Garfield Public School District approves preliminary budget with 5% tax-levy increase; public raises charter and special-education concerns

The Garfield Public School District board voted to advance a preliminary budget that includes a proposed 5% increase in the school tax levy and cost-saving measures as administrators warned of mounting pressure from rising health, energy and special-education costs.

Dr. Tomko, the district superintendent, told the board and the public the proposed budget relies on a 6% increase in state aid and a combination of the 5% levy and roughly 60 fewer positions—projected to save about $7 million—to balance revenues and expenditures. He also described a $3.5 million fund-balance transfer that shifts funds into the next school year and said the district projects approximately a $3 million surplus and a $1 million capital maintenance reserve.

"The district is $17,768,000 under adequacy," Tomko said, citing Department of Education figures he said underscore a multi-year goal to narrow funding gaps with other districts. He identified health-benefit increases, energy costs and charter-school tuition as the principal cost drivers, noting examples such as a roughly 9% increase in benefits and an $850,000 energy increase. "We have to be patient," he said, describing the work to balance fiscal responsibility with sustaining programs.

Why it matters: The preliminary plan would raise the school portion of local property taxes while the board seeks to avoid cutting student-facing programs. Residents at the public-comment section pushed back on how the district calculates charter enrollments and special-education placements, arguing those numbers affect the district's finances and program decisions.

Public concerns and exchanges: Several residents asked the board for greater transparency and reconciliation with charter-school reports. Abdel Sredeta, a candidate for the board, asked whether the $3.5 million used for a School 5 project had been factored into next year’s projections and asked directly if layoffs were planned. He also alleged threats from board members the prior Saturday; later in the meeting a board member said he was unaware of any threats and that he would follow up.

Marlita Zawatska pointed to apparent discrepancies between district and charter-school enrollment figures and asked whether an audit would reconcile the differences. Alexandra questioned why the district pays for out-of-district special-education placements when she said similar programs exist locally and asked the board to explain numbers that, in her testimony, rose from dozens to more than 100 students in recent years. The board’s finance chair and other members said courts and individualized education program requirements sometimes mandate out-of-district placements and that the district must follow legal orders.

Board action: At the hearing the chair called for a motion on resolution 5.1 (the preliminary budget action). After roll-call votes recorded as 'aye' from multiple board members, the motion passed. The board then continued to accept public comment before adjourning.

What’s next: The vote advanced the budget for the next procedural step; the board indicated transition planning and further meetings to implement staffing and facilities changes if the budget is adopted in final form. Administrators said detailed slides and documents will be posted for public review.

Reporting notes: Quotes and attributions in this report come from the board’s budget presentation and the public-comment period. Numbers reported are those stated in the meeting transcript; where the transcript was unclear, the story uses conservative phrasing (for example: the district described a $3.5 million inter-year fund transfer and a projected $3 million surplus).