Dr. Foster outlines staffing priorities including proposal for 5% pay increase; Mr. Murphy details budget timeline and revenue outlook

At the Spencer County Board of Education regular working session, Dr. Foster presented five staffing and benefit priorities and urged the board to consider their fiscal impact as the district prepares the tentative budget.

Dr. Foster (presenter) listed priorities that include a proposed 5% across-the-board pay increase for staff, additional supports for younger staff and parental/retirement transitions, exploring daycare support options using existing district childcare capacity, formalizing recent staffing changes, and targeted position additions such as a custodial trainer and expanded retirement/financial-planning access. Dr. Foster told the board the district recorded 13 parental/maternity leaves this year (ten certified staff, three classified staff) and said some of these proposals could be phased or funded only if the board prioritizes them.

Mr. Murphy then reviewed the budget process and near-term timeline: the draft budget is informational in January, the tentative budget must be approved by May 30 and the working budget adopted by Sept. 30. He noted multi-year funds (grants, construction) are added later in the process and that the state biennial budget and property assessment changes will affect SEEK (state) funding the district receives.

On revenues and costs, Mr. Murphy cited state seat-base figures discussed in the meeting (current SEEK seat base cited at $4,200 per pupil, projected at $4,325 next year, then $4,586 in a later year) and gave estimated SEEK revenue increases (the transcript cites roughly $1.06–$1.09 million additional in FY26, with an example figure of $1,062,000). He warned that higher property assessments in Spencer County could change tax-rate calculations even if revenue grows.

Mr. Murphy highlighted operational constraints and specific budget pressures: several COVID-era federal funding streams will end Sept. 30 and the district hopes to spend most funds by June; four COVID-funded positions are being evaluated for inclusion in school-allocated slots; the district received roughly $435,000 in indirect-cost reimbursements that benefited the general fund but will not continue. He also described a procurement error in which a 34-passenger bus was delivered as a 14-passenger bus; the district plans to return it without payment and still expects three buses in next year’s transportation plan. Bus prices, he said, have risen about 15% year-over-year and the district expects replacement buses to cost about $145,000 each.

On pension costs and salary scenarios, Mr. Murphy said the employer retirement contribution rate fell from roughly 23.69% to a projected ~19.7% next year; he noted that change could partially offset salary increases. He gave budgeting heuristics: adding one year of experience for all employees would cost about $167,000; each 1% across-the-board salary increase would cost roughly $180,000 to the general fund. The presenters estimated that a 5% across-the-board increase plus step increases would cost on the order of $1,067,000 to the general fund, which the board will see reflected in the tentative budget materials in the coming weeks.

Board members asked clarifying questions; presenters said more detailed numbers will be available in two weeks and that the board can still adjust salary-scale choices before the May tentative budget. The meeting moved next to organizational-chart updates.

Quotations in the meeting included Dr. Foster framing priorities in trade-off terms ("we can do anything; we just can't do everything") and Mr. Murphy warning about the bus delivery error ("we're not going to take that bus and we're definitely not going to pay for it").

The board did not take a final vote on pay changes at the session; presenters committed to return with more detailed financials before the tentative budget deadline.