The Bermudian Springs School board filled its last vacant seat on Tuesday, Feb. 9 and discussed potential budget shortfalls for Fiscal Year 2026-27.
The board interviewed two candidates to fill the role left empty by Ruth Griffie’s recent resignation. Griffie represented Region Two, which includes Huntington Township and York Springs Borough.
The board voted 7-1 to approve Julie Marshall for the role. Marshall said her now-grown kids attended Bermudian Springs School District. She said she is aware of Adams County activities and projects that add “value” due to her community work and her job at AC&B Bank.
Marshall said she could bring her experience working to resolve issues with customers to her role on the board solving problems for the district.
Marshall’s term will end in November 2027. Marshall joins two other new board members, Rachel Gray and Chad Klinedinst, who were added last month. The board is now filled.
Board president Dan Chubb said both candidates stressed the value of important communication, something he found critical.
“I believe that’s probably one of the number one things that we hold very valuable as a board is that communication piece with one another and administrators, so that was encouraging to hear,” Chubb said.
Board members expressed that it was a difficult choice between the two candidates.
2026-27 budget process
Business manager Justin Peart and assistant business manager Jennifer Heller provided a budget update for the board.
Heller presented the tax increase options the board has, ranging from adding no tax raises to going up to the Act One Index of 4.7%.
Heller noted that should the board approve the upper limit, the monthly tax increases for average assessed properties would run from about $8.68 per month in York Springs to $11.67 per month in Hamilton.
The district is facing an increase of about 3.82% in revenues, according to Heller. The estimate relies on the 2025-26 state and federal funding amounts as those numbers for the upcoming year have not yet been approved.
In expenditures, Heller said the district is looking at an increase of about 6.72% through a mixture of increased insurance costs, retirement contributions, cyber/charter tuition and more.
Current estimates show the 2026-27 budget will have total revenues of $38,679,740 and total expenditures of $41,316,489. This would leave a gap of about -$2,636,749.
That $2.6 million gap assumes the board increases taxes to the Act One Index of 4.7%. In the event that the board went with a smaller increase – or no increase – the gap would widen. At a 3.525% rise the budget shortfall is -$2,818,029 while with no tax increase the projected shortfall is -$3,361,871.
Peart presented a chart showing the effects of one rising expenditure: cyber/charter schools.
Peart’s chart showed that in 2018-19 there were 82 students enrolled in cyber/charter. The cost for regular education students was $11,005.72 while the cost for special education students was $21,582.82. In all, it cost the district $1,022,517.51 that year.
The district saw the largest number of cyber/charter schools in 2020-21 with 169 students and a total cost of $1,965,373. At that point, the cost for a regular education student was $11,195.14 and the rate for a special education student was $21,273.40.
During the 2025-26 school year the number of students enrolled in cyber/charter school was 135 but the cost had increased. The rate for regular education students was $14,195.40 while the rate for special education students increased to $26,829.31. That cost the district $2,362,972.
Peart said that the cyber/charter rates are higher for both special education and regular education students than they cost the district at its own schools.
In total, cyber/charter school has cost the district more than $13.5 million during the past 8 years, according to Peart.
“That has been the challenge that public education has faced for years when it comes to cyber/charter, that we just want to be treated fairly with them because what this is showing us is it does not cost $27,000 to education a special education student, but that’s what we are required,” Peart said. “We have no choice in the matter to pay these cyber schools. It’s not about free choice of education, it’s about we need to be on the same playing field.”
Assistant superintendent Shannon Myers said that the district has spoken with parents and compared itself to the charter schools.
“But what we’re hearing and we’re digging a lot into this and having some conversations with families: we have our own online academy, but the big difference between our academy and the online cyber/charter schools is that they provide live instruction,” Myers said. “We don’t have the capacity with our current infrastructure to be able to do that.”
At the secondary school level, Myers said the largely asynchronous online academy works well for the older students as they enjoy having time to work or do their schoolwork when their schedule allows.
Becoming an attractive alternative to those seeking live online classes will take time and ingenuity.
“We’re having larger conversations, but we’re just, it’s difficult when you don’t have the personnel,” Myers said. “They have the online personnel to provide that online instruction. Our teachers are teaching in classrooms. We have to think creatively about how to keep these kids here in our buildings, but also provide some flexibility while still meeting the graduation requirements and all of the things that we have to do from an instructional standpoint, and we’re working on it.”
Cyber/charter school is one rising cost element, but other areas, including contributions to PSERS (Pennsylvania State Employees’ Retirement System) and medical insurance, also contribute to rising costs.
Peart said the district began the 2025-26 school year with a fund balance of $6,734,273 and anticipates using $1,253,020 during this school year, leaving about $5,481,253.
If the board uses $2,636,749 to fill the shortfall – the smallest projected gap as it is achieved at the Act One Index – the district would only have about $2,844,504 left in the fund balance by the beginning of FY 2027-28. With smaller tax increases or no tax increase the shortfall would increase without additional changes.
Peart provided a three-year budget outlook, but stressed that projections are rough given that no one can anticipate state and federal funding that far out when even the 2026-27 funding is not fully known.
Peart pondered what federal funding would exist in 2028-29 and beyond.
“We all know that the feelings of the current administration at the federal level is to totally get rid of the United States Department of Education,” Peart said. “Will that funding still exist? We don’t get a lot from that at this point, but it’s something a little over $300,000. That’s something that if that goes, we need to make that up.”
Should PA Gov. Josh Shapiro’s budget wishlist come true, the district would see an increase of $437,544 through the basic education and special education subsidies as well as the Ready to Learn block grant increase.
Peart cautioned that Shapiro’s list is unlikely to fully succeed and that the funding cannot yet be counted on as the state budget has not passed.
Superintendent Brad Sterner said the district was recently awarded over $130,000 from a safety and security grant to add cameras to current blind spots as well as to fund a K-12 school counselor.
Next month, the board will decide on a representative for the curriculum committee as well as the new board secretary, replacing Griffie.
The board will hold its next meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday, March 10 in the Middle School Learning Commons A.
