The Great Falls Public Schools board voted unanimously during their March 24 meeting not to ask voters for an operational levy on the May ballot.

The decision was based on the recommendation of the board’s budget committee, which met last week, and from GFPS’ business operations manager, Brian Patrick.

Patrick has projected a roughly $2.5 million budget shortfall for the upcoming budget year, which runs July 1 through June 30, 2026, and has said the district can balance that using some remaining COVID relief funds, reserves and some efficiencies.

Patrick has been projecting that deficit, and discussing it in public meetings, since last summer.

That depends in part on any changes the Legislature might make to the school funding formula and property tax structure, as well as collective bargaining which is currently underway for the teachers union.

Four candidates so far for GFPS board, filing deadline is March 27

Should all of those things go sideways and the district finds itself in a different financial position once the Legislature wraps up, state law allows school districts the option to set a levy election for a date other than the regular school election date, but prior to August 1, in years the legislature is in session.

So far, four candidates have filed for the three available school board seats so the May 6 election will go forward, with an estimated cost of $65,000 to $70,000, according to GFPS and county election officials.

Mark Finnicum, school board member who is not seeking reelection this year, said that though there are a lot of moving pieces with the legislature in session, “barring anything catastrophic coming out of Helena, we feel pretty strong” about the next fiscal year.

GFPS budget committee recommends forgoing levy this year; balancing shortfall with COVID and reserve funds

Tom Cubbage, head of the local teachers union, said the district had projected a shortfall, he participated in the stakeholder meetings that identified potential cuts and efficiencies, and the district needed to recruit and retain teachers.

“The need is now for additional funding in the form of a levy,” he told the board and asked them to consider sending a levy to the ballot for voters to decide if the current funding level is adequate.

There was no other public comment on the matter.

At the end of the meeting, when board members share their thoughts, several thanked Cubbage for his comments and said they’ll likely be working on a levy in the future.

Bill Bronson, school board member, said that the issue of school funding dates back several decades to lawsuits that lead to the current public school funding formula from the state.

He said that schools are on the cusp of getting support needed to “make what I think are major advances in the funding formula.”

GFPS budget meetings upcoming, board adopts force reduction policy

Bronson said he wants to see that process completed, as well as any adjustments to the property tax structure, before asking local taxpayers to pay more through a levy.

The board budget committee met and voted on March 18 to recommend that the district forgo a levy this year.

The committee includes Finnicum, Bronson and Paige Turoski.

During the March 18 committee meeting, district officials said they’ll likely need to revisit the district’s financial position in the fall and consider whether to pursue a levy and begin a public awareness campaign, which is handled through Kids Education Yes, a political action group that supports GFPS.

Patrick said the trend is continuing that revenues aren’t keeping up with expenses and inflation.

GFPS using community group to develop ideas, solutions to projected budget shortfall

This year, there are still many unknown factors so Patrick said it’s difficult to make projections for the upcoming budget this early.

The district is currently in negotiations with the teachers union so those numbers are not yet set, and other unions will go into negotiations later this spring and non-union employee raises will be calculated over the summer.

Patrick said during the March 18 meeting that as a general rule of thumb is that for every one percent salary increase across employee groups equates to about $700,000.

Patrick said the district can get by another year without a levy, but doesn’t want to eat up their reserves and risk larger cuts in the near future.

GFPS planning increases in permissive levies

The district is also awaiting the outcome of decisions at the Legislature to determine the impact to the school funding programs, including one that would generally revise school funding formulas.

GFPS claims $916,188 in state tax credits

Finnicum said during the March 18 meeting that people have asked him if local entities can coordinate when they’re asking for levies, such as the city and county.

Superintendent Heather Hoyer said she and GFPS administrators have those conversations and had met with some city officials late last year to get a sense of their plans.

Patrick said another unknown factor is federal funding and programs and how those funds will be distributed.

GFPS officials discuss finances, feasibility of baseball [2024]

Lance Boyd, assistant superintendent, said there were two federal entitlement programs, Title 1 and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, that will flow through the state, but all other federal programs are up in the air based on changes at the federal level and they have “no idea” how that will shake out.

Patrick reminded the committee that it has options for funding through a general operations levy, but there are also safety, technology and building reserve levies.

GFPS, County adjusting taxable values after Calumet revision; tax bills delayed [2024]

The district also has the option to run combinations of those levies but it’s a tough sell to do too many, Patrick said.

Bronson said that after the district’s community consensus building process, they know that if needed, there are areas they can trim the budget, which he said they could likely do anyway to prepare for a continued lack of resources.

Finnicum said he didn’t know if it was possible, but could the district go for a levy annually, keeping the numbers smaller rather than a larger ask as needed.

GFPS board sets budget for new school year [2024]

He said many voters think the district asks for a levy every year, but that’s not the case.

GFPS last ran a levy request on the ballot in 2020 that was for $1.75 million in the elementary district.

Before that an elementary levy failed in 2018 and a technology levy failed in 2017.

Voters approved the $98 million facility bond in 2016 and a $1.6 million operational levy was approved in 2014.

Patrick said during the March 18 meeting that the tradition at GFPS has been to not ask for levies until “we’re behind the 8-ball” and have significant needs and “that’s not the best position to be in.”

GFPS forgoes levy, cuts administrative position anticipating budget challenges [2024]

Finnicum said that some taxpayers might prefer the smaller levy requests more frequently rather than larger requests.

Patrick said they’d work with KEY! to consider asking that question in their community survey.

The maximum levy about the district could have asked for in the last budget year was $1.8 million district wide and while there’s a number of unknown factors, Patrick said he’d expect that to be a close figure to this year’s max.

Under current law, operational levies approved by voters remain in perpetuity, but they are set dollar amounts versus mills that adjust as mill values vary annually.