The May ballot contains three propositions. The third one asks voters to authorize something the district has been doing for 22 years without explicit voter permission: systematically over-collect taxes, under-spend the budget, generate surplus, and transfer that surplus into reserves. 22 Years, $247 Million in Surplus: Jericho Has Never Budgeted Accurately.

Proposition #3 authorizes transferring up to $20 million in "surplus monies" into a new capital reserve over the next decade. Twenty-two years of audited data show exactly where that surplus comes from.

What The Propositions Say

Proposition #1 is the $147.9 million operating budget with a proposed tax levy of $121,041,866.

Proposition #2 authorizes spending $4,721,701 from Capital Reserve V on facility improvements within broad categories (windows, bathrooms, ceilings, boilers, asphalt, security, doors, masonry). No specific projects are named. The Board decides what to fund after voter approval.

Proposition #3 authorizes creating a new $20 million Capital Reserve VI "to be transferred from surplus monies remaining in the general fund." The proposition permits transferring up to $5 million from the 2025-26 surplus and up to $10 million per year in subsequent years until the $20 million cap is reached.

The proposition lists approximately 50 categories of authorized spending, including "additional new space/new building additions." The Building Condition Survey identifies a $16.4 million Seaman Elementary auditorium and $6.4 million high school fitness center as programmatic needs. If Proposition #3 passes, no further voter approval would be required to spend reserve funds on either project.

What "Surplus Monies" Actually Means

Proposition #3 asks voters to authorize transferring "surplus monies remaining in the general fund" into reserves. Understanding what you are voting for requires understanding where surplus comes from.

Over 22 years (2003-04 through 2024-25), Jericho UFSD generated $247.3 million in cumulative surplus. That is not a projection. That is audited actual performance. Every single year produced surplus. Not one deficit. Not one break-even year. Twenty-two consecutive surpluses totaling $247.3 million.

Surplus has two sources: revenue exceeding projections and expenditures coming in under budget. In Jericho, both occur every year.

Revenue exceeded budget projections by $31.5 million over 22 years. Interest income alone exceeded projections by $13.6 million. The district budgeted $950,000 in interest income for 2026-27. Actual interest income in 2024-25 was $3,276,000 — more than triple the current projection. Fund balances total approximately $78 million. At current rates near 4%, the $950,000 projection is $2.3 million below likely actual.

Expenditures came in $215.8 million under budget over 22 years. Every year, the district spends less than approved. The budget doubled from $70.5 million to $143.9 million while enrollment declined. Spending growth has consistently exceeded enrollment trends. Yet every year, actual expenditures fall short of the budgeted amount.

This is not fiscal restraint. This is systematic over-budgeting funded by systematic over-collection.

The district holds approximately $78 million in reserves (per the most recent audited statements, though mid-year figures are not publicly available). Proposition #3 asks voters to authorize adding $20 million more, funded by continuing the same pattern that generated the existing $78 million.

What You Are Actually Voting On

A yes vote on Proposition #3 is not a vote for building maintenance. It is a vote to authorize the district to continue generating surplus through conservative revenue projections and spending under-runs, and to formalize the transfer of that surplus into reserves rather than returning it to taxpayers.

The proposition does not say "if surplus occurs, it may be transferred to reserves." It says the reserve "is to be transferred from surplus monies remaining in the general fund" at up to $5 million this year and up to $10 million per year thereafter. The structure assumes surplus will exist. The 22-year pattern confirms that assumption is correct.

Voting yes on Proposition #3 is voting to institutionalize over-collection for another decade.

Either the district's revenue forecasting has been accidentally wrong in the same direction for 22 consecutive years, or the projections are calibrated to produce surplus by design. If forecasting is accidentally broken, the district should fix it before asking voters to authorize another $20 million in surplus-funded reserves. If surplus generation is intentional, voters should know they are approving a formalized over-collection mechanism, not a contingency fund.

The district has generated $247.3 million in surplus over 22 years without ever asking voters to authorize that pattern. Proposition #3 asks for that authorization explicitly. Voters should understand what they are approving.

The Question to Ask Before March 26

The Board adopts the final ballot on March 26. Before that deadline, every Jericho resident should ask the Board this question:

Over 22 years, the district generated $247.3 million in surplus and currently holds $78 million in reserves. Proposition #3 authorizes transferring another $20 million in "surplus monies" into reserves. Does the Board acknowledge that voting yes on Proposition #3 is a vote to continue the forecasting and spending patterns that generated the existing surplus, or does the Board commit to changing those patterns regardless of how voters decide on Proposition #3?

If the pattern continues, voters should know they are voting to authorize it. If the pattern will change, voters should know what systemic changes the district will implement and when.