ROCKLAND — With time winding down for the newly-formed school district to approve their first-ever budget proposal, the Rockland Central School District Board of Education met on Monday evening for an open meeting. By the end of the evening, the board approved the $32 million dollar proposed budget.

The meeting began with a speech from the soon-to-be Rockland Teachers’ Association, highlighting that despite their different opinions prior to the merger passing, they have united in solidarity to show that they are committed to making the new district the best it can be for both the students and the community.

Specifically, they discussed expanded opportunities for students, and to do that they stressed the importance of retaining all staff.

Throughout the merger study, there was an emphasis on retaining the current staff and reducing the number through attrition. However, some voices on the new board have questioned the necessity of keeping duplicate positions, even for just a few years.

Following the Teachers’ Association speech, in which they recommended that the staff remain the same throughout this transition, the board opened up to public comment before viewing a presentation from Superintendent John Evans.

There were questions about budget workshops and a lack of transparency, which Evans explained by saying that, “All of the Board of Education meetings that we discussed the budget were the workshops.”

The proposed budget, which includes both known and estimated costs, would retain all staff, and allow for flexibility in program offerings at the school.

The district previously explained that “the $32,134,980 budget proposal builds on current programs and offers expanded programming for all grade levels utilizing existing staff. The budget proposal includes more than 40 additional electives for middle and high school students, many with the potential for college credit, two transitional classrooms, more targeted PK-6 academic intervention services (AIS) in math and English Language Arts (ELA) and more robust daily specials rotation at the elementary level, as well as expanded extracurricular clubs and activities for all students PK-12.”

The budget represents an increase of $903,510, or 2.89 percent, of the two districts’ combined 2024-25 budget. It also includes a tax levy of $14,955,556, which is a decrease of 5.34 percent.

The district went on to explain that to help decrease the tax levy, the proposal uses one-third of state incentive aid ($1,077,516), $836,171 in fund balance, and $220,483 in reserves. The 2024-25 true tax rate per $1,000 is $10.71 for LMCS and $9.11 for RCS with a combined rate of $10.03. The estimated true tax rate for 2025-26 would be $9.50 per $1,000. This is based on current assessed values and equalization rates, which will change for 2025-26.

“We believe this proposal provides our students with the expanded educational opportunities and the fiscal responsibility proposed in the merger studies,” Superintendent John Evans said.

Also on the ballot will be a proposal to establish a $30 million buildings and facilities capital reserve fund over 15 years.

Remember to vote

There will be a public hearing on Tuesday, May 6 at 7 p.m. in the Roscoe auditorium, and the official vote will be held on Tuesday, May 20 from noon until 8 p.m. at the Livingston Manor and Roscoe school gymnasiums. Residents of the former Livingston Manor Central School District will vote in Livingston Manor, while residents of the former Roscoe Central School District will vote in Roscoe.

“Under New York state law, if the school budget is defeated, the board of education has two options: hold another vote in June on either the same budget or a revised budget, or adopt a contingent budget without a second vote,” the district said in a press release. “If residents defeat the proposed budget during a second vote, the board must adopt a contingent budget. A contingent budget contains no tax levy increase and would eliminate all non-contingent expenses, such as certain student supplies, certain equipment purchases and community use of school facilities that results in a cost to the district.”