School Board · Special Called Meeting · May 7, 2026

Thu, May 7, 2026

Hickman County Board of Education meetings, including regular sessions and special called meetings.

Outline

Disclaimer:
This outline was created using AI based on an automatically generated transcript. The transcript and this outline is likely to contain errors, inaccuracies, or omissions. Always refer to the original audio recording if you need to verify any details or for official purposes.

Call to Order

  • The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance.
  • The board met for a special called meeting focused on the school budget after the county rejected the initial budget request.

Approval of Agenda

  • A motion and second were made to approve the May 7 meeting agenda.
  • The agenda was approved by voice vote.

Budget Discussion

County Rejection and Funding Assumptions

  • The board discussed the county's rejection of the initial budget and the possibility of meeting with county officials again the following Monday.
  • Members questioned how the county expected the school system to fill budget requirements if the requested funding was reduced.
  • The original request included an 8-cent property tax increase, with sales tax assumptions already discussed around $3.6 million.
  • The county appeared to consider a 4-cent property tax increase and a $3.3 million sales tax estimate, which board members said would still leave a wider gap than the original request.
  • The board emphasized that sales tax estimates do not create guaranteed revenue in the same way as property tax revenue.

Sales Tax and Maintenance of Effort

  • Staff explained that the county's version showed an increase in maintenance of effort of roughly $710,000.
  • The property tax portion was stated as $335,874.
  • Staff said the $3.6 million sales tax figure had already been considered in a realistic "bad scenario" estimate, even though the budgeted number could differ.
  • Members discussed possible sales tax estimates of $2.9 million, $3.3 million, $3.6 million, and $4.2 million, but stressed that sales tax collections would ultimately come in at whatever amount the economy produces.
  • Staff noted a possible 3% test issue that could require small revenue and expenditure line adjustments before returning to the county commission.

Fund Balance Concerns

  • Staff explained that the budget must be covered by fund balance, less the required 3% reserve.
  • The current-year fund balance hit was projected somewhere between $1.9 million and $2 million through April, with a conservative estimate of $2.2 million used in the budget document.
  • Members asked to present recent history showing estimated versus actual fund balance hits, noting the school system had used fund balance for the last two years.
  • A budgeted worst-case scenario showed a $5.3 million revenue shortfall to cover expenditures.
  • With an 8-cent increase, the fund balance hit had been reduced to roughly $2.6 million in prior discussion.
  • Staff said that if the budget held exactly as written, the estimated ending fund balance could be around $5.013 million, though they did not expect that exact outcome.
  • Members discussed that about $3.4 million of fund balance was OPEB money and not usable for regular operations.
  • One scenario placed fund balance at about $7 million including OPEB, or about $4 million usable, after a $2 million current-year hit and $2.5 million next-year hit.
  • The minimum required reserve was described as 3%, with a rough amount discussed around $1 million to $1.3 million depending on the budgeted amount.
  • Members said this left roughly $3 million in working room after accounting for OPEB and the required reserve.

Expenditure Pressures and Staffing

  • Members said the district's largest expenditure is personnel, and major reductions would likely mean cutting positions or programs.
  • Staff discussed attrition and retention, saying the prior year retention was about 85% and attrition about 15%.
  • Licensed staff totaled about 308, and 15% attrition would represent roughly 45 people, though staff indicated current attrition appeared lower.
  • The current certified staff departures known at the time were described as minimal, around four or five people.
  • Members noted the challenge of retaining staff while enrollment declines, because fewer students may reduce staffing needs even when employees want to stay.

Budget Reduction Scenarios

  • Members discussed the director's goal of operating at 90% of the overall budget.
  • Staff said a scenario with 90% budget spending, $3.6 million in sales tax, and a 4-cent property tax increase would still draw about $1.1 million to $1.2 million from fund balance.
  • Staff noted property tax collections might come in above the budgeted amount because collections could approach 100%, while the budget assumes 93%.
  • Members suggested presenting simple scenarios to the county showing that even with a 10% spending reduction, a strong sales tax year, and a 4-cent increase, the district would still be in the negative.
  • The board also discussed showing scenarios for both 4-cent and 8-cent increases.

Capital Outlay and Long-Term Facilities

Building and Roof Needs

  • Members discussed long-term capital needs, including the high school, which was described as 18 years old and approaching a 20-year roof cycle.
  • Members referenced a prior 5-year facilities plan from around 2018 or 2019 and said it should be updated for current building needs.
  • Maintenance records and a prior plan were said to exist but still needed updating.
  • Members noted that roof, HVAC, and other building systems can become expensive quickly.

Buses

  • The board discussed bus replacement needs.
  • Staff said maintaining a pace of one bus per year for the next couple of years would keep the district where it needs to be.
  • A bus was estimated around $140,000 to $150,000.
  • Later in the meeting, staff noted that the current budget included only one bus and that bus revenue had not yet been added.

Wastewater Treatment Plant

  • Members discussed the treatment plant serving three schools at East Hickman.
  • The system was described as about 30-plus years old, installed around 1992 or 1993.
  • A prior system was said to have lasted about 30 years.
  • A past estimate to replace or rework the system was stated as roughly $20 million to $25 million, and members noted that cost could increase substantially over time.
  • Members discussed that setting aside $1 million per year for 20 years would still likely not cover the future cost if prices rise.

Capital Project Funding

  • Members discussed whether the county might fund capital projects separately from the operating budget.
  • Capital projects were discussed as historically averaging roughly $1 million per year, with examples in the $700,000 to $1.2 million range.
  • A capital project list of about $400,000 had already been presented.
  • Members discussed whether a wheel tax could support capital projects, including a possible $50 additional wheel tax, but no decision was made on that issue.
  • Members also referenced possible TSBA-related efforts to allow school boards to place funds in interest-bearing accounts for capital improvements, though that had not yet passed.

Food Service Fund Balance

  • Members discussed approximately $500,000 in cafeteria funds used for cash flow.
  • Staff said the budget had included the possibility of food service fund balance dropping below $500,000, with an estimate around $450,000.
  • Staff said current trends suggested the district might not drop below $500,000, depending on the next month and a half.

Revenue Ideas and Energy Savings

  • Members discussed an online program as a possible future revenue source.
  • Staff clarified that revenue from new online students would lag by a year, so students added in the next budget year would generate revenue in fiscal year 2028 / 2027-28.
  • A hypothetical example of 20 added students was discussed, but staff said there was not yet a realistic expectation because the process had not begun.
  • Members discussed whether energy-savings contracts could reduce costs.
  • Staff described prior HVAC and lighting projects, including an LED lighting project through TVA with a roughly $1.1 million interest-free loan and an expected energy usage reduction of about 20%.
  • Staff said similar savings efforts had been done before, though savings depended on continued monitoring of HVAC and temperature settings.

Strategy for Returning to the County

  • Members debated whether to return to the county asking again for 8 cents, accept the apparent 4-cent increase, or consider an intermediate request such as 6 cents.
  • Staff estimated that two additional cents would add about $166,000, while another comment estimated a 6-cent option might add roughly $200,000 over the 4-cent level.
  • Members worried that pushing again for 8 cents could risk losing the 4-cent increase the county seemed willing to support.
  • Several members favored accepting the 4 cents, explaining the fund balance situation clearly, asking for the capital outlay list separately, and working toward better communication and a stronger budget relationship for the following year.
  • Members discussed presenting information in simpler formats, such as graphics and scenarios, instead of heavy spreadsheets.

Motions and Votes

Budget Direction Motion

  • A motion was made to send the director back with the budget adjusted to the 4-cent property tax increase and to ask for the capital improvement projects on the previously presented list.
  • Members agreed not to increase the capital outlay request beyond the list already presented.
  • The motion was seconded.

Amendment to Include Line Item Adjustments

  • Staff asked for the motion to include revenue and expenditure line item adjustments.
  • The adjustments were described as decreasing expenditures by roughly $360,000 and increasing revenues by roughly $310,000, for a net gain described as almost $500,000.
  • The amendment was made and seconded.
  • The final motion was understood to include the 4-cent increase, the capital outlays, and the line item amendments.
  • Roll call vote: Miss Herren, yes; Miss Taylor, yes; Mr. Tidwell, yes; Mr. Hobs, yes.
  • The motion passed 4-0.

Other Business

  • No other business was raised.

Adjournment

  • A motion and second were made to adjourn.
  • The meeting adjourned by voice vote.

Key figures and statistics

Figure Type Context / topic
May 7, 2026 Date Special called board meeting
8 cents Rate Original property tax increase requested by the board
4 cents Rate County's apparent property tax increase proposal and final board direction
6 cents Rate Possible compromise property tax increase discussed
2 additional cents Rate Difference between 4-cent and 6-cent scenarios
$166,000 Dollar amount Estimated value of two additional property tax cents
$200,000 Dollar amount Approximate added value discussed for a 6-cent scenario
$2.9 million Dollar amount Sales tax estimate referenced from an earlier no-property-tax-increase scenario
$3.3 million Dollar amount County sales tax estimate discussed
$3.6 million Dollar amount Sales tax estimate used in board/staff realistic scenario
$4.2 million Dollar amount Higher sales tax budget estimate discussed as possible but not guaranteed
$710,000 Dollar amount Approximate increase in maintenance of effort
$335,874 Dollar amount Property tax portion of maintenance of effort discussion
$1,500 Dollar amount Approximate increase mentioned from penny-rate changes
$2,500 Dollar amount Approximate increase later confirmed from penny-rate changes
3% Percentage Fund balance reserve/test requirement
$1.9 million to $2 million Dollar amount Current-year fund balance hit projected through April
$2.2 million Dollar amount Conservative current-year fund balance hit estimate used in budget
2 years Count Number of recent years the district had hit fund balance
25% Percentage Earlier fund balance goal mentioned
$5.3 million Dollar amount Budgeted worst-case revenue/expenditure gap requiring fund balance
$2.6 million Dollar amount Approximate fund balance hit after 8-cent scenario in prior discussion
$5.013 million Dollar amount Estimated ending fund balance if budget held as written, as heard
$3.4 million Dollar amount OPEB portion of fund balance discussed
$2.5 million Dollar amount Possible next-year fund balance hit in one scenario
$7 million Dollar amount Fund balance including OPEB in one scenario
$4 million Dollar amount Usable fund balance excluding OPEB in one scenario
$1 million to $1.3 million Dollar amount Rough required minimum reserve range discussed
$3 million Dollar amount Approximate remaining working room after OPEB and reserve
85% Percentage Prior-year staff retention figure stated
15% Percentage Attrition figure discussed
308 Count Approximate total licensed staff
45 people Count Approximate number represented by 15% attrition of licensed staff, as discussed
4 or 5 people Count Current known certified staff departures described as minimal
18 years old Other Age of East Hickman High School building discussed
20 years Other Roof cycle / future planning period discussed
5-year plan Other Prior facilities planning framework
2018 or 2019 Date Approximate date of prior facilities plan
1 bus per year Count Desired bus replacement pace
$140,000 to $150,000 Dollar amount Estimated cost of a bus
3 schools Count Schools served by East treatment plant
1992 or 1993 Date Approximate treatment plant installation period
30-plus years Other Approximate age of treatment plant
30 years Other Lifespan of earlier treatment plant referenced
$20 million to $25 million Dollar amount Past estimate to replace or rework treatment plant, as heard
$1 million per year Dollar amount Hypothetical amount to set aside for future treatment plant replacement
$8 million Dollar amount Approximate past high school roof/HVAC rework cost mentioned
$1 million per year Dollar amount Historical average capital projects level discussed
$700,000 to $1.2 million Dollar amount Historical capital project range discussed
$400,000 Dollar amount Capital project list already presented
$50 Dollar amount Possible additional wheel tax discussed for capital projects
$500,000 Dollar amount Cafeteria fund balance / cash flow amount discussed
$450,000 Dollar amount Food service fund balance estimate in budget
90% Percentage Director's budget spending goal discussed
$300,000 Dollar amount Additional sales tax revenue adjustment discussed in 90% scenario
$1.1 million to $1.2 million Dollar amount Fund balance hit under 90% budget, $3.6 million sales tax, and 4-cent increase scenario
93% Percentage Property tax collection rate used for budgeting
100% Percentage Approximate property tax collection level that could occur
10% Percentage Budget reduction scenario discussed
70-plus percent Percentage Approximate share of budget described as salary
20 students Count Hypothetical online program enrollment increase
Fiscal year 2028 / 2027-28 Date Timing when online program revenue would arrive
$164,000 Dollar amount Debt service/light upgrade payment previously covered by county
$1 million Dollar amount Hypothetical annual light bill in energy-savings example
$200,000 Dollar amount Hypothetical reduced annual light bill in energy-savings example
$800,000 Dollar amount Hypothetical energy savings in example
$400,000 Dollar amount Hypothetical savings share retained by vendor and district in example
$1.1 million Dollar amount TVA LED lighting interest-free loan
20% Percentage Expected energy usage reduction from lighting project
$360,000 Dollar amount Approximate expenditure decrease in final amendment
$310,000 Dollar amount Approximate revenue increase in final amendment
Almost $500,000 Dollar amount Net gain from amendment, as described
1 bus Count Number of buses currently in budget
4-0 Count Roll call vote approving final budget direction