By Kolby LaMarche

In a budget development update presented to the school board last week, administrators outlined a “level services” budget that would require an overall budget increase of about 5% to maintain current programming. 

The General Fund would need to rise roughly 6% percent to cover the escalating expenses, district leaders say, and anticipate potentially even greater needs.

After state adjustments like Common Level of Appraisal, this projects a 10.6 percent tax rate hike (7.9 percent for income-sensitive caps), though officials stress these figures are early and subject to revision.

Major cost drivers include a 5 percent wage increase based on recent bargaining patterns, an 8 percent surge in health insurance premiums, and a 6.6 percent jump in debt service — the last big spike tied to the new Burlington High School and Burlington Technical Center rebuild. 

Program costs are also exceeding federal revenues by $2 million.

These pressures are partially eased by $2 million in savings from ending the lease on the temporary downtown high school used during construction.

Board guidance directs officials to align staffing with falling enrollment while meeting Act 73 class size rules, limit growth due to debt obligations, support strategic goals for academic rigor and student outcomes, and develop multiple scenarios amid uncertainties in state and federal funding.

The district’s “Equitable Budgeting Model”, backed by a district cited 2020 survey (72 percent overall and 79 percent among staff), prioritizes resources for high-need students through baseline staffing, per-student funds, and RISE equity allocations. 

Though RISE funds are down about $50,000 due to enrollment and data refinements, they still provide nearly $1.6 million for school-directed initiatives.

Preliminary education spending for level services stands at $109,638,822 — a 6.07 percent increase — with per-equalized-pupil spending up 6.95 percent. 

After state adjustments like Common Level of Appraisal, this projects a 10.6 percent tax rate hike (7.9 percent for income-sensitive caps), though officials stress these figures are early and subject to revision.

Built-in savings already include $500,000 from reducing 4.5 teaching positions and $50,000 from central office cuts (the third consecutive year), plus $1 million from the lease termination and $450,000 in lower bond borrowing.

Four scenarios aim to soften the impact: the baseline at 10.6 percent, 9.5 percent with $1 million extra cuts, 8.5 percent needing $2 million more, and 5 percent requiring $5.5 million — potentially involving school closure.

Deeper reductions could hit up to 12 teachers, 9.5 support staff, 4 administrators, and non-personnel costs. Proposed additions include one position to manage the new high school facility and one instructional coach to address coaching disparities at BHS.

The district ended FY2025 with a $2.4 million surplus (about 2 percent of the budget), often used for temporary rents, while a workgroup brainstorms further options.

While costs climb, student numbers tell a bit of a different story — consistent decline that raises questions about per-pupil spending.

District data shows enrollment dropping from around 3,582 students in 2011 to approximately 3,307 in 2025 — a roughly 8 percent decrease in a period of over a decade, with sharper drops in more recent years.

Despite this, the district’s budget, and ask to voters, has increased each year, totaling today at $134 million. 

*enrollment lines trending downward across elementary (blue), middle (green), and high school (orange) levels, while the total budget (pink) has risen sharply.

The district’s experience—declining enrollment amid rising school budgets—is far from unique, however. 

In Vermont, statewide public school enrollment has dropped nearly 20% over two decades due to low birth rates and housing issues, yet per-pupil spending ranks second nationally at over $26,000, fueling property tax hikes and reforms like Act 73 to address consolidations. 

Nationwide, U.S. K-12 enrollment has fallen since 2020, creating an “enrollment cliff” and “fiscal cliff” post-pandemic aid, with fixed costs driving higher per-pupil expenditures despite fewer students.
The superintendent will incorporate board feedback and present a detailed recommendation on January 6, 2026, ahead of the March 3 Town Meeting Day vote. Full details are available on the district’s budget presentation here.