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.
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.
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.