BARRE – The Barre Unified Union School District closed the books on the fiscal year that ended June 30 with a near seven-figure surplus – one that would have blown past the million-dollar mark had money earmarked as revenue actually been used for that purpose.
According to the district’s accountant, there was never any need and that extra money – $700,000 the school board agreed should be used to blunt the tax impact of the voter-approved budget for the now-ended fiscal year – remains in a tax stabilization fund, which had a favorable balance of nearly $1.6 million when the current fiscal year began on July 1.
That fund may or may not be depleted in coming months because the board included another $700,000 as a source of revenue in the budget voters approved in March, though it is far from clear whether that money will be needed as the fiscal year nears its midpoint.
While forecasting where the two-town, three-school district will be financially more than six months from now involves a good bit of guesswork, a draft audit just presented to the school board provides a solid snapshot of its fiscal position heading into the current budget year.
Due largely to an operating surplus of just over $725,000 and nearly $71,000 in unbudgeted proceeds from an insurance settlement, the district carried a favorable general fund balance of nearly $996,000 into the current fiscal year.
That’s a year-over-year reduction of nearly $1.35 million, all of it attributable to the voter-approved shift of $2.15 million of a previously audited general fund surplus, along with $200,000 in excess grant revenue, to the district’s capital projects fund.
According to the audit, the balance in the capital fund swelled from nearly $855,000 to the more than $2.7 million. Like the roughly $1.6 million in the tax stabilization fund, and the $996,000 general fund surplus, the $2.7 million earmarked for capital was available for the district’s use on July 1.
Though the audit shows the district spent nearly $105,000 more than the $47.2 million budget approved by voters, it also shows revenues came in nearly $830,000 better than budget. That is noteworthy because the better-than-expected revenues came despite the fact the district didn’t use any of the $700,000 in tax stabilization funds it planned. If you add that money to the mix, revenues would have been roughly $1.53 million better than projected and the year-end surplus would have been nearly $1.7 million.
The stabilization money is still there, it just isn’t reflected in the undesignated fund balance for the general fund because it was never moved.
The audit shows the district received the $37.5 million state education spending grant that was projected, but also received another $9.6 million in separate state funding, which was $1.26 million more than anticipated.
On the expense side of the budget, the single biggest variance – roughly $847,000 – broke the district’s way. The budget was built on the assumption the district would spend $16.75 million on direct instruction, and the audit showed the actual cost incurred was just over $15.9 million. Those, and other areas of savings, were more than offset by services that cost more than expected. The most notable examples include operation and maintenance of buildings, which was more than $315,000 over the $4.4 million projection and transportation costs that exceeded the budgetary projection of $1.55 million by about $256,000. Administrative technology services were $186,000 over budget, and behavioral services cost nearly $150,000 more than expected.
According to the audit, all of the district’s various funds – there are six that are separately tracked – finished comfortably in the black. That includes the general fund ($995,741), the tax stabilization fund ($1,557,962), the capital projects fund ($2,713,374), the food service fund ($1,153,589), grant funds ($832,085) and other special revenue fund ($222,672).
The combined total of the various fund balances was $7,475,423 when the fiscal year ended June 30. That’s up $543,384 from last year’s total of $6,932,039.
The audit did detect one “material weakness,” involving the district’s handling of an invoice for just over $1.6 million it received shortly before the fiscal year ended June 30. It didn’t affect the district’s finances, and was the subject of a difference of opinion between the auditor and district officials involving when the expense associated with a heating and ventilation upgrade at Spaulding High School should have been accounted for. There was no dispute over the amount owed, or the availability of grant money used to pay the bill.
david.delcore @timesargus.com
