Base salaries from Higley Unified School District’s maintenance and operations budget will be frozen for fiscal year 2025-26 after the governing board gave unanimous approval to that preliminary budget at its March 4 meeting.
While the district managed to secure a small salary increase for teachers using classroom site fund monies, the decision left other staff members without additional compensation and fueled sharp divisions among board members.
The budget discussion underscored the challenges facing the district amid declining enrollment and financial constraints after voters turned down the continuation of its 15% M&O override. The board also began steps to put another override question to the voters this fall.
The proposal aims to fill a projected $9.2 million budget shortfall while maintaining essential programs and meeting contractual obligations. The final vote on the M&O budget will take place later this year, but the governing board’s initial approval allows the district to issue contracts later this month.
Base salary freeze, limited teacher raises
A major point of contention in the proposed budget was the decision to freeze base salaries for district employees. Thanks to the statutorily designated classroom site fund — a separate revenue stream funded by the Proposition 301 sales tax — the district was able to offer a modest increase to teacher salaries.
“This bucket is for teachers, and we eventually came (to the conclusion) we want to use this to continue to honor teachers,” Chief Financial Officer Tyler Moore said, emphasizing that CSF funds cannot be used for nonteaching positions.
According to the budget breakdown, the starting salary for a Higley teacher, which is set at $58,320 with a midyear stipend and performance pay factored in, will see an increase using CSF money to $58,807, a boost of 0.8%.
While teachers benefited from this decision, other district employees, including classified staff and administrators, were left out because of constraints within the M&O budget. This has raised concerns among board members and employees about long-term retention and morale.
Sharp board divisions
Tensions ran high throughout the meeting between Board President Amanda Wade and Board Member Anna Van Hoek, who offered starkly different perspectives on the district’s financial strategy.
Van Hoek voiced concerns regarding how the district has managed its finances, criticizing previous budget decisions that assumed an override would pass.
“We don't make decisions based on hope,” said Van Hoek, who opposed pay raises last year and the override. “We make decisions based on the money we have.”
She also raised alarms over declining classroom spending, citing a recent Auditor General report that showed a reduction of $54 per student in classroom expenditures while administrative costs increased.
“We need to ensure that our students aren't directly impacted, and we look at the numbers — all the impact is directed to our students, which is in the classroom,” Van Hoek said.
Wade defended the district’s approach, emphasizing the necessity of maintaining competitive salaries for teachers and administrators.
“We pay our admin well because the job they do requires it,” she said, highlighting the ongoing challenges of retaining qualified educators in a competitive job market. “We don't pay our teachers in the same category.”
She also pushed back against the idea that Higley’s enrollment decline, also a driver of the budget decline, was primarily due to dissatisfaction with district leadership, attributing the trend to broader demographic shifts.
“That 300 difference is a global birth rate issue, and that is a nationwide issue,” she said. “That's not a Higley issue.”
Financial uncertainty, more potential cuts
With the override measure previously rejected by voters by 314 votes, the district is bracing for further financial challenges in coming years. Without additional revenue, the phase-down of override funds will continue, leading to deeper budget reductions in subsequent fiscal years.
To address potential shortfalls, board members have floated several ideas, including selling district-owned land valued at approximately $7.3 million and consolidating schools due to declining enrollment. However, concerns remain about whether these measures will provide sustainable long-term solutions.
Unexpected infrastructure costs — such as air conditioning failures and facility repairs — also have strained the district’s budget planning.
Van Hoek has pushed for spending down the district’s budget balance carryforward, which is more than $17 million, saying it has been saved for a rainy day like now. The district plans to use about $4 million of it to bridge the gap.
“If we are able to reduce that further, then these cuts that have to be made, we don't have to make such drastic cuts,” she said.
But Wade pointed to the need for such contingency funds to guard against unexpected expenses and noted once the carryforward is spent, it is gone.
“I cannot emphasize enough that while we have these things available, we also have really old buildings,” she said, citing Williams Field High School’s air conditioning break last August and Cortina Elementary facility repairs. “Why use all of that savings right now?”
Despite these challenges, the board remains divided on the best path forward. While Wade and other members stress the importance of securing additional revenue through a future override attempt, Van Hoek and her supporters argue for budget restructuring and cost-cutting measures instead of seeking further taxpayer support.
Community response, next steps
The district has conducted community surveys and engagement sessions to gauge public sentiment on potential budget cuts.
Survey results indicated strong opposition to reducing teacher salaries and increasing class sizes, while programs such as Mandarin language instruction and extracurricular activities were ranked lower in priority.
With the M&O budget receiving preliminary approval, the focus now shifts to finalizing budget allocations and preparing for the next fiscal year.
The override failure means its current override will further sunset in 2026-27 and expire in 2027-28, requiring more cuts unless voters renew the override.
However, the board voted 3-1, with Sara Jarman dissenting and Van Hoek abstaining, to draft a resolution to send an override renewal back to the voters. Van Hoek said she was abstaining because of a concern for the will of the voters at the last election and wanting to meet with Moore to explore other options.
The draft will come back at a later meeting for board approval and placement on a ballot this fall in a special mail-in election.
We would like to invite our readers to submit their civil comments, pro or con, on this issue. Email AZOpinions@iniusa.org. Tom Blodgett can be reached by email at tblodgett@iniusa.org or follow him @sp_blodgett on X.
Meet Tom Tom Blodgett joined Independent Newsmedia, Inc., USA, in 2022, when the company acquired Community Impact Newspaper's Phoenix-area properties. Raised in Arizona, he has spent more than 35 years in journalism in the state.
Community: He has served as an instructional professional in the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication since 2005, and is editorial adviser to The State Press, the university's independent student media outlet. He also is director of operations for an 18U girls fastpitch softball team from Gilbert.
Education: Arizona State University with a BS in Journalism.
Random Fact: He lived in Belgium during his freshman year of high school.
Hobbies: Tweeting enthusiastically about ASU softball (season-ticket holder) and grumpily about other local sports (pessimistic fan).
By 
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here