LINN — Linn R-2 board members approved a measure on May 21 to place a 50-cent operating levy increase before voters in August as district officials project a declining fund balance and increasing pressure to remain competitive in recruiting and retaining teachers, due to state budget cuts, and to SB 727, and the mandated teacher minimum salary.

The proposed levy would increase the district’s operating tax levy ceiling to $3.25 per $100 of assessed valuation and is projected to generate approximately $482,000 in additional annual operating revenue. District officials estimate the August election will cost between $4,000 and $6,000.

Superintendent Bob James explained the discrepancy as a result of the Foundation Formula not being fully funded.

“Something very important — at full funding, $7,145 — we get to $40,000 next year with a balanced budget, but we’re not going to get full funding,” said James. “I think it’s going to be closer to $6,700. They’re predicting $6,900. They told us $7,145 this year, in March, just a couple of months ago. They said, ‘We were just kidding,’ $6,900 is going to be the number. Now that they’re telling us $6,900.30.”

James added that he expects to attend a meeting at which he learns the district will not receive what it was supposed to get. “That’s why I’m building it at a couple hundred dollars less, because I anticipate that being the case,” he commented.

With that being said, James added that although he budgeted State Adequacy Target (SAT) especially for what he believes may be the worst-case scenario. “They could still pay out at best-case scenario, and we could end up almost with an absolutely balanced budget, but the way I’m going to plan is for the worst-case scenario,” James said, noting that he is building Linn R-2’s budget using an even more conservative assumption of slightly above $6,700 per student.

As June 30 nears, James told board members that preliminary budget projections indicate the district will finish the current fiscal year with a fund balance of approximately 29.2% — lower than earlier projections — and could end the 2026-27 fiscal year at roughly 27.09% using conservative revenue assumptions.

“I am a very conservative budgeter, meaning I definitely overestimate expenditures and underestimate revenues, because I would much rather tell you guys I’m sorry I told you that we have less money than what we actually ended up with, because I think the other conversation is a much more difficult one to have,” said James.

He said the projections already reflect significant spending reductions, including eliminating two teaching positions through attrition, reducing a paraprofessional position and an aide position, cutting instructional supply budgets by 10%, reducing activity budgets by 15%, limiting capital projects, and delaying curriculum purchases.

“We’re just trying to focus most of our efforts on remaining financially stable and weathering these next two to three years,” James said.

He told board members the district has increased its base teacher salary from below $30,000 a decade ago to $37,000 today, but warned that state minimum salary requirements will continue rising in future years. He argued that maintaining only the minimum required salary schedule will make it increasingly difficult to attract qualified educators.

“What are we saying to people who want to come here when we tell them we’re proud to do the minimum?” James said. “It’s not fun to stand there with a below minimum sign. It won’t be especially fun to stand there with, ‘We made it to minimum.’

“It’s hard to look them in the eye and ask them to outperform yesterday when I’m not outperforming yesterday,” James added. “I hate it for our staff. I really do, because we’re asking more and more from them. Great people have choices.”

Board members discussed whether the district should wait until a later election cycle after a previous levy proposal narrowly failed. Board member Brad Peterson expressed concerns about voter perception following recent bond projects and questioned whether additional community education was needed before returning to voters.

Other board members argued the district should not delay seeking voter approval, citing staff morale, recruitment challenges, and the narrow margin of the previous election. Several members noted that a community committee has begun organizing to help educate voters about the proposal.

James said delaying action until a future election would be detrimental. “If we do it in November, the first time we receive a dime would be January of 2028,” he noted. “So, we would push the can 18 more months. We already identified it a year and a half ago. We ran an election in April that failed. Now we’re one year down the road, and if we had to wait another year and a half after that, we’re talking about identifying a financial challenge and then moving it to potentially solve it three years later.”

The ballot language states that additional revenue would support general operating expenses, including meeting minimum teacher salary requirements, funding corresponding wage increases for support staff, and hiring a full-time school resource officer serving all district facilities.

James said improving the school with an increased tax levy is a point of pride. “I want to walk through Thriftway with my head up and tell everybody hi when I go by in there,” he noted. “As a community, everybody tells me they want an exemplary school, but we need to be exemplary across the board.”

Following the discussion, the board approved placing the measure on the August ballot by a 6-1 vote, with Peterson voting no.