; each project will require additional scoping and approvals.)
- Multiple personnel and bargaining items referenced in the budget presentation (six compensation plans, Teamsters agreements, specific new hires and reclassifications) were presented and approved by the board during the meeting; votes on those items were recorded as 8–0 in roll calls referenced by Mosley.

What’s next

The administration will post a clearer, public‑facing capital‑plan document and will begin seeking project‑management proposals for an initial high‑school project. The board emphasized the capital plan will be updated as enrollment, construction and borrowing costs, and design details become clearer.

Ending note

Mosley closed her presentation by restating that the budget as presented balances planned expenditures with a recommended tax increase and limited use of committed reserves. The board approved the package 8–0.