The Pine Plains Central School District Board of Education approved nearly $300,000 in cuts on May 26, revising a budget proposal that was rejected by voters after failing to secure the supermajority needed to exceed the state tax cap.

The amended $40.49 million spending plan, scheduled for a June 16 revote, eliminates three positions: a head school bus driver, a typist and a dedicated one-to-one nurse assigned to a student. The cuts save $290,569 and bring the proposed tax levy down to the district’s allowable limit of 3.39%, meaning the budget would need only a simple majority to pass.

The original $40.78 million spending plan received 51.5% of the vote but needed 60% because it would have exceeded the tax cap, which had been calculated at 3.4%.

“We are now at the tax cap; we’re right where we’re allowed to be,” district Business Official Laura Rafferty said.

The revised plan would increase spending by 4.59%, or about $1.7 million, over the current year. The defeated budget called for a 5.34% increase.

Board member Fred “Chip” Couse, who sits on the audit-financial planning committee, said residents should not assume that the proposed spending increase would translate directly into an equal increase in property taxes.

“Our tax base is growing yearly at a significant pace,” he said. “The last budget [5.34%] increase translated into about a 1.5% tax increase for the average home owner.”

District Superintendent Brian Timm said the revised plan has a lower approval threshold, but added that the board must also prepare for the possibility that voters reject it.

At its meeting on May 26, the school board advanced a plan to cut three employee positions to save $290,569.
Image courtesy Pine Plains Central School District

“I’m hopeful we’ll find some support for our new modified budget,” he said. “The voters must know what the potential losses would be.”

If the revised plan fails, the district would be required to adopt a contingency budget, which would hold the tax levy at the current year’s level and require another $945,789 in reductions, according to district officials. Under state rules, a contingency budget would also restrict purchases of new equipment and additional capital projects, cap administrative spending and require the district to charge fees for outside use of school facilities.

“There are two areas we can reduce [spending] right out of the gate,” Timm said. “The $100,000 capital project along with [$96,500 earmarked for] equipment.”

Capital outlay funds are used for building maintenance and emergency repairs.

“We are going to have to find $750,000 more dollars to consider taking out of the budget,” Timm said.

Timm presented a list of possible program and staff reductions, emphasizing that final decisions would rest with the school board. The largest options included eliminating athletics, which would save $441,305, and pre-K, which would save $410,423. Other possible reductions included extracurricular activities, field trip transportation, travel and conference stipends and the elementary school Ashokan trip.

State law does not require districts to offer interscholastic sports, Timm told the board. The potential athletic reductions would include varsity, junior varsity and modified programs, as well as transportation and coaching stipends. Timm said he would provide more detailed cost breakdowns for athletics and extracurriculars at the board’s next meeting.

Timm cautioned against eliminating pre-K, saying districts will likely be required to offer universal pre-K by the 2028-29 school year.

“I cannot in good conscience any longer recommend that,” Timm said.

The school district’s revised $40.49 million budget for 2026-27 represents a 4.59% spending increase, down from the 5.34% hike in the previously defeated plan. Image courtesy Pine Plains Central School District

Board President Amie Fredericks expressed concern about cutting transportation for off-campus student events.

“If you take away transportation then there’s no field trips, considering where we live,” she said.

The budget debate comes as the district has spent months considering whether to close one or more of its three schools, a discussion driven by declining enrollment and uncertain state funding. Timm said any programs eliminated now could be difficult to restore because of rising costs and tax cap restrictions, though he said the district also has an opportunity to further reduce its footprint.

“This will give us some breathing room,” he said, “allowing our programs to perhaps be layered back in.”

Timm also presented $922,497 in possible staff reductions, including the elimination of one of the district’s four nurses, one of three social workers and one of two librarians. Other options included cutting one custodial position, one teaching assistant, one administrative position and one teaching position.

“We looked at positions [with] multiple people,” he said.

Timm said he was hesitant to further reduce the nursing staff because the revised budget already eliminates the one-to-one nursing position.

“I would encourage the board to look elsewhere,” he said.

He also warned against cutting a social worker, saying the district’s three social workers already have full workloads.

“They are extremely impactful,” Timm said. “I think it would hinder the district significantly to lose a social worker.”

Addressing the librarian position, Timm said state regulations require junior-senior high schools to have a certified librarian, but elementary schools are exempt. He said the district’s attorney, Julie Shaw, confirmed that because of the district’s size, one half-time librarian could legally serve kindergarten through 12th grade.

“I think none of these positions we could really do without,” Timm said. “The question becomes, what is the least bad answer?”

The school board is scheduled to meet again on Tuesday June 2 at 6:30 p.m. in the Stissing Mountain High School library. A public budget hearing is scheduled for Tuesday June 9 at 6:30 p.m., also in the high school library.

The district’s 2026-27 budget revote will be held from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Tuesday, June 16 in the Stissing Mountain High School cafeteria.

Join the Conversation

7 Comments

  1. The per student cost in PP at ~$47,000 (40490,000/850 students) is comparable to NYC’s per student cost. That amount is said to be higher than 95% of the school budgets around the US. Continuing to support 3 schools for that few students is untenable. And I am a supporter of education, libraries, social workers, et al. Please tackle the fundamentals of the problem.

    1. Actually, incredible as it may seem, the per student cost in PPCSD (approximately $47k) significantly EXCEEDS the per student cost in New York City public school system (approximately $40K)!

  2. Agree with Neal. Most in the district would concede that a school needs to close as enrollment is down – to that end – administrative staff have not changed. Why does it take the same number of admins at all 3 locations if our enrollment is 50% down?

    Also, if this 2nd budget passes – it will be our new threshold – which will then go up again next year…..the model needs revision, not continuing to take programs away from the youth.

    This BOE and Timm need to do the hard work. It’s not fun and it’s not nice, and it will adversely impact people that I love…..but I’m already stretched thin….

  3. So the school board reduces the budget by $290,569 by eliminating three employees: a bus driver, a typist and a nurse. That’s an average of over $96,000 per employee. That sounds like an awful lot for employees of these profiles. Am I the only taxpayer wondering why these employees’ costs are so high? Are we overpaying people here?

    I note that a contingency budget ($39.542 million) still represents a significant spending INCREASE of over $800,000 over the prior year’s budget ($38.712 million). Taxpayers are kidding themselves if they think this is pinching pennies.

    I agree with Stacey that the BOE and Timm need to do the hard work of controlling costs, which is going to require more than just consolidating facilities. You can’t expect the average taxpayer to continue to endorse budget increases based on a 9-1 student-teacher ratio (the lowest among Dutchess County school districts) and current headcount/pay levels.

  4. Timm has to look beyond student needs. Cutting field trips and librarians is not the answer. Cutting the 5pm bus is not the answer. Where is his leadership??

    With $47000 for every kindergartener, to high school senior, that is ridiculous. With a teacher to student ration of 9 to 1 is ridiculous. It is foolish to keep three building open for 850 students, and it is ridiculous to keep cutting aids and lunch ladies.

    Get the student to teacher ratio back up to 15 or 20 to 1. Freeze the pensions, as few residents in town get them at all, find a less expensive insurance carrier, as we all have had to do.

    Why do the people footing the bill have to make cuts to our spending when the school district refuses to make meaningful cuts to theirs??

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *