Hamilton Central School District presents $15.7M draft budget; special‑education costs and reserves shape options

Hamilton Central School District held a public budget workshop in which staff outlined a draft expenditure plan of about $15.7 million and detailed why student needs and personnel costs are the primary budget drivers.

Matt, the district presenter, said personnel accounts for the large majority of spending and that the draft would require roughly a 5.45% levy increase to balance — about 1.45 percentage points above the district’s 4% allowable increase under the tax‑cap rules. He said that gap equates to roughly $120,000 under the current figures.

Why it matters: presenters said student needs — especially special‑education placements and career‑technical costs — are the central constraint on choices. Matt reported the district has 169 students with IEPs or 504 plans (about 30% of enrollment) and expects 11 students will require out‑of‑district placements next year (up from six this year). He estimated the total program cost for those 11 placements at $640,000 and said the tuition for the five newly anticipated outside placements would be about $285,000.

What’s being kept: the draft retains the social‑emotional‑learning (SEL) coordinator and the SEL room, and presenters said all services required by the Committee on Special Education (counseling, occupational therapy, physical therapy, speech) remain funded. The district also said it expects to retain a social worker provided through Madison County collaboration.

What’s changing: presenters listed several staffing and program adjustments intended to reduce recurring costs. One elementary teaching position will not be refilled through attrition, which will reduce pre‑K from two half‑day sections to one (about 18 students; a small waiting list was reported). The part‑time elementary math support position funded with COVID relief is out of the draft, a high‑school science position will be combined with a special‑education teacher’s load, and one full‑time equivalent in buildings and grounds is being eliminated.

Presenters said the loss of a behavioral specialist (previously funded with COVID relief) will require repurposing responsibilities across the SEL team. A staff member acknowledged the change could increase strain on internal personnel but said the district intends to cover most needs internally and will continue to refer families to outside services when appropriate.

Reserves and other revenue: the draft uses restricted reserves to smooth the transition away from one‑time COVID funds. Matt described a plan to use $300,000 of reserves next year and to reduce that use by $75,000 each subsequent year (a multi‑year strategy the presenters said would spread about $750,000 of reserve application over several years). Presenters emphasized that while reserves soften the immediate impact, relying on one‑time sources creates budget pressures in future years.

Community partner payment: a staff member announced that Colgate had informed the district just before the meeting that it agreed to make a one‑time voluntary payment to help offset part of the gap. Presenters stressed the gift is voluntary and not an obligation or PILOT; they also noted Colgate is a major local taxpayer (67 parcels on the tax rolls that generate roughly $250,000 in tax revenue, per the presentation).

Tax‑levy math and options: staff walked through levy math to illustrate tradeoffs. They said a 1% budget increase would translate to about a 1.73% tax‑levy increase and that 1% of the levy is roughly $84,000 — a figure comparable to the average cost of a full‑time instructional position. Presenters reviewed the risks of seeking an override (which requires a 60% supermajority) and explained contingency rules that can apply if a proposed levy is rejected.

Public engagement and next steps: the district listed three upcoming budget‑coffee sessions for public feedback, scheduled updates before the April 16 meeting, and noted the formal budget vote occurs on the third Tuesday in May; if the board is not ready by then, a special meeting would be required to meet statutory timelines. Presenters said they will continue pursuing grants and community partnerships to close remaining gaps.

Closing: after an extended Q&A on how the district will cover services for affected students and how course offerings might be rotated to save FTEs, the board adjourned. A motion to adjourn was moved and seconded and passed.