Forest Grove budget committee recommends 2026–27 budget, allocates $6.4 million in SIA spending

The Forest Grove School District Budget Committee voted May 21 to recommend the 2026–27 district budget, approving the measure on a roll-call vote and sending the plan to the full board for adoption.

The recommended budget includes $6.4 million in spending from the Student Investment Account (SIA), with just over half of that directed to health and safety services — counseling, mental-health supports, instructional assistance, family-resource support and the district’s school resource officer contract — and a set-aside that covers 45 full-time equivalent positions. The budget also includes a roughly $300,000 commitment for a high-dosage tutoring program contracted with HeyTutor.

“This grant includes 45 FTE in this budget,” the presenter said, describing SIA allocations and how they feed into the general fund through grant indirect rates. She said the district’s indirect rate from grants is “closer to three or four” percent and estimated indirect-rate revenue of about $400,000 annually.

The committee heard that some object-level costs rose because of insurance market shifts. Property and casualty insurance increases were cited as the main driver of a 15% rise in the general-fund “other objects” category; the presenter said the budget anticipates 13–15% insurance increases in the coming year.

On enrollment assumptions, the district explained it budgets to February average daily attendance as the best proxy for the school-year average and typically plans conservatively; historical budget-to-actual enrollment has been about 95–98%.

Committee members asked about nutrition program status and potential hits to the general fund. The presenter said the district submitted an application to extend 100% free meals under the state’s C designation and that, if the district did not qualify but nevertheless maintained universal free meals, the financial impact could be between $2 million and $3 million depending on direct-certification outcomes.

The budget book also itemized function-level shifts: some school-psychology FTE moved to grant-funded functions, transportation costs rose after a recent RFP and contract finalization, and special-revenue funds expanded to reflect new grants and high-dosage tutoring purchases.

During the meeting several members praised the clarity of the budget materials and the community engagement process; others urged continued outreach and earlier listening sessions when staffing reductions were discussed. After discussion, a motion to recommend the budget as proposed was made and seconded. The committee completed a roll-call vote; the chair announced the motion passed and adjourned the meeting at 7:32 p.m.

Next steps: the committee’s recommendation will be transmitted to the district school board for a formal adoption hearing and any required public notice if changes exceed statutory thresholds.