Second vote on revised budget
A second budget vote to be held with proposed reductions
In light of the May vote on the proposed 2026-27 budget, it is important to reflect on the results as well as the factors that may have contributed to this outcome. The budget fell short of approval by 53 votes and the reasons suggest:
- The projected tax levy increase
- Estimated tax rate increase between -0.4% - 6.2%
- an uncontested board race often associated with lower voter turnout
- Voter apathy, perceiving that individual votes would not impact the result
Exit poll results did not align with the final outcome. Fewer than 7% of voters participated in the survey with 67% indicating support for the budget. Among the 33% respondents who voted no, the most common concerns were the tax levy, tax rate and overall budget total.
The survey results may be found at this link.
As you know, there are three options following a defeated budget:
- Adopt a contingent budget
- Conduct a revote with no changes
- Hold a second vote with proposed revisions
On May 26, the Board of Education unanimously approved the third option for the community’s consideration.
Presenting a revised budget
- acknowledges that we heard the community
- limits further impact of a contingent budget on students
- demonstrates shared decisions, with schools and departments identifying concessions and areas to cut
PowerPoint presentation, May 26 board meeting |
|
|
FAQs
Why weren’t these reductions made before the first vote?
The revised proposal represents a 2.8% tax levy, which is a decrease from the original vote with a 4.7% levy.
The listed reductions below were not included in the May 19 proposal because they directly affect programs and services. The original budget prioritized maintaining those areas, while this revised plan reflects a response to community feedback. Even with these changes, students still will be impacted far less than if a contingent budget is required.
Staffing
- Chose not to fill some open positions after retirements or departures
- Moved current staff into open positions where the need is greater
- Reduced or removed summer workdays for some staff
- Reassigned a teacher to fill a vacancy
- Reduced the number of clubs across the district due to low enrollment
- Applied class size guidelines
- Reduced spending on supplies & materials for grades K-8
3-Part Budget
New York State law requires that all school districts present the proposed budget in three parts: Program, Capital and Administrative.
- Program (74%) includes expenses associated with instructional programs, teacher salaries and benefits, health services, transportation operating costs, special education, instructional supplies and equipment, and athletics.
- Capital (16%) consists of maintenance costs for buildings and grounds, custodial services, utilities, capital expenses, bus purchases, and debt service.
- Administrative (10%) expenses include costs associated with office and administrative areas, financial/legal services, human resources, business office, communications, board of education expenses, BOCES administration, district clerk, and school supervision.
Revenue summary
The proposed budget is balanced using a combination of funding sources, including:
- State aid
- Property tax levy
- Local revenues
- Federal funds
- use of reserves
This chart shows the expected revenues for the 2026–27 budget year. Most of the revenue (96.6%) comes from state and federal aid, the tax levy, and local sales tax. The tax levy is the money collected from property owners within the school district.
The remaining 3.4% using reserves and other (debt service) will be restricted to specific budget items, such as workers’ compensation, unemployment costs, and debt service. Using reserves for their intended purposes has helped balance the budget and reduce the impact on taxpayers.
Estimated tax rate
The estimated tax rate for 2026-27 will affect homeowners differently based on their property’s assessed value and the equalization rate in their town.
These tax rates are estimates only. The tax levy and tax rates are established in the summer after each town finalizes its property assessments.
Estimated tax rate comparison
| Town | 2025-26 | 2026-27* | % change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ogden | $15.41 | $16.05 | 4.2% |
| Gates | $15.25 | $14.90 | (-2.3%) |
| *Greece | $25.02 | $25.62 | 2.4% |
| Parma | $15.57 | $16.23 | 4.2% |
Tax rates/$1,000 of assessed value and excludes STAR.
Tax rates/$1,000 of assessed value and excludes STAR.
| Town | 2025-26 | 2026-27* | $ annually | $ monthly |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ogden | $4,623 | $4,908 | $285 | $24 |
| Gates | $4,575 | $4,557 | (-$18) | (-$2) |
| *Greece | $7,505 | $7,836 | $331 | $28 |
| Parma | $4,671 | $4,962 | $291 | $24 |
Budget notebook (updated)
-
2025 26 Administrative Compensation Disclosurepdf
-
26 27 Presupuesto de Ingresos para Re Votepdf
-
Aviso Presupuestario de Spencerport con Declaracion Militar Para June 2026pdf
-
Compensación Administrativapdf
-
Escuela Canal Viewpdf
-
Escuela Secondaria Spencerportpdf
-
Fiscal Accountabilitypdf
-
Munn Elementarypdf
-
School District Budget Notice 2026 7 Revotepdf
-
Tax Exemption Reportpdf
-
26 27 Expense Budget Re Votepdf
-
26 27 Revenue Budget Re Votepdf
-
Benabi Elementarypdf
-
Cosgrove Middle Schoolpdf
-
Escuela Intermedia Cosgrovepdf
-
Escuela Taylorpdf
-
High Schoolpdf
-
Property Tax Report Card Revisedpdf
-
Spencerport First and Second Budget Re Vote Notice with Military Statement June 2026pdf
-
Taylor Elementarypdf