The meeting’s primary focus was a detailed presentation of the proposed 2025 payable 2026 tax levy, marking a 26.69% increase, equating to $3.468 million. This increase is allocated across several funds, with 40% going to the general fund, 58.3% for debt service, and a smaller portion for community services. School officials explained the factors influencing the levy, including shifts in state law, enrollment changes, and market value adjustments. They highlighted the district’s statutory limitations in raising funds, emphasizing that public school funding is tightly regulated and dependent on state authorization.

During the truth and taxation hearing, the director of business services outlined the proposed levy and the fiscal year 2026 budget, explaining that the board would approve the final tax levy certification later. The director stressed the importance of community involvement in the levy process, encouraging public dialogue on fiscal responsibility and the impact on educational programs.

However, the public comments segment revealed significant dissatisfaction among residents regarding the levy increase. A retired CPA pointed out the stark contrast between the proposed tax hike and the average social security increase of 2.8%. They argued that the board needed to communicate financial decisions more transparently. Another resident expressed concern about balancing the proposed tax increases with those expected from the county and city, urging the board to follow the county’s example, which had slightly decreased its levy.

Further complicating matters were concerns about air quality improvements in schools. Some board members explained that the primary driver for the tax increase was related to indoor air quality modifications, a necessity identified by the facilities committee. These improvements, including the replacement of aging mechanical units, were described as crucial for providing a suitable educational environment. However, residents questioned the necessity of such projects amid financial pressures.

In addition to tax issues, compensation for educational assistants (EAs) emerged as a concern. Several EAs addressed the board, highlighting wage disparities compared to neighboring districts and stressing the critical roles they play in supporting students, particularly those with special needs. One EA shared how they had learned Braille over the summer to support a visually impaired student, emphasizing their dedication but calling for fair compensation. Another EA presented a comparative analysis of wages, revealing that St. Francis EAs earn less than their counterparts in nearby districts.

The board also addressed curriculum changes, particularly in mathematics education. The proposed changes involve integrating statistics and probability courses, modifying the traditional sequence of math courses to better prepare students for state testing.

Despite the challenges, the district’s financial position showed signs of improvement. A financial presentation noted that while enrollment had been declining, the current year showed nearly flat numbers, stabilizing the district’s funding. The district’s unrestricted fund balance and unassigned fund balance experienced slight decreases, but overall financial health was described as stable.

The meeting concluded with the approval of the 2025 payable 2026 final tax levy following a roll call vote. While some board members supported the levy due to the district’s pressing needs, particularly concerning indoor air quality, others expressed reluctance about increasing taxes, citing broader implications for residents. The board also accepted the FY 2025 audited financial statements and approved several policies without opposition.