Finance Director Mike presented and the committee approved four budget transfer motions. The transfers were described as extraordinary due to early budget freeze and the need to pre-pay $1.5 million in next year’s out-of-district tuitions. In a typical year, transfers would not exceed 1% of budget (approximately $490,000).

All four motions carried 5-0. The district had also pre-paid $1.1 million in out-of-district tuitions at the end of the prior fiscal year.

The assistant superintendent (identified contextually as ‘Julie Ryan’ or ‘Ms. Ryan’) presented a comprehensive review of the 2021-2026 Plan for Success strategic plan outcomes. Key highlights:

Curriculum (Goal Area 1 - Teaching & Learning):

• Completed a 6-year curriculum review cycle
• Adopted Wit & Wisdom literacy curriculum K-6
• Adopted Illustrative Math
• Adopted new K-12 science curriculum (first year of integration)
• Adopted Wayfinder social-emotional learning curriculum K-12 (first time ever district-wide)
• Updated scope and sequences; embedded enrichment/intervention block K-12
• Integrated DIBELS early literacy assessments; expanded i-Ready and IXL use
• Added WIN block at high school (equivalent of K-8 WIN time)
• Launched MET (manufacturing, engineering, technology) pathway with state grant funding

Student Outcome Data:

• 81% of K-3 students on or above grade level in math (end of year)
• 87% of K-3 students on or above grade level in reading (end of year)
• High-needs students: math meeting/exceeding grew from 27% to 34% since 2022
• ELA growth percentiles for high-needs students showed strong growth
• Science: no measurable change (anticipated; new curriculum just implemented)

Equity & Inclusion (Goal Area 3):

• Wayfinder SEL curriculum in year 2; first year with beginning-and end-of-year measurement
• METCO program strengthened under director Kesha Johnson
• AP course access expanded
• Inclusive performing arts community highlighted
• Placement process overhauled with cross-school collaborative approach

One Unmet Goal:

• Free full-day kindergarten not achieved by June 30, 2026
• Announced: free full-day kindergarten will launch in 2027-28 school year

Professional Development (Goal Area 2A):

• Active PD committee with MEA partnership
• Over 200 educator survey responses on PD needs
• AI professional development added to annual training
• Instructional coaches K-12 credited: Rebecca Brand, Mary LeBlanc, Emily Perez, Angie Graziano, Danielle Boucher
• PDP tracking system for DESE re-licensure established

Committee members asked about connecting chronic absenteeism improvements to academic gains and expressed interest in longitudinal Wayfinder data. The superintendent noted the district has been recognized as one of few in the state to improve chronic absenteeism.

The chair introduced the Plan for Success review, noting the committee had previously approved a new district-wide improvement plan and that this agenda item closes out the prior five-year strategic plan. The superintendent noted the fall initiatives will be shared at a future meeting.

The district’s finance director (identified as ‘Mike’) presented an 11-month financial update as of May 31. Key figures:

• Unexpended balance: approximately $1.703 million
• Roughly $285,000 less than one month prior
• Approximately $200,000 deemed a comfortable cushion for remaining end-of-year bills
• District is pre-paying approximately half of next year’s out-of-district special education tuitions, with invoices already encumbered
• Final payroll push expected around June 18-23 will clarify year-end landing

A separate budget transfer motion was flagged for later in the meeting.

The superintendent briefly acknowledged the passage of the override, noting it allows the district to ‘take a breath, reset, and begin planning.’ Highlights included:

• Class of 2026 graduation ceremony described as successful
• College signing day: Sydney Ball (women’s soccer), Madison Bessette (College of Charleston, cheerleading), Braden Callahan (Johns Hopkins, football), Ian Zucker (Colby College, soccer), Finn Gallup (Salve Regina, football), Daphne Gibson (Bethany College, football), Sadie Halpern (Colby College, track and field)
• Sixth-grade National Math Olympiad honorees listed
• English learner parent advisory council summer reading book event held at Brown School playground
• Six staff retirees recognized: Judy Cowan (20 years, Village), Moira McMahon (11 years, Village SPED), Rhonda Gifford Flynn (16 years, teacher), custodian James Rackey (21 years), Mary Roberts (4 years, Glover), Christine Seymour (10 years, food/bus services), Mark Tarmy (17 years as athletic director)

Superintendent presented an updated district improvement plan incorporating feedback on numbered improvement strategies, a revised ‘data points’ evidence column, year-one-through-three timelines, expanded ELL language, and a corrected list of seven core value areas. The committee discussed the plan’s lack of an overarching destination statement and agreed the committee’s role is to set strategic direction for the next iteration. Quarterly check-ins beginning in October or November 2026 were agreed upon. The plan was approved 4-0.

Brown School’s plan targets typical and stretch growth in math, reading, and writing using i-Ready, mCLASS, and Wit & Wisdom assessments; assesses preschool curriculum consistency for a district-wide preschool development initiative; and establishes a school-based safety leadership team. Third-grade writing proficiency was noted at 34% at Brown versus a statewide average of approximately 24%. Glover’s plan emphasizes vertical and horizontal teacher collaboration, PBS (Positive Behavioral Supports) expansion for student and staff recognition, and enrichment through parent volunteer involvement. Both plans were approved 4-0.

Essex Tech currently serves 1,926 students in 26 programs on a 166-acre Danvers campus. Marblehead’s 35 enrolled students represent a 2.2865% participation share, yielding a $749,000 assessment covering operations, capital, and transportation. The school accepted 500 students in the class of 2030 from over 1,500 applicants. Article 21 approved by hand vote.

Revenue: Total available FY2027 revenue is $96.5 million, down $600K year-over-year. Tax levy grows $2.1M; state aid up ~$200K; local receipts down ~$1M (interest income decline, conservative motor vehicle excise estimate); free cash use reduced by $2M.

Level-service cost: $104.2M — $27.9M town operating, $51.3M schools, $25M shared employee benefits. Deficit: $7.7 million.

Deficit drivers: Wages +$3.1M (collective bargaining), health insurance +$1.7M (~10% GIC increase), new curbside contract +$1M, pension +$500K, out-of-district SPED +$300K, other +$500K.

Cost accountability framework: Finance Committee reallocated shared benefits; true town/school split is 38%/62% (vs. prior 49%/51% presentation). Town share of deficit: $4M; school share: $3.7M.

Town-side gap closure ($4M):

• New curbside trash fee (Board of Health): ~$2.2M
• Department cuts totaling ~$2.4M, including:
  • Library: $700K cut + $170K materials eliminated (8.25 FTEs; decertification risk)
  • Other general government: $590K (OPEB $250K, stabilization $250K, workers comp $90K)
  • Community Development & Planning: $300K (dept head, sustainability coordinator, grant coordinator positions cut)
  • Meaningful reductions in DPW, finance, public buildings, cemetery, COA, town clerk, police, building inspection, Rec & Park
• Unemployment costs increased ~$600K due to eliminations
• 22 FTE town positions eliminated (~12% of workforce; ~18 currently filled, ~4 vacant)

School-side gap closure ($3.7M):

• One-time $1.5M prepayment of FY2027 out-of-district SPED tuition using FY2026 funds
• $750K teacher/IA salary cuts; $450K from vacant positions
• $350K expenses shifted to revolving funds/grants
• ~$650K further reductions in substitutes, supplies, curriculum, technology, administration
• 18.25 FTE school positions eliminated (~4% workforce; 11 vacant, 11 layoffs)

Bond rating: S&P affirmed AAA but revised outlook from stable to negative, citing budgetary stress. Reserves at ~2% vs. 5% policy target.

Debt service: New bond issuance of $26.2M (net $24,975K after $1.5M premium) at 3.75% true interest cost. Total FY2027 debt service: $10,971,016. Total general fund debt outstanding: $146,297,626 through 2056.

Finance Committee unanimously recommended yes on Article 23.

The superintendent described an iterative process of drafting the district improvement plan — gathering feedback from the administrative team, staff, and parents via survey — and highlighted key additions:

• Goal 1 (Curriculum): Added language addressing artificial intelligence as a learning tool and reviewing Chromebook use to ensure balance between screen time and hands-on learning.
• Goal 2 (Educator development): Added language on celebrating and supporting developing educators, expanding mentoring, and providing new administrators with mentorship and alignment with district mission.
• Goal 4 (Student support): Added language establishing avenues to address online safety, cyberbullying, and social media partnerships with parents and caregivers; added restorative practice protocols district-wide.
• Goal 5 (Governance): Added language around streamlining district-wide systems and services through enhanced tools.

A committee member noted that listing a committee meeting as “assessment and evidence” is insufficient and that the document lacks specific deliverables and data metrics. The superintendent acknowledged the feedback.

The committee agreed to the following timeline:

• Committee members email feedback to the superintendent by May 8
• Full committee discussion at the May 21 meeting
• Vote no later than the June 4 meeting

The plan covers FY2026–27 through FY2028–29 and contains 6 goals, 22 objectives, 59 improvement strategy boxes, and approximately 100–150 individual strategies.

Essex Tech Superintendent Dr. Heidi Riccio and School Committee Representative Mark Stroud presented the impact of a new state-mandated vocational lottery on Marblehead’s enrollment and assessment costs.

Background on the lottery: DESE eliminated grades, teacher recommendations, and personal interviews as admissions criteria. The only permissible factors were attendance (fewer than 27 absences) and discipline, which Essex Tech opted not to use. The result was 1,750 applicants for 427 seats this year — students could apply by simply checking a box with no further investment.

Seat allocation change: Larger member communities (Danvers, Beverly, Peabody, Salem) proposed an allocation formula based on total K–12 enrollment. Essex Tech countered using eighth-grade enrollment per community. Under that formula, Marblehead received a minimum target of 39 seats — compared to a historical average of 10 acceptances per year. Danvers, which typically sends 60 students, was allocated 39 seats but had 132 applicants; Marblehead had 28 applicants for its 39 seats.

Current enrollment trajectory: Of the 28 Marblehead applicants, 7 withdrew, leaving 21 accepted as of the meeting. Over 50% of accepted Marblehead students hold IEPs. The net new students entering the system represents a roughly 50% increase over current enrollment at Essex Tech from Marblehead.

Financial risk: A FinCom member calculated that at the current trend of ~15 net new students per year from a base of 35, the Marblehead assessment could exceed $2.5M during the three-year override period, and in a worst-case scenario (full 39-seat fill rate) could reach over $4M by FY32 — compared to approximately $750,000 today. The FY27 assessment already rose over 9% year-over-year.

Legislative outlook: State representatives are voting on Amendment 1580 to House Bill 5500 to restore merit-based admissions for vocational schools. The superintendent was not optimistic about its passage.

The FinCom noted the assessment was already voted as part of the budget and this discussion was focused on future risk and calls for more community involvement in the admissions allocation process.

The subcommittee reviewed a draft HTML newsletter hosted on a member’s personal test site. Key sections discussed included:

• School budget summary: Level-services cost cited as approximately $53.2 million; members noted a discrepancy between that figure and the stated $3.1 million in reductions and flagged it for CFO review.
• FTE vs. positions: The draft referenced 18.25 FTEs but noted that a recent meeting referenced 22 positions because many were part-time. Members agreed to use FTE figures throughout and add a clarifying note.
• District trends: Enrollment, staffing ratios, per-pupil spending, and MCAS proficiency compared against a cohort of similar North Shore communities. Members noted Marblehead’s per-pupil spend and teacher salaries rank lowest in the cohort while MCAS scores remain competitive.
• What’s already been done: The newsletter references the consolidation of elementary schools (Brown and one other) and prior staff reductions.
• Override options: A three-tier override structure outlined; members planned to update figures pending the Select Board vote the same day.
• Draw schedule: Newsletter shows no additional school draw in the immediate year but flags a structural deficit beginning in FY2028.
• Ballot mechanics: A section explaining how voters can vote yes on multiple tiers up to their comfort level, with an example illustrating that the highest tier above 50% prevails — not the tier with the most votes.
• Disclaimer: A footer notes compliance with Massachusetts General Laws and states the newsletter does not advocate for or against any ballot question. Members agreed to have the superintendent review for any inadvertently advocacy language.

Target send date: Tuesday, April 28. Draft to be shared with superintendent (John) and CFO (Mike) for fact-checking the same day.

FY27 Budget Overview

The FY26 budget is $49,122,287. A level-services FY27 budget would have been approximately $50,073,633 but was not approved. The adopted FY27 reduced-services budget is $47,620,287, representing a total reduction of approximately $3.157 million.

Key drivers of cuts:

• Out-of-district special education tuition increased 12% (9.4% average across the consortium, up to 12% for higher-end programs).
• Health insurance costs rose approximately 11%.
• Pension contributions rose over 8%.
• Contractual salary obligations (COLA + step increases) apply to all staff annually.
• The district has no control over OSD-set tuition rates.

Where Reductions Landed

Personnel (22 positions reduced, 11 currently filled / 11 vacant; approximately 18.25 FTE):

• Brown School: clerical position reduced from 261 to 195 days; potential custodian reduction; 1.24 FTE general ed instructional assistants shifted to grant funding.
• Glover: vacant EL teacher (census-driven); supply reductions (~$1,600); second custodian; pre-K Wednesday afternoon hours reduced.
• Village: 1.75 FTE EL teacher (census-driven); vacant special ed teacher; one elementary teacher position; one of three general ed instructional assistants; supply/PD savings (~$2,600); discussion to cut part-time position.
• Veterans Middle: math interventionist; one classroom teacher (rate TBD); supply level-funding (~$1,600 savings); clerical position cut.
• High School: art teacher reduced from 1.0 to 0.8 FTE (prior year decision); 2 teachers moved from general fund to revolving (Educious) account (not a long-term solution); 3 classroom teachers cut; supply level-funding (~$4,000 savings).
• Athletics: supply lines level-funded.
• District-wide: 2 fellow (non-FTE) positions eliminated from grant, saving ~$81,000 for general fund; ABA coordinator vacancy eliminated; summer IT help cut; HR generalist/assistant vacancy cut; special ed physical therapy assistant (PTA) vacancy eliminated; assistant business manager 20% salary shifted to pre-K revolving and grants; facilities assistant 50% salary shifted to building rental revolving fund; substitute budget reduced by approximately $137,000–$138,000; 1.0 maintenance employee cut; heating fuel and electricity budgets reduced; student services contract services and supplies level-funded; curriculum refresh cycle paused; speech and language pathologist reduced from 1.0 to 0.6 FTE.

Prepaid tuition: $1.5 million prepaid from end-of-year FY26 surplus (unencumbered balance target ~$1.5M) to reduce the FY27 out-of-district tuition line from approximately $5.3 million to $3.8 million. This is a one-time measure that cannot be repeated without new funding.

The committee voted 5–0 on the line-item budget.

“Without any restoration of the funding, our cuts would be much deeper.” — Superintendent

A board member raised concern that specifics were being publicly disclosed before all affected staff had been individually notified. The superintendent confirmed principals were part of the iterative process and union presidents have been meeting with administration every two weeks.

Asst Supt Mike’s monthly update.

• FY26 unencumbered balance: just under $2.1M, down about $614K from last month. The push to close out FY26 expenses was deliberate.
• Reserved for next year: $1.5M to subsidize the FY27 out-of-district tuition line via prepayment (driving the budget vote later in the agenda).
• March surprises: HVAC failures at Brown and Glover; bus repairs; elevator repairs. “When it rains, it pours.”

Roof projects in motion: Veterans Middle School roof restarting within two weeks; Marblehead High School roof – three small sections done during April vacation (the section above the meeting room, a section by the concession stand, and one on the far side). Sections selected to avoid HVAC/exhaust units. “Praying for nice weather.”

Committee approved the FY27 line-item budget at $47,620,287, a $3,157,460 reduction from FY26.

Two passes of cuts: the original $1.7M reduction (level-services to balanced), then an additional $1.5M when the town asked for deeper cuts. Each FTE in the count below is a real position even when not yet bargained to a name.

Position changes (22 total / 18.25 FTE)

• 11 currently filled – reduction in force, subject to bumping under the unit contract.
• 11 currently unfilled – vacancies in the budget that won’t be funded.

Where the cuts land

Plus: 0.4 SLP reduction, pause the curriculum-refresh cycle, −$137,938 daily-substitute line (building subs working), 1.0 maintenance cut, heating-fuel and electricity reductions tied to the new contract and usage.

The prepayment

The biggest single move was prepaying $1.5M of FY27 out-of-district tuition from the FY26 unencumbered balance. The reserve fell from $12.1M last year to a target of $1.5M – spending the safety net to keep teachers in classrooms.

Three remaining safety nets after the move: circuit breaker (SPED reimbursement); a smaller SPED stabilization fund (requires town meeting authorization); and the Finance Committee stabilization fund (broad, hard to access).

“I would rather risk one more year than have any impact – if we can reduce the impact on education for another year, hopefully forever, but for another year, I think it’s more critical than us holding something in reserve.”

Build assumption: 6% over prior-year budget. Plus $540K in unanticipated FY27 increases (incl. Educational Consortium 9.4% average / 12% high-end tuition increase notified one week prior) that had to be absorbed.

Five high-school students – Michael Labosier, Max Colin, Don Obesi, Caleb Sidman (juniors) and Lucy Molinari (sophomore) – presented the work of Marblehead High School’s Magic Coalition: Marble Headers Alliance for Growth, Inclusion, and Connection.

The group formed in response to the October 7 incident in which a swastika was reportedly drawn in a second-floor men’s bathroom. Existing reporting channels for hate incidents had not produced the result students wanted, so a peer-led structure was created to give students, teachers, and the broader community a clearer way to speak up.

What the group has done

• Ran a full-school assembly during MAGIC block, broken into grade-level sessions (freshmen, sophomores, juniors, seniors).
• Set up suggestion boxes around the building.
• Planning a Village School (sixth-grade) assembly at end of May / start of June – aiming to reach younger students before patterns set in.

“Hate is not necessarily in someone’s heart, but more in their surroundings and in their environment. When someone is raised in an environment where they don’t know what their words mean, then it leads to things like this with repeated acts of hate happening.”

“We’re really trying to provide hope in the students’ minds that they have a place to go if they feel they’re being discriminated against. We really just want to make people feel comfortable for who they are.”

The peer-to-peer framing was deliberate – students argued the message lands differently from a peer than from a teacher. Committee thanked the group for the work.

Article 21 approved at $749,920 for the FY27 assessment. The trajectory matters more than the number:

Two drivers compound:

• The school changed to a lottery system, raising Marblehead’s allocated seats from 35 to 39.
• Cost per student rises roughly 3% per year.

Participation is mandatory under the regional-school agreement. The Finance Committee is working with the North Shore Collaborative on the assumptions and may pursue state-level relief.

Board concern: this line item is one of several externally-imposed costs (alongside GIC health insurance) the MOU cannot constrain. A further allocation jump in FY28 could blow through the override’s three-year envelope.

The Finance Committee chair presented a detailed overview of the budget process and deficit before moving the vote on Article 23 (Expenses of Several Departments).

Revenue shortfall: | Driver | Change | |—|—| | Prop 2½ levy increase | +$2.2M | | Local receipts (interest, excise) | −$1.0M | | Free cash contribution | −$2.0M | | Other (state aid, enterprise indirect) | net small increase | | Net change in available revenue | −$600,000 |

Available revenue: approximately $96.5 million; level-services expenses after all department meetings: approximately $103.8 million; resulting deficit: $7.2 million.

How the deficit is addressed:

• Curbside trash ($2.2M): Removed from the general fund; funded by a user fee unless voters approve a Prop 2½ override.
• Town-side cuts ($1.9M net): Required approximately $2.5M in gross cuts (due to unemployment cost offsets) resulting in approximately 22 FTE reductions, of which 18–19 are filled positions. Departments most affected: community planning, library (8.5 FTE cuts), public buildings, finance. Represents ~12% of general-fund town employees.
• School-side cuts ($3.2M needed): Schools have identified $1.7M in cuts (14 FTEs, mostly vacancies/retirements/attrition); the remaining $1.5M in cuts has not yet been specified by the School Committee.

The committee also highlighted that “other general government” costs (pension, health insurance, OPEB) are up 8% year-over-year and that approximately $12.5M of those costs are attributable to school employees and retirees. GIC health insurance rates have risen 5–12% annually over the past four years.

Vote: $122,762,030 total; $109,777,938 raised from taxation and other available funds; $12,984,092 from enterprise funds. Approved unanimously.

Article 21 appropriates $749,920 for Marblehead’s share of Essex North Shore Agricultural and Technical School District costs, up approximately 13% over prior year. The committee noted this year’s number is reliable, but expressed concern that a new lottery-based admissions system and reallocation of seats among member communities could significantly raise costs in future years. Marblehead’s seat allocation has increased, and the final enrollment count — which determines the assessment — is not known until March each year. The town administrator and FinCom chair are scheduling a call with Essex Tech administrators to model future-year projections.

A motion was made to approve the FY27 budget at $47,620,287 — the figure recommended by the Select Board and Finance Committee, which incorporates the $462,000 health-insurance buffer. The administration’s preferred budget of approximately $48,958,896 was placed on the record by school CFO Mike but drew no additional support from other members.

Roll call vote:

• Melissa: in favor
• Jen: in favor
• Henry: in favor
• Kate: in favor
• Al (chair): in favor

Result: 5-0

Superintendent and CFO Mike presented the school department’s FY27 budget of $47,620,285, voted by the School Committee the previous day. This is $2,566,000 below the level-service budget of approximately $51,687,000, a reduction of approximately 5.22%.

Phase 1 cuts (to reach level-funded baseline of $49,120,285)

• 14.75 FTE positions eliminated or left vacant
• Reallocation of general fund items to special education grants and revolving accounts
• New copier lease savings
• Level-funded supplies (removing the 2% increase from level-service)
• Reduced natural gas and electricity budget (natural gas supply rate locked in for three years in February 2025 at a favorable rate)

Phase 2 cuts (additional $1.5M reduction)

• Specific line items not yet determined; to be presented at the April 9 School Committee meeting

Offsets applied

• Special education circuit breaker: increased allotment to stay within the one-year reserve limit ($2M received)
• Retirement savings from staff departures (limited this year)
• Pre-K/kindergarten revolving account offset nearly doubled (noted as not long-term sustainable beyond ~2 budget cycles)
• Federal/state grants level-funded (IDEA grant risk of ~10-20% reduction flagged as a concern; IDEA grants total ~$700,000–$800,000)

The superintendent stated further FTE reductions will directly affect students through larger class sizes, reduced services, and safety impacts. The Finance Committee noted that DESE data shows Marblehead’s per-pupil spending and staffing ratios are roughly median among comparable communities, and that the phase 1 cuts represent a right-sizing aligned with declining enrollment trends.

Abbott Public Library Director Kim presented the FY27 library budget of $857,633—a reduction of approximately $700,000 from the level-service request and the largest proportional cut on the town side of the budget. Key findings:

Staffing impact

• Current staff: 24 (20 active; 4 vacancies including one imminent retirement)
• Under the approved budget: estimated 13 staff members, all part-time
• Positions eliminated: library assistants (green), pages (orange), and part-time union positions (purple); only core full-time professional staff (blue) retained in a reduced capacity

State certification risk

• The budget falls ~$600,000 short of the Municipal Appropriation Requirement (MAR), defined as the average of the last three years’ total municipal appropriations plus 2.5%
• A waiver application is not viable because the library’s cuts are disproportionately large relative to other town departments; the Board of Library Commissioners would not approve a waiver under those conditions
• Decertification would make Marblehead one of only five decertified libraries in Massachusetts; the other four are very small Western Massachusetts towns with no modern library
• After decertification, re-certification requires a minimum of three additional years of meeting standards even if funding is restored

NOBLE network consequences

• NOBLE (North of Boston Library Exchange, 17 libraries) provides the shared catalog, internet connectivity, patron database, cataloging infrastructure, bulk technology purchasing, EBSCO databases, interlibrary loan, and professional services
• NOBLE membership renewal is due by June 2026 for the period ending June 2027
• NOBLE member libraries may vote to deny access to decertified municipalities
• Building equivalent in-house infrastructure would cost an estimated $250,000–$300,000
• Interlibrary loan volume was approximately 28,000 instances in FY25
• State aid lost: approximately $44,000 annually (currently used for materials)

Service reduction

• Under the approved budget: estimated 25 hours/week open, no evenings, no Saturdays
• Children’s room and teen room would likely close
• No municipal funding for new books, movies, or digital subscriptions
• A rejected alternative scenario adding $310,000 would have reduced staff from 24 to 16, maintained 45 hours/week, and allowed a waiver application; that scenario was not adopted

Closure timeline The director stated that under the $857,633 budget with no override, the library would not be able to sustain operations and would close by approximately December 1, 2026, due to staffing attrition and inability to cover shifts.

“With this budget and no override, it will close after this point. We can’t survive on the budget we’re talking here.” — Kim, Library Director

The $10 million taxpayer investment in the library building would sit underutilized. The Finance Committee approved the budget unanimously while expressing that this was the least-desired vote of the session.

The waste and health director presented the FY27 health department budget line by line. Key items included:

• Salaries: Department head (30% health / 70% waste split), public health nurse and health inspector combined under one line, senior clerk (50/50 health/waste split), and nighttime clerical staff.
• Marblehead Counseling Center: $60,000 allocation; the director noted a prior effort to double this to $120,000 was reversed due to budget shortfalls, and he plans to request an additional $60,000 through a future override tier.
• Bloom app: $14,000 annual cost currently covered by opioid settlement funds; director intends to return to that funding source for renewal.
• Total budget: $339,320, a 4.07% increase over FY26, driven primarily by a senior clerk moving to a higher step.

The board voted unanimously to approve the budget. A Finance Committee hearing (“Super Saturday”) was noted for the following Saturday morning.

FY27 Budget Discussion

Superintendent John Rabbu prefaced the discussion by noting the school produced a level-funded budget reflecting a $2.6 million reduction from level services, and that the town has since asked for an additional $1.5 million cut. He said the superintendent’s office still recommends the $1.5M reduction but acknowledges numbers need validation.

Six Benefit Categories on Town Side

Assistant Superintendent of Finance Mike Piferling reported on a committee directive to verify six benefit cost line items carried on the town’s budget but allocated to the schools:

Key Disagreement

The superintendent and committee noted that the town’s $1.5M demand appears to be based on the 63%/37% split formula applied to a ~$96.5M total revenue figure (63% ≈ $61.1M), while the school’s current level-funded budget plus all six benefit categories totals approximately $62.5M—a ~$1.5M gap. Piferling argued that if the benefit cost numbers are accurate, the gap should be closer to $1.25M (after the town’s own downward revision). Committee member Melissa observed that the town controls the cushion and the formula but asks the school to absorb cuts it cannot manage.

Path Forward

The committee agreed to:

• Form a budget subcommittee (Jen and Melissa) to meet with the town’s finance director and FinCom chair to reconcile numbers and determine whether benefits can be moved into the school’s budget directly (as Medicare was moved several years ago)
• Return with a final agreed number to the full committee before the April 28 FinCom warrant hearing
• Discuss a multi-year override structure (the town proposed a three-tier approach); committee members expressed interest in a level-services restoration as the minimum tier and full-day kindergarten as a potential augmentation tier
• Reschedule the April 2 meeting to April 9 due to religious holidays

The committee did not vote on a budget figure at this meeting.

Before individual department reviews, the town administrator provided budget context. He explained that the proposed FY27 budgets are built on two assumptions absent in Scenario A: implementation of a solid-waste user fee generating just over $2 million in new revenue, and a request for the schools to absorb an additional $1.5 million in cuts beyond their already-reduced level-funded budget.

The overall deficit was described as approximately $7.7 million. The schools are responsible for approximately $3.2 million of that (their own cuts plus the additional $1.5M), while the town side carries roughly $3.3 million. Board members discussed the importance of establishing a formal cost-responsibility model for dividing surpluses and deficits between the town and schools going forward, and noted a plan for quarterly meetings with school finance staff.

After extended deliberation, School Committee member Jen made a motion:

Motion: Direct Mike and John to work together with the town finance director to solidify the benefit cost numbers and return next week with a new presentation and budget reflecting whatever numbers Mike and Alicia agree to.

Roll call vote:

• Jen: In favor
• Henry: In favor
• Melissa: In favor
• Gabe: In favor
• Al (Chair): In favor

Result: 5-0 in favor

The superintendent confirmed he is meeting with Finance Director Alicia the following day. The committee also discussed adding the override tier discussion as an agenda item for the following week’s meeting.

Extended deliberation among School Committee members, Superintendent John, and Finance Committee Chair Crosby:

Points of agreement:

• The analytical framework of allocating shared benefit costs proportionally is sound in concept
• An MOU between Select Board and School Committee to hold annual early-budget meetings already exists (signed around 2019-2020) but had not been followed
• Future budget cycles should begin with a joint meeting in October
• A multi-year budgeting approach (2-3 years) would help

Points of contention:

• School CFO Mike disputed the input data, noting his own GIC roster calculation yields ~$700,000 less in school-side costs than the town’s estimate
• School Committee member raised concern about changing the allocation framework mid-year and without prior joint deliberation
• Superintendent John stated the ask would ‘impact classrooms 100%’ and that at $5M deficit before the trash fee or school ask, the town faced 50-60 employee cuts; the 1.5M school ask restored ~15 of those positions
• Town side deficit: Before trash fee, ~$3.5M remained; the proposed trash fee (discussed at Select Board meeting the prior evening) would offset approximately $2M of that

Town-side cut scenario described by Crosby (without trash fee or school ask): Full shutdown of library, COA, Rec & Parks, cemetery; elimination of chief procurement officer, two police officers, three community planning staff, assessor senior clerk, two custodians, 6-8 DPW/facilities workers = 55-60 positions

Finance Committee Chair Alec Crosby presented a spreadsheet analysis at a joint session with the School Committee and Select Board Chair Dan Fox. Key figures discussed:

• FY26 baseline: Town departments $47,968,952; School budget $49,120,287; total ~$97.1M
• Available revenue for FY27: approximately $96.5M, roughly $600,000 less than FY26
• Revenue drivers: property tax/new growth up ~$2.1M; local receipts (interest income, excise tax) down ~$1M; free cash usage dropping from $7M to $5M creates a significant drag
• Offsets before split: ~$740K abatement reserve, ~$2.5M state assessment offsets, $150K snow/ice reserve, ~$450K warrant articles, ~$636K Essex Aggie assessment

Crosby’s analysis of the six ‘Other General Government’ benefit lines (pension ARC, active health insurance, life insurance, retiree health insurance, PEC Medicare reimbursement, OPEB transfer) attributed roughly 63% of those costs to schools, yielding an implied total school budget of ~$61.3M vs. available revenue of ~$96.5M × 63% ≈ $60.8M. The resulting town-wide deficit was estimated at $7.7M, with $3.2M on the school side and $4.5M on the town side. A $1.5M reduction ask of the school budget was discussed as the working assumption.

Discussion continued on the overall budget framework. One member noted the FY27 projected total revenue figure (tax levy, new growth, free cash, cherry sheets, stabilization, enterprise funds, local receipts) was approximately $101 million. The committee debated whether the 50/50 split is truly symmetric once $8 million in school employee benefits currently carried on the town side are paper-transferred to the school budget, which one member calculated would move the school department from roughly $50M to $58M, requiring the schools to cut an additional $1.5M to achieve parity. Medicaid reimbursements and Chapter 70 funds were raised as potential offsets that have not been fully factored in. The chair moved to close the budget discussion and advance to the next agenda item.

The superintendent summarized a town-side presentation from the prior evening that laid out two scenarios for FY27: Scenario A involving elimination of dozens of positions and shuttering of town departments; Scenario B preserving most services via a new trash fee and an additional approximately $1.5 million reduction to the school budget. Both scenarios included the $1.5 million school-side cut.

Committee members’ reactions:

• Committee member (Kate) called for a joint school-town working group to verify the numbers underpinning the $1.5 million figure, noting the figures presented the prior evening appeared inaccurate (e.g., the school-side reduction was listed as $1.9 million when the committee’s own budget showed $1.6 million). She proposed the school committee chair work with the Select Board to establish a joint working group and begin exploring a joint override.
• Committee member (Melissa/Jen) expressed frustration that the $1.5 million figure was not backed by transparent data, noting it appeared to be based on a projected 15% health-insurance increase while current indications were that the increase would be more in the 7–8% range — roughly half — which would significantly reduce the ask. She also could not reconcile how cuts on the town side appeared to be offset by a new fee without reducing the town’s apparent share of the budget gap.
• John (superintendent or senior administrator) stated he had prepared a level-funded budget — the first time in his career the district had done so — and would not alter a single number without a clear directive from the committee. He noted that cuts on top of the already $2.6 million reduction would bring the total to $4.1 million and described the operational difficulty of making additional cuts in the compressed time before town meeting (~8 weeks away).
• Committee chair noted the committee is tasked with bringing a balanced budget to town meeting and that no formal committee decision had been made regarding an override.

Key data points discussed:

• Already reduced: ~$2.6 million (equivalent to ~14.75 FTE)
• Additional cut requested: ~$1.5 million (total would be ~$4.1 million)
• Town-side deficit figures cited: ranging from $4 million to $8 million depending on source
• Health-insurance increase assumption: 15% (town projection) vs. likely 7–8% (per superintendent)
• Finance committee budget day: March 28 (Saturday)
• Staff notification deadline: April 15
• The assistant superintendent had already requested a roster of school-based employees with their health plan type (family vs. individual) and sought clarification on whether retirees were included in the town’s benefits calculation

Outcome: The committee did not vote on the FY27 budget. The consensus was to wait for verified health-insurance cost data from the town before giving the administration a directive to revise the budget. No formal motion was made.

Assistant Superintendent of Finance (referred to as Michael Bifain) reported an unexpended balance of $2.7 million at the end of February, down approximately $422,000 from the end of December. He attributed the decline primarily to the correction of over-encumbered out-of-district tuitions that had to be moved from the circuit breaker revolving account to the local budget. He noted the district is transitioning from a SAMS to a Munis payroll system, which has made some line-item categorizations unclear, though all money is accounted for. He anticipated the March end-of-month balance would be closer to $2 million after additional purchase orders are processed. A board member noted they had not received a link to the shared drive with the financial documents; staff agreed to follow up.

Town Administrator Thatcher and CFO Alicia Benjamin presented two FY27 budget scenarios:

Scenario A — Straight cuts

• Total cuts required: $7.7 million (town side: $5.7M; school side: $1.9M)
• Would defund six departments: Community Development & Planning, Cemetery, Health (except mandated health agent), Council on Aging, Library, and Recreation & Parks
• 56 positions eliminated from an active town workforce of approximately 185–190
• Position breakdown: 1 chief procurement officer, 1 police officer, 1 vacant firefighter, 2 public works, 6 cemetery, 3 health, 6 COA, 23 library, 8 recreation & parks, 5 community development & planning

Scenario B — Fee shift + additional school reduction

• Total cuts: $7.9 million (school side: $3.4M; town side: $4.4M)
• Proposes moving approximately $2.04 million in curbside trash/recycling costs to a Board of Health fee structure (~$254/year per household based on ~8,000 households; opt-out available; discounts for tax-exempt residents)
• Asks schools for an additional $1.5 million reduction (beyond the $1.9M already cut) to proportionally share rising employee benefit costs; schools carry ~62–66% of GIC active employee costs
• Reduces impacted positions to approximately 20.5 FTE; all six departments remain open
• Leaves $1.4 million unfunded even under Scenario B, identified as a starting point for override discussion

Health insurance caveat

GIC was scheduled to vote on rates the following day. Town had been carrying a 15% increase assumption, revised to 11%; a favorable GIC vote could shrink the gap further. Open enrollment April 1 adds additional variability.

Board sentiment

All five board members signaled support for Scenario B as a working framework. Board members called for formal guidelines on how revenue increases and deficits are split between the town and schools going forward, and indicated a combined override with the schools for FY27.

The chair explained that liaison meetings with individual departments and schools had been postponed because the town had not yet finalized a balanced budget. A Select Board meeting on Wednesday is expected to confirm a path to balance and provide department heads with their available budget figures. The chair estimated the overall gap — after removing capital and reserve items from the State of the Town figure — at approximately $6.5–$7 million. Health-insurance savings of up to $800,000 would partially reduce that gap but not eliminate it.

Near the close of the public hearing, the chair stated that the district has historically split available revenues roughly 50/50 between the school department and the town side (including health insurance and benefits). He noted that a ‘pretty significant reduction’ in projected revenue was presented at the State of the Town meeting about a month prior, and that if the final revenue figure is below the amount underpinning the $49.1 million proposed budget, 50% of that lower number could result in the school department receiving less than last year’s appropriation—which he characterized as ‘the first time in my experience’ such a cut would occur.

Jen pushed back, saying she believed the school committee was not required to present a level-funded budget—it was merely requested to—and that the committee retains the authority to bring a different budget to town meeting. She also expressed concern about offline conversations between individual committee members and town officials about potentially reducing the budget further without involving the full committee or budget subcommittee.

The chair acknowledged the point about process but maintained that decisions about a different budget would go through the budget subcommittee first.

Surpluses explained: The district began prepaying out-of-district special education tuitions around 2019 (FY20) after a circuit-breaker shortfall nearly destabilized the budget. Surpluses accumulate from unfilled positions (e.g., a vacant math interventionist budgeted at ~$75,000, a vacant assistant HR position at ~$65,000–$70,000), utility savings, and similar line-item underspending. The district anticipates prepaying approximately $1 million per year; at year-end, after the prepayment, a remaining surplus of roughly $600,000 is typical. For a ~$49–$50 million budget, a $1 million surplus represents about 2% variance, described as normal in the budgeting world.

Circuit breaker mechanics: Circuit breaker is a state reimbursement mechanism, not a grant. The district pays SPED tuitions upfront, then receives reimbursement. The reimbursement threshold is roughly 4× the state per-pupil average (~$60,000). The state reimburses 75% of costs above that threshold—not 75% of the total tuition. So on a $100,000 placement, the district is on the hook for approximately $60,000–$70,000 and receives ~$30,000 back. The district now carries forward up to one full year of circuit-breaker accounts as a safety net, a practice started after 2019.

Out-of-district tuition deduct line: A former school committee member questioned why the current budget no longer shows a deduct line reflecting the ~$1 million prepayment against the ~$5 million out-of-district tuition budget. Mike explained that showing a full $1 million deduct would reduce the FY28 out-of-district line to $4 million, creating a structural shortfall. The committee agreed the practice and policy should be reviewed.

FY27 enrollment projection: Fall 2026 enrollment is projected at approximately 2,349 students (down from 2,435 as of February 2, 2026—a decline of roughly 86 students). The K–6 average classroom size is currently 19.7; general-ed classes run 20–24 students. The district’s staff-to-student ratio of approximately 11:1 (inclusive of all licensed staff) is near the state average.

Essex Tech / charter school funding: Vocational and charter school tuitions are paid from the town’s budget, not the school department’s budget. For FY27, approximately 27 Marblehead students are slated for Essex Tech (up from fewer than 12 the prior year—more than doubled). The additional cost accrues to the town side.

The meeting opened mid-discussion of the FY27 proposed budget. A budget subcommittee member noted a 23–24% enrollment decline over 10 years with proportionate teacher reductions and consolidation into the Brown School, but stressed the student population is now ‘much more complex’ and ‘highly regulated,’ which accounts for costs not falling in line with enrollment.

The chair clarified procedural rules: this was a hearing (two-way dialogue), not a standard public-comment session, and noted concern that an earlier vote to close the open meeting may have been procedurally improper. The committee agreed to proceed.

The hearing was opened to approximately five in-person speakers plus online participants.

FY27 Superintendent’s Proposed Budget

The School Committee opened a public hearing on the FY27 superintendent’s proposed budget of $49,120,285, identical to the current year appropriation. Superintendent John Ferrero and Assistant Superintendent of Finance Michael Piling presented the budget and answered questions.

Key Budget Drivers

• Negotiated salary increases: 3% for FY27, 3.5% for FY28 already agreed under collective bargaining
• Special education out-of-district tuition and transportation: anticipated increase from approximately $6.1M (FY26 budgeted) to approximately $6.6M (FY27), an estimated 8.25% increase — described as a moving target
• A level-funded budget (same dollars as current year) does not equal level services because costs rise while revenue stays flat

Reductions to Reach Level-Funded Number

Initial efficiencies already implemented:

• Eliminated summer technology position (~$7,000–$8,000)
• Did not fill HR assistant position
• Removed teacher-in-charge stipend at Glover
• Reduced full-time art teacher to 0.8 FTE
• Reduced 1.75 EL teacher FTEs at Village (enrollment-based)
• Reduced 1.0 math intervention FTE at Vets

Additional reductions to close approximately $800,000 gap:

Enrollment Context

District enrollment fell from 3,144 students (October 1, 2016) to 2,435 students (February 2, 2026) — a 23% decline over approximately 10 years. The superintendent projected approximately 2,349 students for the start of the 2026–27 school year. Over the same period, teacher FTEs fell from 263.9 to a projected 215.4, a 19% reduction — described as roughly proportionate.

The superintendent noted enrollment decline is not unique to Marblehead; statewide enrollment fell by nearly 15,000 students since 2021 due to low birth rates, charter and private school competition, and demographic trends.

Financial Reserves and Surplus Discussion

Mike Piling explained that apparent year-end surpluses arise primarily from:

• Budgeting positions that go unfilled (e.g., the math intervention vacancy, worth roughly $75,000)
• The district’s practice of prepaying up to approximately $1 million in special education out-of-district tuitions from year-end surpluses — described as the only legally permitted use of school department surpluses
• Utility savings and other underspending

The district also draws on several revolving accounts (kindergarten/prek tuition, special education tuition, and the international student program) to offset salary costs, providing roughly two to three years of additional runway.

A committee member noted the district is in a structural deficit and that all efficiencies described provide only short-term relief. A projected reduction in town revenue could require cutting the school appropriation below the current year for the first time in recent memory.

Public Comment Highlights

• Sarah Matusa (MHS teacher, ~20 years): Expressed concern that cutting intervention positions (e.g., math interventionist) will cause at-risk students to slip through the cracks and increase special education referrals.
• Samantha Rosado (resident): Called for a fully funded budget and a Proposition 2½ override, noting the last override was in fiscal year 2005 and that the prior level-funding in FY24 had serious consequences.
• Mary (senior citizen/school volunteer): Urged broader outreach to senior residents (now approximately 23% of the population, roughly 1,100 more over-65 residents than 10 years ago) and recounted families leaving Marblehead schools following the teacher strike.
• Molly (resident, Finance Committee vice chair): Described this as the most difficult budget season in her four years on FinCom and emphasized the importance of school-town collaboration.
• Lee Blander (resident): Asked about projected September enrollment and student-teacher ratios; received the 2,349 projection and confirmation that the 11:1 staff-to-student ratio is in line with state averages (noting it includes all licensed staff, not just classroom teachers; average class size is approximately 19.7 K–6).
• Amarie Jordan (virtual, retired educator): Encouraged community groups and PTOs to begin an organized public campaign if an override comes to ballot, recalling that grassroots canvassing was decisive in passing the last general override.
• Melissa Theod (parent, district employee): Asked about enrollment recapture strategies; administration described earlier kindergarten enrollment outreach, improved high school transition events, and prek wait lists (Brown prek is full).
• Cindy Tower Lohan (virtual): Asked all committee members whether they support more school funding; all members indicated support, though they noted the practical challenges of passing an override.
• David Patton (virtual, taxpayer without children in schools): Asked about projected enrollment and class sizes; noted cuts might be reasonable if enrollment continues to decline.
• Maggie Pelin (resident, school employee, parent): Raised the importance of language around students with disabilities and called for accurate public education about special education classification.

Essex Tech / Charter School Funding

Vocational school (Essex Tech) enrollment rose to approximately 27 Marblehead students this year, more than double the prior year, capped at 37. These costs are not in the school department budget — they are funded by the town side. Charter school costs are handled similarly. Both reduce Chapter 70 state aid indirectly.

Override Discussion

Multiple residents asked whether the committee will seek a Proposition 2½ override. Committee members confirmed:

• A placeholder article is already on the town meeting warrant for a general override
• No committee decision to proceed has been made
• Multiple overrides have failed since 2005 (most recently in 2023)
• The committee’s next steps, including whether to bring a higher budget, will be deliberated at a future meeting before town meeting

A committee member (Kate) disclosed she had held conversations with town officials about the budget situation, including the possibility that revenue projections could require cutting below the level-funded number; the chair clarified no authority to change the budget was delegated and that any changes must go through the full budget subcommittee and committee.

Town Administrator Thatcher and CFO outlined the FY27 budget development timeline across five phases (June 2025 through town meeting). The board is currently in Phase 4: individual department reviews aimed at producing a balanced budget for presentation on February 25.

Key financial pressure cited:

Total new tax revenue from Prop 2½ growth: approximately $2.2 million Projected healthcare cost increase alone: approximately $1.9 million

This leaves virtually no room for any other cost increases before cuts must be made. Additional pressures include a new trash contract and normal inflationary costs.

Health Insurance: The GIC vote on plan redesign (changing copays/deductibles to reduce premiums) is scheduled for February 26. The town’s blended healthcare cost increase is currently tracking at approximately 14–15%, though the final rate will depend on Marblehead’s specific enrollment mix across HMO, PPO, family, and individual plans.

Board discussion on override strategy: Board members debated whether to pursue a one-year or multi-year override. Most members leaned toward a three-year structured approach but acknowledged that without final numbers, no commitment could be made. One member cautioned against presenting voters with a large lump-sum multi-year ask; another noted the school committee had recently suggested it may not need an override. The board agreed to review a balanced budget plus preliminary override scenarios at the February 25 meeting.

A ‘Municipal Bootcamp’-style public forum for residents — featuring department heads explaining their operations — was proposed for March.

Superintendent Roberto and Assistant Superintendent of Finance Mike Ling presented the proposed FY27 school budget, developed at the town’s direction to be level-funded at the current year’s appropriation of $49,122,850. Providing the same services at the same funding level would require approximately $2.56 million in additional revenue, of which $1.6 million represents increased town appropriation need under a level-service scenario.

Enrollment context: District enrollment was 2,564 in FY24-25 and 2,394 as of October 1, 2025 (the DESE reporting date), though the superintendent noted enrollment had risen to 2,435 as of February 3, 2026. Since FY16-17, enrollment has declined from 3,144 to 2,435 (approximately 22%), while licensed teacher FTEs declined from 263.9 to a proposed 212.35 — roughly a 20% reduction over that period.

Budget offsets and efficiencies (Round 1):

• Increased draw on circuit breaker reimbursement
• Reduced retirement savings assumption
• Near-doubling of draw from the pre-K/kindergarten revolving account
• Moving select staff salary costs (assistant business manager, facilities administrative assistant, assistant director of student services) partially into revolving accounts and federal grants
• Level-funding of all supply, PD, and technology lines
• Copier lease renegotiation and paper cost reduction (~$30/case from ~$38-39/case)
• Vacant summer technology position and vacant HR assistant position not filled
• Removal of a teacher-in-charge stipend at Glover School
• Reduction of 1.75 FTE EL teachers at Village School (census-based)
• Reduction of 1.0 FTE math intervention at Veterans Middle School
• Reduction of 0.2 FTE to 0.8 FTE FDER teacher (already in effect)

Staffing reductions (Round 2 — positions eliminated or not filled):

• 1 elementary teacher
• 1 teacher at Veterans Middle School
• 3 teachers at Marblehead High School
• 0.4 FTE EL teacher at Glover
• 1.0 general ed instructional assistant (elementary)
• 0.4 FTE speech-language pathologist
• 1 special education teacher at Village (vacant, not filled)
• 1 BCBA coordinator (vacant, not filled)
• 1 maintenance worker

Total: 9 positions eliminated/not rehired plus 5.7 FTE not rehired plus a stipend = approximately 14.75 FTEs plus stipend.

Federal grants: FY26 federal grants totaled approximately $932,343 (Title I ~$99K, Title II ~$41K, Title III ~$12K, Title IV ~$10K, IDEA ~$247K, early childhood ~$21K, and other). FY27 grants are designated TBD but expected to be level-funded or slightly lower.

Concerns raised by committee:

• Several revolving funds used to cover ongoing salaries are finite; the special education revolving (~$300K balance) may support the draw for only one year; the pre-K/K revolving is estimated sustainable for two to three years.
• Federal grant uncertainty, particularly Title II (mentor/mentee program), which is a state mandate if funding lapses.
• Out-of-district tuition rate risk: collaboratives may increase rates by up to 10% for FY27, compared to the 4% assumption in the budget.
• Transportation spike in prior years has been right-sized; FY27 assumes modest 6% increase.
• A $100,000 cut to the electricity line (~8% reduction) was flagged as a line to watch closely.
• DESE data cited: high-needs population grew from 27% to 32% of enrollment between 2016 and 2025; autism diagnoses up 34%; neurological/health-related disabilities up 48% in that period.

Pre-K/K tuition: The district remains one of approximately five Massachusetts communities still charging for full-day kindergarten. The administration had planned to move toward eliminating that fee but deferred given the level-funded directive.

Next steps: Budget will be posted publicly; a public hearing is scheduled for February 26; the school committee vote is planned for March; Finance Committee budget hearing anticipated in March-April; Town Meeting in May.

The committee received an update from the budget subcommittee (Henry reporting):

• The town’s Finance Committee has directed the school department to present a level-funded budget, which would hold the appropriation at approximately $49.4 million.
• Contractual salary increases, benefits, and utility costs generate an estimated $1.7 million deficit relative to a level-funded baseline.
• Reductions identified so far total approximately $900,000, including:
  • Not filling approximately 1.75 ELL positions (enrollment of English language learners is down)
  • Not filling an HR secretary vacancy
  • Elimination of a high school art position
  • Other attrition savings
• Remaining gap: approximately $800,000, to be addressed through further staffing and programmatic discussions at the next budget subcommittee meeting (tentatively January 29) and a full presentation scheduled for February 5.
• A public budget hearing is planned for sometime in February, followed by a committee vote on the recommended budget.
• One member noted it is possible the town may request even deeper cuts if revenue projections worsen.

The superintendent also noted preliminary discussions with Recreation and Parks (and reference to Swampscott’s model) about potential shared or alternative use of the Glover School building, though no formal facilities subcommittee meeting has occurred yet.

The CFO’s office proposed a uniform ~3% increase in all user fees and tuition-based programs for FY27. Key changes include:

• High school athletics: 1st season $540 → $555; 2nd season $490 → $505; 3rd season $430 → $445
• Middle school athletics: 1st season $260 → $270; 2nd season $210 → $215
• Non-athletic activities / unlimited pass: $290 → $300
• Pay-to-ride bus (K–6, under 2 miles): $250 → $260 (~44 cents per one-way trip)
• Annual family maximum: ~$2,160 → $2,215 (approximate)
• Full-day pre-K tuition: $7,000 → $7,210; half-day: $5,000 → $5,150
• Half-day kindergarten: $4,000 → $4,120
• Income-eligible families receive 75–100% tuition reductions via USDA/Virtual Gateway direct certification.

One committee member voted no, expressing concern that kindergarten charges and overall fees already exceed comparable districts and that further increases shift budget problems onto families. Others noted fee waivers exist and that peer districts also charge for extracurriculars. Vote: 3 to 1.

Essex Tech currently uses a three-tier lottery and had set Marblehead’s minimum incoming freshman seat at 10, based on a three-year average enrollment. A proposal by larger member districts (whose five districts represent roughly 70% of enrollment) to shift to a proportional model would raise Marblehead’s minimum from 10 to 33, potentially sending up to 132 students versus the current ~40 annually.

The superintendent said the first model was fair and the second less so for smaller districts, but noted the decision is still in flux. Essex Tech reported over 700 applicants this cycle and is capping general enrollment at 450. Marblehead currently has approximately 33 applicants for the class of 2028. A committee member noted the financial implication could be significant — one member estimated potentially half a million dollars in Chapter 70 follow-the-student revenue. The superintendent planned a follow-up call with Essex Tech leadership.

The CFO’s written memo reported:

• Unexpended unencumbered balance: $3,123,627 at December 31, down $148,560 from the November 30 report.
• A negative $22,764 line related to retirement/attrition savings needs to be distributed across salary lines.
• SPED audit district tuition and transportation lines will be adjusted in January.
• An overrun in the circuit breaker line of approximately $27,472 will be rectified by moving purchase orders to LEA/district tuition lines.
• Payroll of approximately $2,851,189 was being processed for January 15, with a federal tax-table error discovered that day being worked through with the payroll vendor.

School department official Mike presented a request for the Select Board to approve a four-year copier lease with UIIO Business Services — an extension beyond the standard three-year term that requires board approval. The new contract replaces 29 machines district-wide at a savings of approximately $22,000 per year versus the current contract.

Key features of the new agreement:

• Click-charge model: The vendor supplies toner and service; the school pays per copy (~0.4 cents/copy black & white, ~4 cents/copy color), eliminating the need to purchase and store cartridges.
• Badge-release printing: Staff print to a single universal driver and release jobs at any machine by tapping their ID badge, improving print confidentiality and reducing paper waste.
• Volume tracking: The system logs usage by user and machine, allowing management to identify underused equipment and reduce waste.

Mike noted the district also separately secured a better paper price of $30/case through Staples, down from $38–$39/case, after the Crest Collaborative did not run its usual bid this year. The school committee had already approved the contract; the Select Board’s role was solely to authorize the extended lease term.

Superintendent Robu and Assistant Superintendent Piferling reported that the FY27 school budget faces a gap of approximately $1.7 million between level-service costs and the town’s level-funded allocation (FY26 town appropriation was $49.1 million; level-service need is approximately $53.2 million from town funds before revolving offsets).

Through a series of measures, administration reduced the gap to approximately $879,000:

Subcommittee members pressed administration on whether the staffing picture reflects enrollment-based analysis. Administration confirmed that further cuts beyond the ~$879,000 gap would require reducing classroom staffing — potentially increasing elementary class sizes from approximately 19 to 22 or higher — with direct instructional impacts.

The subcommittee discussed the difficulty of publicly quantifying special education staffing needs without revealing individual student information, and agreed that aggregate program-level data (e.g., number of students in specific programs, staffing required) should be prepared for the community. Administration noted Marblehead has built approximately $2 million in circuit breaker reserves and has been pre-paying $800,000–$1 million annually in out-of-district tuition as financial buffers.

The chair noted the subcommittee needs to begin discussing whether an override article is warranted, with that conversation targeted for the January 15 school committee meeting.

The superintendent and assistant superintendent presented a detailed enrollment update.

Key figures:

• Total enrollment (Oct. 1, 2024–25): ~2,560 (including METCO and staff children); resident-only count ~2,395
• Decline since 2019: approximately 28% (roughly -3% per year over seven periods)
• No graduating class currently exceeds 200 students; all classes are under 200
• Marblehead has the second-lowest birth rate in Massachusetts according to a Pioneer Institute white paper (data through 2019)

Where Marblehead resident students go (selected figures, students previously enrolled in public schools): | Destination | Approx. count | |—|—| | Charter schools | 82 | | St. John’s Prep | 78 | | Tower School | 168 | | Epstein Hillel Academy | 32 | | IS (unnamed) | 41 | | Essex Tech (vocational) | 35 |

Transfers out (last school year): 56 students moved out of state; 6 enrolled in homeschool

Approximately 81–83% of Marblehead resident students attend public schools, consistent with comparable districts. Administration noted declining enrollment is spread across grade levels and does not directly translate to equivalent staffing reductions. Neighboring towns with more affordable housing development (e.g., Swampscott added ~305 affordable units over four years) show different enrollment trends. The committee requested census data from the town clerk to supplement the analysis.

Student Services Director Lisa Marie (assisted by Assistant Director Victoria Ryan, watching remotely) presented an overview of the department’s scope, which includes special education, Section 504, McKinney-Vento (homeless students), foster care, and restraint/safety training.

Student counts (current year): | Category | 23–24 | 24–25 | 25–26 (current) | |—|—|—|—| | Students on IEPs | 505 | 439 | 469 | | Students on 504s | 226 | 249 | ~279 | | Out-of-district placements | 48 | 53 | 50 | | Foster care | 7 | 6 | 4 (fluctuating) | | McKinney-Vento (homeless) | 11 | 7 | 7 | | Restraint-trained staff | — | 53 | 61 |

Accountability (district-level, students with disabilities):

• Achievement: 0/12 points in 2024 → 7/12 in 2025
• Growth: 6/8 in 2024 → 5/8 in 2025 (slight decline in math)
• Chronic absenteeism: 0 points (area of concern)

Accountability (high school):

• Achievement: 1–5/12 in 2024 → 7/12 in 2025
• Growth: 2/8 in 2024 → 4/8 in 2025
• Graduation/dropout/extended engagement: 4/12 in 2024 → 8/12 in 2025
• Chronic absenteeism: 2/8 in 2024 → 0/8 in 2025 (area of concern)

The director announced the hiring of a new team chair for Glover School (starting soon) and a new 0.6 administrative assistant at Glover. Programs described include inclusion services, language-based programs (grades 2–12 at all schools), therapeutic programs (K–12), and ABA programs (pre-K through age 22). Deescalation training using a common-language framework was rolled out district-wide in November by the district’s three BCBAs.

The presentation covered 21 College Board–approved AP courses across English, world languages, history/social studies, math, science, and computer science. Key data points:

Marblehead High School received the AP Honor Roll gold award for equitable access to AP coursework. Committee members raised questions about whether selective colleges grant credit for AP scores and suggested surveying graduates, and whether AP enrollment drives school ranking metrics.

Three-Year Revenue vs. Expense Forecast — December 10, 2025

Revenue summary (FY27 preliminary) Total estimated revenue: approximately $109 million — roughly $700,000 less than FY26 — driven by:

• Property tax levy up ~$2.2 million (~3%)
• Local receipts down ~$1 million (primarily lower investment earnings as ARPA funds have been spent and interest rates have declined)
• Free cash projected to decline; preliminary estimate of ~$5.7 million available for all purposes in FY27 vs. $9.5 million certified last year (of which $7 million was used to balance the budget)

Key expense drivers | Line | Estimated change | |—|—| | Salaries & wages (all departments) | +~6% (contractual steps, market hiring) | | Health insurance | +10–17% estimated; GIC rates set in spring; private market seeing 23–26% increases | | Pension | +~3% (schedule-based; ~$500K increment) | | Trash collection | +~51% in FY27 (new 5-year contract; current favorable contract expires); then ~4%/yr | | Utilities | +~3% | | Out-of-district SPED tuition | Volatile; prepayments declining as budget tightens |

Projected deficits (preliminary)

• FY27: ~$7 million
• FY28: ~$11 million (cumulative)
• FY29: ~$15 million (cumulative)

The Finance Director noted that approximately 80% of all expenses are personnel-related (salaries, benefits, pension). The board discussed that a balanced budget without an override will be prepared showing service-delivery impacts, with a State of the Town address planned for January 28 as a key milestone. The board noted other communities that have recently passed overrides (Melrose $13.5M, Brookline $12M, Arlington $7M, Belmont $8.4M, Hingham ~$8M). Discussion emphasized that Prop 2½ remains a key accountability mechanism and that the process should be strictly analytical before any override is presented to voters.

Next steps: Department-by-department budget review in January; free cash certification expected January–March; state-of-the-town address January 28; contingent override scenarios to be developed alongside the balanced budget.

Following a deadlock in the policy subcommittee, the full committee received a first reading of proposed policy IIKF (Competency Determination), required under 603 CMR 30.03 after MCAS was eliminated as a graduation requirement.

The policy requires students to earn a passing grade in specified 9th- and 10th-grade courses in ELA, mathematics, and science to demonstrate competency. U.S. History will be added as a requirement starting in 2027. Students who do not pass required courses will be placed on a proficiency plan using portfolios or equivalent measures. An appeals process is included. The policy must be submitted to DESE.

The policy subcommittee had been deadlocked over whether the passing grade threshold — currently defined as the lowest passing letter grade (D, approximately 60–64 depending on the grading scale) — should be set higher, such as a 64 or 65. One member argued that the broader implications for credit-granting and student eligibility made such a change significant enough to warrant data analysis and administrator input before the committee acts. The superintendent and assistant superintendent noted that most comparable districts use a passing grade aligned to their standard credit-granting threshold.

A motion to define a passing grade as 64 for all subjects was made and seconded but ultimately amended: the committee voted 4-0 to approve the first reading and direct the superintendent and assistant superintendent to bring comparison data from similar districts to a January meeting agenda item. The committee also voted 4-0 to waive the third reading and place the policy on the December 18 agenda for a final vote.

Committee member Jen raised concerns about enrollment decline, noting the district went from approximately 2,754 students on June 7 to 2,511 as of the current week — a drop of over 200 students. The most recent weekly report showed a 25-student decline in a single week.

The administration presented October 1 DESI enrollment data from 2019 through 2025, comparing actual enrollment to grade-level averages. The data showed enrollment below average in every grade level in the most recently reported year. The average annual enrollment decline across all grades over the period was approximately 3.8% per year.

The superintendent noted the administration can pull data on where departing students go (homeschool, private school, moved out of district) and committed to providing a more detailed analysis at the next meeting. The committee discussed implications for Chapter 70 state aid, which is formula-driven based on enrollment, and for the FY27 budget process.

Assistant Superintendent Mike reported that the unencumbered budget balance fell by approximately $65,000 over the prior month, from $3.34 million to $3.27 million, indicating accurate salary encumbrances. A negative budget line of approximately $227,000 was explained as a placeholder for anticipated staff retirements and will be redistributed between salary lines without requiring school committee approval.

The budget subcommittee has met several times. The administration is conducting one-on-one meetings with all building principals to review staffing and resources. A tentative budget calendar has been developed; the committee agreed that budget documents will be released to the public simultaneously with their presentation to the school committee.

Pfifferling distributed the FY27 budget process calendar.

Key dates

School Committee must vote on the budget before Finance Committee recommendation to town meeting.

Principal meetings and staffing review timeline

Robidoux outlined that administration would meet with principals December 1-15 to review staffing needs and identify critical positions versus potential reductions in light of enrollment decline from 2,727 to 2,511 students (8% drop).

Robidoux expressed concern about publicly sharing detailed reduction lists in December for a May vote, due to staff morale. The committee clarified that they were seeking an overall sense of adjustments, not specific position details, in December.

FinCom liaison clarification

Finance Committee members clarified they function as a liaison team per town counsel, not an official subcommittee. No formal recommendations or minutes required from them. School Committee members are required to produce minutes. The November 17 meeting was a School Committee subcommittee meeting only, not a joint meeting.

Enrollment decline review

• Enrollment dropped from 2,776 (June) to 2,511 currently
• Superintendent Robidoux noted decline includes a larger exiting senior class than incoming class
• Committee questioned whether reporting mechanisms may have inflated or deflated previous numbers

Preschool tracking

Students enrolled for assessment purposes may not ultimately attend, inflating counts:

• Last year: 168 students
• This year: 78 students

Exit interviews

Committee member noted exit interviews / surveys were requested last year but not implemented. Repeating the request now: families leaving the district could give the committee actionable information on why.

Class-size data ties to general-education teachers, representing approximately 30% of total salary costs.

User fees and athletic budget accounting reviewed.

Current structure

• When user fees were raised, all coaching salaries moved from the local budget to a revolving fund
• Approximately 50% of athletics transportation costs funded from user fees; 50% from local budget
• User fees set at $500 per student with family cap; fees have not been adjusted while salaries increase 2-3.5% annually

New accounting structure

Pfifferling restructured user-fee accounting into separate revolving funds for improved transparency and oversight:

• High school athletics
• High school clubs / activities
• Middle school programs
• Elementary activities

Sustainability concern

Pfifferling cautioned that recurring salary expenses require recurring revenue, not fund balances. The current setup has all coaching salaries on a revolving fund that’s depending on the user-fee revenue stream — if fees don’t rise but salaries do, the revolving fund will run down.

Committee agreed fund balances should be used for one-time expenses only.

Asst Supt of Finance and Operations Michael Pfifferling presented a detailed spreadsheet organizing the FY26 approved budget by:

• Department
• Staffing category
• School building
• Role type

Groupings included administration, clerical, teachers (by grade level and specialty), instructional assistants, special-education services (licensed and support), guidance, nurses, transportation, maintenance, and technology.

Reflected only appropriated budget funds, not grant-funded positions.

Where the dollars sit

Instructional coaches under discussion

Four full-time district-level instructional coaches plus building-level teacher leader stipends, totaling approximately $732,000 district-wide. Coaches work on curriculum development, implementation, professional development, and classroom support.

Committee requested written roles-and-responsibilities descriptions for instructional coaches and administrative positions to communicate value to the public.

Guidance and adjustment counselors

Reviewed guidance and school adjustment counselor positions, noting confusion in categorization between general education and special education roles. Administration acknowledged the need to properly categorize staff based on licensure and actual service delivery for accurate state reporting.

Special education detail

~25% of total salary costs allocated to SPED, aligning with the district’s 20-23% SPED enrollment. Out-of-district tuition costs higher than desired; building internal programs is a multi-year goal per the Superintendent. Recent increases in initial-evaluation requests and move-ins with significant needs have impacted staffing demands.

Administration

School-level admin ~3% of total salary; district admin ~4%; clerical ~3.5%. Total ~10%. Superintendent Robidoux stated no areas for administrative reduction.

The budget subcommittee reported completing a second round of analysis of existing staffing broken down by building and category. The next step involves the superintendent and finance director meeting with building administrators. A joint finance subcommittee meeting is scheduled for December 1. The committee noted a calendar of budget milestones leading to town meeting was presented and may be shared more broadly with the community.

A board member noted the school committee was scheduled to vote on November 20 on a contract for replacement of the high school roof (a full replacement rather than a repair, per subcommittee deliberations). If approved, the Select Board would hold a brief special meeting around November 25 (Tuesday) to approve the contract, which is time-sensitive due to the need to order HVAC components that accompany the roof work.

A committee member reported on behalf of the facilities subcommittee that a survey is being distributed to parents/guardians of children ages 0–5 to gauge demand for early childhood education services, including what families would expect from a potential preschool program.

Key context:

• The conversation originated from questions about potential uses of the Eveleth School building.
• The committee agreed early on to conduct a low-cost needs assessment before commissioning a potentially expensive feasibility study.
• The survey deadline for results review is approximately December 2.
• If demand data is sufficient, the next step would be a full feasibility study. If not, the committee would assess whether to pursue any use of the building or return the property to the town.
• The committee emphasized the question is not ‘what do we do with this building’ but rather ‘do we have a need for this service, and if so, is this building appropriate.’

The assistant superintendent presented the end-of-October financial report, an update from the prior meeting’s September figures. Key highlights:

• Unexpended balance: approximately $3.34 million, up from $2.8 million at end of September.
• The apparent improvement reflects two offsetting moves: roughly $1 million in SPED out-of-district tuition costs were shifted to the circuit breaker revolving account (where they belonged), and approximately $500,000 in new encumbrances were added (electricity, teacher-leader stipends, 403b match for Unit A teachers, fuel, athletic trainer contract, school resource officer chargeback).
• The net result is approximately $500K better than last month on an unexpended-balance basis.
• Some budget lines appear abnormal because payroll data from the legacy SOFT system and Munis are not yet fully aligned; full reconciliation is expected once all payroll migrates to Munis in January.
• Items not yet encumbered include athletic facility/ice rink rentals (to be encumbered by season) and custodial overtime.
• Legal line was manually encumbered for the full remaining balance; actual spend will be split among multiple firms depending on matter type (labor, contractual, investigative).

Board members asked about negative line balances (attributed to mid-year staffing changes, lane changes, and system misalignment) and the central admin legal line appearing at 0% remaining (explained as a manual encumbrance).

A member noted that students with IEPs who do not meet graduation requirements remain district students until age 22 and must be served with vocational and life-skills programming. The district previously ran an in-house program at the high school, then at the YMCA (described as thriving), before it was outsourced during a building transition. The superintendent confirmed the program is currently outsourced and the location is not in Marblehead.

Members discussed that a separate building (like the E School) could be appropriate for this cohort — allowing community outings by van while maintaining some separation from the high-school environment. The district also previously attracted tuition-paying students from surrounding districts for this program, making it a potential revenue source. Approximately three or four current students would benefit from an in-district 18-to-22 program.

A school committee member described the genesis of the early-education feasibility study: the E School (formerly the Coffin School), now used mainly for town archives, is the last unrenovated building from the district’s 1998 master plan. The building has a condemned boiler, needs a new roof, windows, insulation, and HVAC, but sits on an attractive site.

Current pre-K model:

• Six integrated classrooms split evenly between Brown and Glover schools
• Each classroom: up to 8 typical students + up to 7 students with IEPs (state/federal law; 49%/51% ratio required)
• Tuition-paying “typical” students generate revenue; the 262 federal grant supports the integrated model
• Registration has moved from April/May to February/March, but still loses some typical students to private providers who register in December/January
• The district starts the year with a wait list for typical spaces

Options discussed for the E School:

1. Expanded public pre-K (integrated model, school-hours program)
2. Longer-day/extended-care model operated by a third party leasing the building
3. Co-location with Early Intervention (EI), which is run by independent private agencies (historically served by a Salem-based provider)
4. An 18-to-22 transition program for students with IEPs who age out of high school
5. Multi-purpose building combining any of the above with archives storage

Key regulatory constraints noted:

• Public schools cannot operate a non-integrated preschool
• The 49/51 IEP-to-typical ratio is both a federal grant requirement and a state regulation
• Children turning three qualify for public-school pre-K the day they turn three, creating rolling enrollment pressure

Cost discussion:

• Earlier conversations estimated a full feasibility study at ~$175,000 (from capital funds); a preliminary quote from one firm came back at ~$240,000, described as “far greater” than expected
• Members agreed a lighter internal survey should precede any formal feasibility study

Survey design agreed:

• Short (3–4 questions), broad distribution (EI through K families, private preschools in town, Board of Health outreach)
• Superintendent to draft and circulate; window of roughly two weeks targeting results by the Wednesday before Thanksgiving
• December 2 subcommittee meeting to review results and determine next steps
• Town meeting warrant-article deadline (~January) cited as a soft deadline for any building decision

The chair opened the meeting, confirmed live streaming and recording, opened public comment, received no public attendees, and proceeded directly to subcommittee agenda items.

The working session continued with refinement of all three superintendent goal areas:

Student achievement goal: Members asked that the summary be sharpened to specify which assessments will be used (MCAS, iReady, Dibels, etc.), at what frequency data will be reported to the school committee, and how the district compares to peer districts. The committee expressed particular interest in high school metrics — AP course enrollment and scores, SAT/ACT scores, and where graduating seniors go after high school. One member noted that approximately 97–98% of MHS graduates go to college, making it effectively a college preparatory school. Chronic absenteeism was raised as a driver of outcomes; a member suggested it be captured within the student achievement goal framework rather than as a standalone superintendent goal, since the committee sets policy and the administration is responsible for implementation.

A member noted the district has a data platform (referenced as ‘AREAd’ or similar) that may allow tracking of how graduates are performing in college, and suggested that data be incorporated into future reporting.

District improvement / instructional leadership goal: The committee agreed the goal should be reframed from a description of learning walk tactics to a strategic goal about developing building principals as strong instructional leaders. Specific focus indicators from the state rubric were identified — including 1A (rigorous standards-based instruction), 4E (shared vision), and a continuous learning standard about staff reflection on practice. A member noted that curriculum directors were eliminated in the mid-2000s for cost reasons, and the current ‘lead teacher’ model, while valuable for coaching, does not carry supervisory authority — making the principal’s instructional leadership role all the more important.

Discussion also addressed how to measure this goal without inappropriately evaluating principals through the superintendent’s own evaluation. Staff surveys were discussed as one mechanism, though members acknowledged collective bargaining and trust issues with anonymous surveys. 360-degree feedback and structured conversations were mentioned as alternatives.

Professional practice goal: The session turned to the third goal (professional practice / storytelling and communication) at approximately 1:11 a.m. A member expressed some dissatisfaction with the current draft language and asked that it be made more concrete. Discussion touched on the challenge of holding comfortable evaluative conversations, particularly when principals and evaluators develop personal relationships. A member with a corporate background noted that performance management training — including how to give structured feedback — is standard in the private sector but less emphasized in public education, and suggested this could be an area for professional development for building leaders.

Asst Supt Julia Ferreira presented district MCAS data with principals providing school-specific analysis – the longest agenda item of the night at roughly 1h19m.

District summary

• District performed above state averages in core subjects with moderate growth
• ELA district SGP of 51 – moderate growth range
• Math similar moderate growth above state benchmarks
• Science: 57% meeting/exceeding vs 43% state average
• MCAS no longer required for graduation; top 2% eligible for state scholarships

Special populations (Student Opportunities Act plan)

• 36 English learners – varied growth by grade, strong in grades 6 and 10
• Special education students – high growth in ELA grades 5 and 8, low growth in grades 4 and 10; math results uneven across grades, with transition-year challenges

School-specific results

• High school: 10th-grade performance declined due to reduced testing time and attendance issues after the graduation requirement was removed; remained above state averages and ranked top third for math, top 20% for science
• Veterans Middle School: exceeded state averages in all subjects; ELA top 14% statewide for 8th grade; math top 16% (7th) and top 18% (8th)
• Village: 5th grade top 20% statewide
• Glover: 3rd grade top 13% with 17% growth since 2022
• Brown: strong performance with kindergarten attendance impact noted

The mid-year correction

Out-of-district special-education expenditures had shown $700,000 over budget because all tuition had been charged to the local budget instead of being split appropriately with circuit-breaker accounts.

The issue was rectified during the meeting week: $1.7 million in expenses moved from local budget to circuit breaker. The adjustment restores approximately $1 million to special education, offsetting the previous year’s prepaid tuition.

Financial position

Legal expenses flagged

Central administration legal services have already spent $32,000 in July-August against a $117,000 annual budget. Monthly monitoring continues; no spending freeze anticipated, unlike the previous year.

Payroll-system note

Payroll is running through SoftRight while general-ledger expenses process through Munis. Plans to consolidate into Munis for automatic salary encumbering. Several salary categories remain unencumbered: lead-teacher stipends, custodial overtime, unemployment costs, contractual lane changes, athletic salaries, 403 match. Manual purchase orders are creating encumbrances September-June.

Buried in the Subcommittee Updates section, the Budget Subcommittee’s report to the full committee:

“Budget subcommittee met twice with finance committee liaison; all departments directed to prepare level service budgets; timeline includes December preliminary information, January-February work, February voting, March finance committee review, town meeting approval.”

Why this matters

Two weeks earlier on October 17, 2025, the same Budget Subcommittee had requested a zero-based budgeting approach examining staffing needs by building against enrollment projections. The Superintendent had committed to school-by-school staffing breakdowns and a methodology development meeting on October 28 before budget packets distributed to principals on November 3.

The October 28 methodology meeting does not appear in the meeting catalog. The next School Committee meeting (this one, Oct 30) directs the budget process the opposite way: level-service, which carries forward last year’s staffing and just adds contractual increases.

The Oct 30 minutes (this transcript) contain no mention of zero-based budgeting, no school-by-school staffing breakdowns, and no methodology development.

The historical pattern

This is now the fourth time zero-based budgeting has been raised at School Committee without a formal exercise materializing: 2020-06-08, 2022-07-19 (Cresta’s full methodology presentation), 2023-07-06, 2025-10-17. Each time the conversation ended in committee.

The full FY27 timeline announced at this meeting:

• December 2025: preliminary information
• January-February 2026: budget work
• February 2026: committee voting on individual lines
• March 2026: Finance Committee review
• May 2026: Town Meeting approval

A community member’s email raised concerns about the district’s practice of not returning midterm and final exams to students. Members noted the high school stopped midterm exams during COVID and has not resumed them, and that some teachers reuse tests — leading to potential academic-integrity issues. Members discussed whether existing handbook language should be formalized into a policy under IK (academic achievement) and agreed to raise the topic with the superintendent and assistant superintendent at the upcoming additional meeting.

The subcommittee discussed the competency determination policy (IKF), noting that the superintendent and assistant superintendent have not yet prepared a draft because districts are still debating approaches. Members agreed the December 31st deadline is not legally enforceable — ‘there is no policy jail’ — and said the policy is likely to take effect for incoming freshmen rather than current students.

Members also noted press reports that DESE may reinstate a state exam requirement. They agreed to schedule an additional meeting with the superintendent and assistant superintendent before the November 20th subcommittee meeting to get a clearer picture of where administrators stand and what the available policy options are.

The subcommittee voted 2-0 to revise policy JB (entrance age for kindergarten) to tie eligibility to September 1st rather than the first day of school, consistent with the MASC model policy. The superintendent supported the change, noting that a floating first-day-of-school standard creates an unpredictable target for families whose children have birthdays near that period. The policy will go to the full school committee for a single reading.

Finance Director Alicia presented the FY27 revenue forecast, noting that property taxes — approximately 80% of the town’s revenue — grow by roughly $2.2M per year under the Proposition 2½ cap. State aid is projected to increase by only 1%, and local receipts are projected at approximately $8.1M, down from $10M actual in FY25, driven by declining motor vehicle excise taxes, lower investment earnings (dropping from a peak of roughly $2M+ to approximately $800,000 as interest rates fall from 5% to 3.75% and ARPA balances are spent down), and other factors.

Key cost pressures identified:

• Health insurance: projected 14% increase for FY27, approximately $1.5–$1.6M more than FY26; GLP-1 drugs, aging population, and hospital utilization cited as drivers
• Trash contract: estimated $800,000–$1M increase when new contract is bid
• Pension: approximately $900K annual increase
• Personnel: 80% of budget; union contracts settled at ~3%
• ARPA funds: fully spent by end of 2026, eliminating a one-time revenue buffer

Fin Comm Chair Alec (online) noted that free cash certified last year at approximately $9.5M, with $1M going to capital, $500K to reserves, and $1M unappropriated; FY27 free cash is estimated at $4–$6M with $5M projected for the operating budget. Board members expressed concern about continued reliance on free cash to balance the budget and the need to adhere to financial policies around reserves. The stabilization fund currently holds approximately $1.5M. The Town Administrator noted that the next step is a general override, the town’s first since 2005.

Budget calendar and forecasting requirements.

• Preliminary budget calendar reviewed (additional dates expected)
• Assistant Superintendent to provide three-year contract impact estimates for the wages budget
• Level-service budgets for FY26, FY27, and FY28 already completed based on existing contracts
• Town-wide three-year forecasting still needed to illustrate funding challenges across all departments

Key dates confirmed

Adjourned at 3:08 PM.

Capital project preparation and early-education feasibility study planning.

Capital list (preliminary)

• High school security upgrades
• Auditorium improvements
• Gymnasium refinishing
• Kitchen-classroom renovation
• Playground safety improvements
• Wireless access point renewals (proposed as a three-year rolling lease to avoid annual capital requests)
• Bus replacements from 2013 and 2015

The Asst Supt emphasized presenting all needs to town regardless of affordability to keep items on the radar, even when they won’t make the current cycle.

Early-education feasibility study (FY26 budgeted)

Exploring expansion of preschool programming beyond the current IEP-focused model. Evelyn School is being considered as a potential location.

Current preschool: integrated classroom serving ~70 students total at 14-15 per classroom (typically 8 tuition-paying students plus up to 7 special-education students). Local private preschools have waiting lists, suggesting market demand for expanded public programming.

Additional programming under discussion:

• 18-22 year old special-education program (currently outsourced)
• Early intervention services for birth to age 3 through federal Medicaid funding

Funding options noted

Existing budget capacity, town free-cash allocation, debt-exclusion overrides, and “potential school-specific override requests with historical precedent for bundling school items with town-wide debt exclusion articles.”

The school department reported a $2.8M unexpended balance in FY26 budget so far, with $900K-$1M prepaid for special-education tuitions, leaving $1.8M uncommitted. Salaries are encumbered until the Munis payroll system is operational January 1. Detailed budget update scheduled for the October 30 meeting.

Out-of-district special-education detail

Total OOD special-education cost in FY26: $6.362M

Tuition range per student: $70,000 for collaborative programs to $300,000 for residential placements.

Circuit breaker mechanics

Circuit breaker provides 75% state reimbursement for costs exceeding the $56,000 per-student threshold, but funding depends on statewide claims versus legislative appropriations.

Extraordinary relief provides additional funding when costs exceed 125% of budget. The 2019 budget crisis with a $900,000 shortfall was cited as justification for maintaining reserves.

Free cash certification status and revolving-fund reconciliation update.

• Free cash certification in process as of October; expected completion January-February 2026 (the previous year was delayed until May)
• FY25 revolving funds reconciled, with balance-forwards loaded into Munis
• Balance boards for revolving accounts issued the previous week

What’s new

Finance Committee review has been expanded over the past three years to include revolving accounts alongside general fund budgets, for a complete property-tax-impact picture. At this meeting the Assistant Superintendent demonstrated revolving-fund offsets within the general-fund budget – for instance, kindergarten tuition revenue offset against teacher and assistant salaries.

The committee was told this was the first time any town department has shown transparent offsetting in budget presentations.

Committee requested a comprehensive list of all revolving funds and their purposes for FY27 budget workshops, to enable informed public responses and prevent town-meeting misinformation.

School department returning $466,000 to the town from FY25 budget closeout, all to free cash.

The amount was higher than estimated because of late transfers using ARPA funding for items purchased before December 2024, to ensure ARPA dollars were spent before expiration.

Closeout drivers:

• Surpluses – prepaid tuitions, salary savings from an unpaid day during negotiations
• Overages – out-of-district special-education costs not properly budgeted

Reporting accuracy

Committee requested detailed budget-to-actual reporting with line-item breakdowns for future reference. The Assistant Superintendent walked through the salary categories: professional (licensed staff), clerical, and other (non-licensed); plus contracted services, supplies, and miscellaneous.

Acknowledged challenge: budget reporting accuracy is constrained by software transitions and historical coding issues. Some staff were incorrectly coded as professional salaries in past years; the Munis software transition is expected to resolve categorization. Asst Supt Pfifferling committed to cleaner reporting and to sending the complete FY25 closeout report to all committee members.

Committee requested a zero-based budgeting approach examining staffing needs by building based on enrollment projections.

The framing:

• Enrollment declined 800 students over eight years, “requiring staffing justification”
• Level funding with contractual increases would require $1.7M in cuts
• That’s potentially 30 professional staff positions, roughly 10% of staff
• The Superintendent noted that the current process “already considers contractual obligations and service requirements”

Staffing data requested

Categories the committee asked to see, school by school:

• General-education teachers
• Special-education teachers
• Instructional assistants
• Lunch monitors
• Operational support
• Specialized positions (OT, PT, speech-language, psychology)

Analysis to examine contracted hours by building rather than per-student assignments. Special-education director to provide staffing-level recommendations alongside state guidelines for comparison. Data to be presented in Excel format with detailed breakdowns by school.

Next steps committed to

• Oct 28, 2025 (2:30 PM) – methodology development meeting before budget packets distribute to principals
• Nov 3, 2025 – budget packets distribute to principals
• Superintendent committed to providing school-by-school staffing breakdowns with justifications
• “Data needed to defend budget requests at town meetings and address public concerns about staffing levels relative to enrollment.”

What actually happened next

The October 28 methodology meeting does not appear in the meeting catalog of 331 minute-level entries (FY19-present). The next School Committee meeting on 2025-10-30 instead saw the Budget Subcommittee direct all departments to prepare level-service budgets – the procedural opposite of zero-based.

This is the fourth time zero-based budgeting has been raised at School Committee without a formal exercise materializing (2020-06-08, 2022-07-19, 2023-07-06, 2025-10-17).

The chair reported consulting with MASC’s Alicia Min, who reviewed the draft committee goals and found them strong, noting she would ‘steal’ the practice of indicating which member owns each goal. She shared examples from two other districts. A committee member raised a concern that no draft goal explicitly addresses student achievement, suggesting that at least some goals should fall clearly within the committee’s core responsibilities (budget, policy, superintendent evaluation). The committee agreed to convene a workshop — potentially at the same session planned for the superintendent evaluation compilation — to refine goals. No goals were adopted at this meeting.

CFO Mike presented the FY25 fiscal close. Key figures:

The school department will return approximately $240,820 to the town from the LEA budget. An additional $213,122 in ARPA reclassifications was processed the same day, bringing the total returned to approximately $454,000.

The CFO also covered summer facility improvements across all buildings: Glover HVAC finalization (with $50,000 PTO donation for new playground equipment), Brown School bottle-filling station, Vets gym wall padding and pack seat reupholstery, high school fire-door progress and new entrance doors, and purchase of a Ford Transit E-350 electric van for special-education transportation.

A transition to the Munis financial system is underway; full payroll and HR modules move to Munis on January 1, 2026. The CFO cautioned that budget reporting may be less detailed until January–February due to the transition. Committee members requested monthly budget reports and noted the legal obligation to vote budget transfers during the year.

A detailed enrollment presentation showed total K–12 enrollment of 2,513 students: Marblehead High 808, Vets 351, Village 484, Brown 445, Glover 318, plus 107 in other programs (31 homeschooled, 46 out-of-district, 30 private placement). Historical data showed enrollment peaked near 3,300 around 2017 and stood at 2,963 in 2019–20, a decline of roughly 450 students over five years.

Key grade-transition drops: grade 3→4 (−15), grade 6→7 (−9), grade 8→9 (−15). Committee members noted an approximately 8% year-over-year decline and asked for more granular data by grade. The superintendent and CFO committed to a deeper analysis for the first October meeting, including tracking where departing students go (private school, homeschool, out-of-town moves).

NSEQ projections anticipate a modest enrollment rebound: +2.1% in 2026–27 and +0.6% in 2027–28, trending toward roughly 2,700 students within 10 years. Committee members discussed the importance of not overcorrecting staffing decisions given the projected recovery.

The Select Board and School Committee jointly interviewed four candidates to fill the seat vacated by a departing member. Each candidate was asked identical questions covering budget challenges, outside funding reliance, carrying out voter intent from the June election, managing difficult team members, budget-cut guiding principles, fact-based financial reporting (variance analysis, DESI dashboard), committee dynamics, and what excited them most about the role.

Melissa Lucas — CFO with 18 years of finance/accounting experience; parent of three children newly enrolled in Marblehead schools. Priorities: financial transparency, long-term planning, restoring community trust, and improving student outcomes. Noted 6% enrollment decline and called for zero-based budgeting. Said she would need to do detailed analysis before committing to an override position.

Sarah Fox — Five-year veteran of the School Committee budget subcommittee, described as having deep institutional budget knowledge. Flagged an approximately $3 million projected deficit for the coming year tied to collective bargaining outcomes and a 6.5% enrollment decline (the largest single-year drop she had seen). Advocated strongly for zero-based budgeting and encumbrance tracking; noted revolving funds were used last year to bridge the gap.

Yale Weissman — Municipal attorney with prior school committee advisory experience. Focused on anti-discrimination/antisemitism policy, student accountability, and community discourse. Less detailed on budget specifics; emphasized fact-based decision-making and open communication.

Mark Schwartz — 15+ years of classroom teaching; most recent role in marketing/project management at a tech firm. Emphasized mental health and student wellbeing, transparency through simplified public communications (e.g., a plain-language blog), and building community trust post-strike. Acknowledged limited direct Marblehead budget involvement but cited Swampscott budget process experience.

One member (Jim Sison) recused himself, leaving eight voting members. On the roll-call vote, six members named Melissa Lucas, one named Sarah Fox, and one named Mark Schwartz. A motion to appoint Lucas carried unanimously on the formal vote. She was directed to be sworn in the following day.

Assistant Superintendent Julia Ferrer presented the work of the AI steering committee, which was formed in fall 2024 and includes teachers from the high school, middle school, and Village School, along with administrators.

Key points:

• The committee’s guiding vision: “revitalize a culture of students having intrinsic value of education” and producing their own work.
• The district does not have a separate AI policy or AI rules; AI misuse is addressed under the existing academic integrity framework, which was updated and approved in school handbooks.
• Academic integrity expectations were added to the elementary handbook for the first time.
• Violations at the middle and high school carry forward year-to-year.
• Core student expectation: “The work presented is my own unless otherwise indicated.”
• Teachers are encouraged to clearly set AI parameters per assignment (no AI / AI for ideation / AI permitted with citation).
• Citation tool: Noodle Tools, already in use.
• A communication to families is forthcoming.
• An all-staff professional development session was delivered August 25; teachers led fellow teachers.
• The steering committee will continue in 2025-26, and school-level support groups are planned.
• Detection tools: the district is exploring options; currently using Turnitin; a webinar was held with a company focused on student writing feedback that also flags atypical writing patterns.

The assistant superintendent explained the MASC policy framework: parents consent broadly by signing the handbook, but for eight specific sensitive subject areas (as defined by statute), the district must provide advance notice and an opportunity to opt out before any survey is administered. The district’s attorney had reviewed the policy and confirmed that handbook signing does not constitute blanket consent for the eight protected areas; separate notification and opt-out opportunity are required.

One committee member said there is an inherent contradiction between requiring “prior written consent” (as stated in the policy) and then allowing only an opt-out, and that the policy conflicts with how the handbook is being applied (students graded for handbook signature). That member voted no.

Vote: 3-1 (one opposed).

The assistant superintendent and Julia (instructional coaching lead) presented proposed handbook language updates aligning with MASC’s current policy IL (last approved 2018, minor 2023 update) under the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment. The update would have families provide written consent by signing the handbook at the start of the year, while retaining an opt-out right when specific surveys in eight sensitive categories are scheduled, with advance email notification.

One member (Jen) dissented strongly, raising concerns that:

• The committee had not yet approved the underlying policy IL
• Blanket consent via handbook signing was legally questionable and potentially contrary to the spirit of opt-in requirements in the pending updated policy
• She had never received survey notification as a high school parent
• She requested legal counsel review

Administration clarified the update references current approved policy (not the pending revised version), and that operational notification and opt-out processes would continue unchanged. The motion passed 3 in favor, 1 abstention (Jen).

The superintendent reported on the anti-discrimination committee created last year. The committee currently includes three community members, three administrators, and three teachers, with high school students consulted separately.

The superintendent acknowledged that surveys sent to parents, teachers, and students near the end of the school year did not get adequate response, and committed to resending them in the fall with better framing. The overarching goal is to understand the frequency and nature of discrimination in the district and develop proactive solutions.

The committee then screened a recorded interview with Dr. Mary Ghart, described as director of trauma training and services at Parents for Peace and a lecturer in psychology at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Ghart’s work focuses on resilience, healing, and recovery in the context of extremism and identity-based violence. The superintendent indicated he would follow up with Dr. Ghart about potentially bringing her into the district in some capacity, following discussion with the anti-discrimination committee about appropriate format and audience.

A committee member read a joint statement co-signed by MEA leadership, the superintendent, and the assistant superintendent of teaching and learning.

The statement affirmed that all curricular materials in Marblehead Public Schools go through a district review and approval process independent of external organizations, and that curriculum decisions are not driven by positions taken by national organizations such as the NEA. The statement noted the NEA board of directors had voted not to adopt a proposal brought forward at its annual assembly regarding the ADL, and that NEA leadership subsequently reaffirmed its commitment to combating antisemitism and all forms of discrimination.

The proposed recess policy reads: The school committee recognizes the importance of physical movement as part of students’ educational experience. Students in kindergarten through third grade may have up to two scheduled recess periods and students in grade four through six may have one scheduled recess period, providing daily opportunities for physical activity, cooperative play, and positive social interactions. All recess periods will be supervised by school staff to promote a safe and inclusive environment.

The superintendent noted the policy is ‘may have up to’ language, meaning it is enforceable as written. However, operationalizing a morning recess at the elementary level requires a 5-minute earlier student arrival (without changing staff arrival), which is currently under discussion as a bargaining matter with the union (MEA). A prior survey of educators overwhelmingly supported the change. The committee voted 5-0 to approve.

The district’s finance director noted FY26 is now open while FY25 is still being closed out. The conversion from Softright to Munis financial software (with payroll moving to Munis January 1) has made the office busy. Key FY25 highlights: prepaid tuitions of slightly over $1 million (vs. ~$900,000 in FY24), purchase of 17 AEDs, and use of available FY25 funds to cover the approximately $30,000 shortfall on pack seating and approximately $140,000 shortfall on pack painting that had been cut from capital requests prior to town meeting. New speakers for the high school cafeteria, auditorium, and the pack have also been ordered with FY25 funds. A formal close-out report will be presented at a future meeting.

A board member described reviving an earlier proposal to seek a debt-exclusion override to fund expanded mental health services for Marblehead youth. The proposal centers on asking the Marblehead Counseling Center to present data on its waiting list for residents 21 and under, along with estimated costs and a multi-year timeline.

The board also discussed the current budget trajectory: initial discussions with the Finance Committee about increasing the counseling center’s funding from approximately $60,000 to $120,000 were progressing until late-stage town budget cuts intervened. The board agreed to continue pushing for the $120,000 line item while simultaneously developing the override article.

Chair Massaro noted he had been drafting a paper citing McKinsey research estimating that global investment in adolescent mental health could generate $5 trillion in global GDP, and a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper quantifying similar benefits for the U.S. at approximately $168 billion. He proposed submitting such materials to the Finance Committee.

Town meeting warrant articles are due approximately the third week in January, giving the board several months to prepare.

Assistant Superintendent Julia Ferrera, instructional coaches Angie Graziano and Emily Perez, and a district-wide teacher committee presented the results of a comprehensive science curriculum review — the first in many years — conducted across the 2024-25 school year.

Recommended Adoptions by Level

Total estimated cost: ~$200,000, already approved in the FY26 budget.

Key discussion points:

• K-4 rollout will be phased, with FOSS used as a bridge while teachers receive professional development
• Grades 5-8 will have an aligned, standards-based scope and sequence for the first time
• High school digital access allows students to review lab videos and text at home
• Committee member Fox raised a concern about lab block scheduling; Ferrera committed to collecting data from science educators on lab frequency and reporting back
• Finance director confirmed the $200,000 is within the approved budget envelope

The committee voted 5-0 to approve.

Gina Hart, clinical social worker at the high school, presented results of the annual MGH-administered substance use and mental health survey (84.5% response rate, administered October 9).

Mental Health Trends (positive direction)

• Anxiety: declining trend over three years
• Depression: 13% this year (down from prior years)
• Psychotic experiences (seeing/hearing things not there): 8% — comparable to state data; committee noted this is roughly 1-in-10 students
• Suicide attempts: decreased from 3% to 1%; approximately 10% reported having made a plan

Substance Use

• Lifetime alcohol, nicotine, and cannabis use comparable to state
• Regular alcohol use (1-3 days/past 30 days): approximately 4x higher than comparison schools
• 7% of students reported first alcohol use at age 12 or younger (elementary school age)
• Age of first use before 15 significantly elevates addiction risk (nearly 7x higher per CDC data)
• Prescription drug misuse increased approximately 1% year over year

Social Media

• Snapchat and Instagram are top platforms; students average 4-6 hours of screen time daily
• Project Reboot social media programming delivered to grades 7-12 this year

Committee Chair Schaffner emphasized parental responsibility especially during graduation season given the elevated alcohol figures. Hart and Assistant Superintendent Ferrera noted the district adopted its first K-12 SEL curriculum this year and are expanding tiered mental health interventions.

Mike Ling reported that through 11 months (May 31), the district had expended $36.8 million with an additional $8 million encumbered — approximately 96% of budget committed. The unexpended balance of $1.87 million was $580,000 less than at end of April.

Discussion centered on three capital items removed from the budget during the year when the town identified a $2 million projection shortfall:

The superintendent and finance director indicated they would explore prepaying special education tuitions and other district needs before year-end close. The finance director also noted MLD (Marblehead Light Department) agreed to provide lift equipment at no cost for installing a new scoreboard, saving funds.

The Finance Committee presented the $119,479,480 balanced FY26 operating budget, a 6% increase in available revenues over FY25. Key revenue drivers included a ~3% levy increase (2.5% Prop 2½ plus ~0.5% new growth), a 25% increase in local receipts driven by interest income and the new hotels-and-meals tax (~$575,000 year-to-date through March), and $1.5M more in free cash utilization. Personnel costs (salaries, health insurance, pension) represent 75–80% of the budget. Key expense pressures: salaries/wages +4–4.5%, health insurance +8–10%, pension +8–9%, utilities +4–5%, and trash costs projected to spike 35–40% upon contract expiration after FY26.

Budget silos approved:

Holds were taken on Town Counsel (to explain the $2,000 salary vs. $113,000 legal services contract distinction) and the Community Development and Planning Department (a resident questioned five new hires under fiscal constraints). The town administrator explained the department was funded by reallocating salary lines from retired or reorganized positions including the retired town engineer and the prior single town planner position.

Mark Troub, chair of the Essex Tech 20-member school committee, reported the school serves 1,836 students across 27 programs on a 165-acre Danvers campus. For the fifth consecutive year, Marblehead will be assessed at the state minimum contribution. The district has secured over $10 million in competitive grants this year. Thirty-two Marblehead students are enrolled. Article 17 passed 428–12.

Assistant Superintendent Julia Ferrera presented the results of a curriculum review process launched after a DESE tiered focus monitoring finding that the district did not consistently support an ESL curriculum for all English proficiency levels in the high school.

The selected curriculum, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt’s English 3D, will be implemented for grades 7–12 starting the 2025–26 school year. Key details:

• 117 English Learner students are currently enrolled district-wide.
• Teachers at the middle and high school levels were involved in the review and piloted lessons.
• The vendor quote includes professional development and both online and hard-copy materials.
• K–6 EL instruction is aligned to the Wit & Wisdom curriculum already in place; English 3D fills the gap for grades 7–12.
• The program is differentiated to support students from newcomer level through exit proficiency.
• Title III federal funding supports the EL coordinator stipend, professional development, and the English Learners Parent Advisory Council (ELPAC); the committee noted awareness that Title III funding could be at risk.

The committee voted 4–0 to approve the curriculum.

The Finance Committee unanimously recommended the FY26 operating budget of $119,479,480, of which $106,206,380 is raised from taxation and other available funds, and $13,273,100 from enterprise funds.

Budget structure (excluding debt service):

• Base budget (prior year excluding debt service): ~$92.5M
• Total increase in available revenues: ~$5.7M
• Total operating budget before levy-funded warrant articles: ~$96.9M
  • ~51% schools
  • ~25% town-side operating departments
  • ~23% general government (health insurance, retirement, insurance)

Key cost pressure highlights from the FinCom chair’s analysis:

The chair noted the tax levy can only grow at ~2.5% plus new growth (~0.5–1%), totaling ~3–3.5%, while major cost drivers are growing faster. He warned the budget may be significantly harder to balance in FY27 and beyond. The town has balanced without an operating override for approximately 18–19 consecutive years.

A public commenter asked the FinCom to allocate shared overhead costs (health insurance, retirement) proportionally to the school vs. town sides in future presentations, suggesting schools may represent closer to 65% of total cost when indirect costs are included.

The Finance Committee approved $627,323 for the town’s share of the Essex North Shore Agricultural and Technical School District operating budget. The increase reflects both higher per-pupil costs and an uptick in Marblehead student enrollment after several years of decline. A FinCom member suggested establishing a liaison relationship with the district, noting the school’s director is a Marblehead resident; the chair agreed to add it to a future agenda.

Assistant Superintendent of Student Services Lisa Marie Polito and Assistant Director Victoria Ryan presented an overview of the Academic Discovery special education program review, commissioned by the school committee.

Key demographics:

• 28.5% of MPS students K–12 have disabilities, above the state average of 20.2%.
• Students with disabilities perform above the state average on MCAS but below general education peers in Marblehead.
• Suspension rates and dropout rates are higher for students with disabilities than the general population.

Six focus areas reviewed: Program organization and management; student identification and placement; program service delivery; instructional practice; staff support and development; compliance.

Highlights:

• The district exited corrective action ahead of schedule after compliance work by the new team.
• A master tracker, special education procedural manual, and Goal Book IEP software (grant-funded) were implemented this year.
• Language-based and therapeutic programs are under review with Landmark Outreach; entrance/exit criteria and family open houses are planned.
• Restraints dropped dramatically: 72 in the year before last, 49 last year, and only 5 so far this school year (four stand holds, one floor restraint).
• 85% of staff report feeling supported by special education administrators, compared to a near-total no-confidence vote approximately one year ago.
• 59% of parents and 78% of staff perceive special education services as moderately to extremely effective.

Areas still needing work: Co-teaching models, MTSS consistency, transition planning (age 14+), reporting accuracy to the state, and staffing in specialized therapeutic roles.

The committee voted 4-0 to approve the FY26 Marblehead School District operating budget at $49,120,285.

Chair Fox noted that through the fall and early winter the district had anticipated difficulty meeting its budget given town revenue projections, but in early-to-mid January those projections revised upward significantly — a development first announced publicly at the State of the Town and of which even FinCom was unaware until shortly before that event. The superintendent and administration characterized the resulting budget as a level-services budget.

Next steps in the budget calendar: | Date | Event | |—|—| | March 31 | FinCom votes the school budget | | Early April | Warrant hearing; FinCom recommendation issued | | First Monday (and likely Tuesday) of May | Town Meeting |

The schedule of bills totaling $973,745.11 was also approved 4-0 on a separate consent vote.

The kindergarten revolving account is funded by tuition charged to families for full-day programming. Half of every kindergarten teacher’s and instructional assistant’s salary is paid from this revolving account.

Key claim: The superintendent stated Marblehead is one of approximately five districts out of 351 statewide that still charge for public kindergarten.

Cost to go free: Estimated incremental annual cost of $600,000–$700,000 (assuming enrollment does not require additional sections).

Proposed path: Rather than an abrupt change, the superintendent proposed:

1. Reducing fees incrementally year over year
2. Requesting the town (general fund) cover $100,000 more one year, $200,000 the next, etc.
3. Embedding the transition in the next 3–5 year strategic plan

The Finance Committee liaison expressed support if a funding mechanism can be identified, but noted there is “no realm of reality” where $600–700K is found within the existing budget without an override or other revenue mechanism. The committee asked that any plan be communicated transparently over multiple budget cycles. The last override that included free kindergarten did not pass.

Special education (tuition-in / circuit-breaker adjacent): The account balance was described as significantly above what is needed. The CFO is embedding $100,000 of special-education provider salary costs into next year’s budget as an offset, reducing the general-fund ask. The committee noted that a 2018 state circuit-breaker shortfall caused a fiscal crisis and argued for maintaining that circuit-breaker account at 100% as the primary reserve, with the separate tuition-in account drawn down toward ~$100,000 over time.

Foreign-exchange (Educa) account: Revenue showed as nearly zero year-to-date; the district enrolled roughly 12 students. The CFO noted revenue is likely still pending and will investigate.

Guidance account: Small balance driven by transcript fees; managed tightly by the guidance office administrator.

Building rental: FY24 revenues were ~$107,000; FY25 year-to-date only ~$26,000, partly because a YMCA payment of ~$21,000 arrived the morning of the meeting. Target floor: ~$100,000. Potential use: gymnasium AV equipment upgrades and, possibly, contributing to the Performing Arts Center (PACK) renovation (painting, reupholstering seats) as a visible demonstration of self-funding ahead of any override request.

The athletics user-fee revolving account is projected to end FY25 near the FY24 closing balance of approximately $214,000—about one season’s worth of buffer—which the CFO described as the target floor.

Revenue concerns: Revenue did not even double despite the large fee increase, prompting questions about whether all families are actually paying. Spring-season fees had not yet fully posted at the time of the meeting.

What remains in the local budget (~$426,000 after removing administrator salaries):

The CFO stated there is no recommendation to raise user fees again this year; the goal is to right-size the account before any further changes.

Scoreboard discussion: A committee member raised a two-year-old request to replace the Village School field scoreboard (last estimated at ~$112,000). The CFO confirmed that if high-school athletics programs use the field, the expense would be an acceptable use of the revolving fund, but advised waiting until the year-end balance is confirmed before committing.

The district’s food-service CFO (referred to as Mike) presented a side-by-side FY24 close-out and FY25 year-to-date revolving account report. Key figures:

• FY24 school-lunch revenues: ~$961,000; FY25 year-to-date: $1.24 million
• FY24 expenditures: ~$1.14 million; FY25 year-to-date: ~$925,000

The account is state-regulated; the statutory reserve floor is three months of operating cost. The district currently holds more than that, as do roughly 90% of Massachusetts districts, because universal free lunch (state-reimbursed) has swelled revenues while eliminating the bad-debt problem that previously required $8,000–$12,000 annual general-fund transfers.

The food-service director was encouraged by the School Committee to begin transitioning toward more scratch-cooked meals given the stronger balance. Capital expenditures from the account (e.g., kitchen equipment at Village and Veterans schools, roughly $100,000 each) require DESE approval.

In response to the earlier public comment, the committee addressed uncertainty around approximately $976,000 in federal grants. The superintendent stated a position of maintaining status quo until DESE issues guidance or there is a legal notification requiring otherwise. The finance director clarified that only about 15% of those funds can be carried into a future fiscal year, meaning proactive belt-tightening would provide little benefit. The committee noted it is working with legal counsel and following DESE’s lead, consistent with all 300-plus Massachusetts school districts facing the same uncertainty.

Committee members noted that several special education salary lines were running 25–40% over budget. This was attributed to two causes: (1) a contractual reclassification of paraprofessionals to tutor-level wages, resulting in an immediate 30–40% pay increase; and (2) out-of-district placements committed in the prior year that were not fully reflected in the current budget (~$2.4 million budgeted with a circuit-breaker offset). The district has applied for extraordinary circuit breaker relief, which if granted would accelerate reimbursement rather than the standard one-year-in-arrears schedule.

Finance Director Mike presented the end-of-February budget update:

Utilities were described as tracking well: gas expended $208,000 against a $262,000 balance; electricity expended $528,000 against a $628,000 balance. The director projected the district should be able to prepay approximately $900,000 in out-of-district tuitions, subject to finance subcommittee approval in April or May.

The Munis financial software conversion remains on track with a July 1 go-live for accounts payable/general ledger and January 1 for payroll/HR.

This segment covered forward-looking budget strategy:

• Technology: The business manager proposed a three-year ramp-up of $150,000/year in new IT capital (leasing $400,000 of equipment per tranche), reaching a steady-state budget line of approximately $450,000 by year three. A five-year device replacement cycle was illustrated with examples from a prior district.
• Staffing: Three sources of salary variance were identified: (1) unfilled positions, (2) retirements replaced at lower steps, and (3) strategic hiring decisions. A $182,000 ‘retirement savings’ placeholder (negative line) was built into FY26. Principals were advised to plan new hires at approximately $70,000–$80,000.
• Enrollment and staffing levels: The superintendent stated current staffing is appropriate for identified needs, but acknowledged efficiencies will emerge as special education programs are consolidated and restructured.
• Override preparation: The contract’s lower increases in FY27 (3%) and FY28 (3.5%) were described as intentional negotiating strategy to give the administration time to complete the strategic plan before approaching voters with a well-documented override request. Two prior overrides were noted to have failed partly due to insufficient multi-year projections.
• Federal grants: The superintendent stated he is not changing operations based on federal-level noise until the Massachusetts DESE directs otherwise. The district’s IDEA 240 grant (approximately $800,000) was noted as an entitlement grant appropriated in a prior federal fiscal year, currently not threatened.
• Revolving funds: The business manager noted he has manually rolled forward revolving balances pending the town’s formal closeout process; the kindergarten tuition revolving account was identified as historically underfunded from the general fund side, a gap corrected in FY26.

The school business manager reported that the district returned approximately $379,000–$382,000 to the town at the end of FY24 on a budget of roughly $44.9 million (budget approximately $44,947,274; actual expenditures approximately $44,509,320; encumbrances approximately $55,570). Key takeaways:

• Salaries were approximately $2 million over budget relative to actuals, providing a cushion that offset the expense-side shortfall.
• Out-of-district tuition overspent by roughly $1.5 million on the expense side—largely because some students were not properly accounted for in prior budgets, a discrepancy since identified and corrected.
• The district now carries a full-year circuit breaker reserve, which reduces the urgency of waiting until after April 1 to vote the budget.
• A multi-year trend analysis of out-of-district costs (adjusted for prepayments) was recommended to better forecast future budgets.
• The superintendent described plans to rebuild in-district special education programs—particularly language-based and therapeutic programs—so that students currently at Landmark School and similar placements can return over the next one to two years, potentially saving several hundred thousand dollars per returning cohort.
• Circuit breaker extraordinary relief was noted as a potential current-year funding source if out-of-district expenditures exceed 125% of the prior year’s claim.
• The business manager disclosed that circuit breaker filings were historically done by the business office rather than student services, which likely resulted in under-claiming; a corrective process is underway with the director of student services.
• A five-year technology refresh plan was discussed, including a proposed three-year lease ramp-up of approximately $150,000/year to build a sustainable IT capital line.
• A $200,000 curriculum refresh line was included in the proposed FY26 budget.
• FY25 salary budget was built conservatively, with a manual encumbrance approach; the business manager estimated an unexpended balance of approximately $2.8–$3 million as of late January, expected to trend down to roughly $800,000–$1 million available for out-of-district prepayments at year-end.
• The new teachers contract carries 3% in FY27 and 3.5% in FY28, plus step increases, which will compress future salary surpluses and make the current unexpended balance pattern unsustainable in out-years.

A committee member (name not fully captured) requested a future agenda item: a presentation from Assistant Superintendent for Teaching and Learning Julia Ferrera and Student Services Director Lisa Maro on iReady mid-year assessment results at each school level.

The member noted that approximately 50% of students tested one or more grade levels below in initial iReady results, though the superintendent and others noted this figure requires nuance (e.g., some tested content may not yet have been taught in the curriculum sequence). The member also noted that Marblehead has a higher-than-state-average percentage of students on IEPs and asked how SPED and general education are working together to use multiple data sources to get ahead of learning gaps. The rest of the committee agreed to add the presentation to a future agenda.

Chair Shaffner and Superintendent Robero discussed the remaining FY26 budget timeline. The Finance Committee liaison meeting (rescheduled to the morning of Feb. 27 due to the town website launch) will provide any additional feedback. The school committee is targeting a budget vote at its March 20 meeting, ahead of the Finance Committee’s vote on March 31. The chair noted the option of scheduling an additional meeting in late March as a snow-day contingency.

High school principal (name not captured on audio) presented six changes to the MHS Program of Studies for 2025-26:

1. Financial literacy requirement — effective for the class of 2029; one-semester course drawn from three existing offerings: Banking and Personal Finance, Entrepreneurship, and Real World Skills. No additional credits required; will fit within existing elective credits. AP Business/Personal Finance may be added in two years.
2. Removal of Essex Tech DART program — the current graduating class is the final cohort; program was eliminated in a prior budget cycle.
3. Removal of grammar/nature writing — never had enrollment since added.
4. Removal of CP2 (general education) level in Algebra 1 and physics — third year of phasing out the lowest general-education tier; English and social studies departments completed this previously.
5. Art Series III prerequisite change — reduced from three semesters of prior art to two semesters, to increase access.
6. Addition of AP Photography — expands AP course offerings for advanced art students.

Chair Shaffner noted the financial literacy addition had been a request she had previously made to the administration. Committee members expressed enthusiasm and suggested future consideration of a full-year or more rigorous course. Motion by Alison Taylor (inferred), second by Alison. Roll-call: all in favor — 5 to 0.

The committee voted 5-0 to open the public hearing, then heard a brief slide presentation from Superintendent Robero (assisted by CFO Mike Ping and Assistant Finance Director Christine Mel).

Key budget figures:

Budget assumptions: Salary steps per settled collective-bargaining agreements; 2% COLA for non-represented employees; 2% increase for supplies and contracted services (with principal/director flexibility within total allocation); 4% utility increase; $200,000 curriculum refresh; increased out-of-district SPED tuition and transportation.

FY27-28 outlook: Contractual obligations call for a 3% salary increase in FY27 and 3.5% in FY28, which the superintendent said will likely require either significant staffing efficiencies or a Proposition 2½ override — a conversation he said would begin in earnest the day after Town Meeting.

SPED programming: Superintendent Robero and Student Services Director Lisa Maro described an ongoing effort to rebuild in-district language-based programming (including Orton-Gillingham training starting the following week for six staff) with a goal of returning out-of-district SPED students to in-house programs, which also saves on costly out-placements.

Capital requests highlighted: Glover cafeteria HVAC, Glover playground replacement (~$120,000 bundled with rubber surface already approved), Pack seating/painting, SPED van (rolling stock), and a $125,000 feasibility study for potential Early Childhood Center use of the Eveleth School building.

Public comment (in-person and Zoom):

• A Glover teacher asked for details on the proposed playground replacement structure.
• A resident (former school committee member) asked about the source of the additional $2.3 million in investment income; CFO Ping explained it arose from the school department returning ~$1 million in encumbrances at the end of FY23, which became certified free cash and was split with the town at a higher-than-expected level.
• Paul Baker (Overlook Road) asked where funding for an Eveleth Early Childhood Center would come from given projected override needs; the superintendent clarified the $125,000 is only for a feasibility study.
• Erin Nunan (via Zoom, parent of three students including two with diagnosed language-based dyslexia) urged the committee to ensure FY26 funding and the district improvement plan address dyslexia programming deficiencies, citing NIH prevalence rates of 15-20% of the student population.

The committee voted 5-0 to close the public hearing. The FY26 budget vote is targeted for the March 20 school committee meeting, ahead of the Finance Committee vote scheduled for March 31.

The superintendent outlined the remaining budget calendar:

• February: Budget workshop completed tonight; full budget book posted online tomorrow
• February 27: Next school committee meeting — targeted for public budget hearing
• March: School committee vote on superintendent’s budget; possible additional budget subcommittee
• April: Warrant hearing if needed; additional subcommittee if needed
• May: Town Meeting

The committee discussed the format of the public hearing: by statute it is a back-and-forth hearing, not a one-way public comment. Members debated whether to hold it on February 27 or a separate night. The superintendent expressed preference for sooner to allow time to respond to community feedback before Town Meeting. A committee member suggested a single clear summary slide explaining the override timeline and contract structure to counter community misinformation.

MHS Principal Carlson presented goals largely rolling over from the current year, including:

• Maintaining AP, honors, and standard course pathways
• Expanding a ‘magic block’ (extended advisory/support period) that launched this year
• Revising and aligning student progression and academic norms
• Continuing middle school–high school vertical alignment meetings among teachers

Enrollment: Projected to stay roughly the same or increase by approximately 5 students next year, as a strong incoming class arrives from MVMS.

Scheduling: Teacher course-level recommendations for 8th-graders began this week; a parent information night is planned for end of month. MHS uses a student-driven schedule — class offerings are determined by what students choose. Latin I may be reintroduced if incoming students request it.

Applied arts class sizes (wood shop, culinary, marketing tech) are intentionally small due to equipment and safety constraints.

In response to a question about a projected enrollment drop, Fox clarified there had been a data error on the printed sheet (subsequently corrected on the slide). He also noted that approximately 1.2% of MVMS students — roughly 4–5 out of ~405 — withdraw temporarily each winter to attend ski school and re-enroll in spring, which affects November enrollment counts and can skew district-level metrics reported to DESE.

A committee member noted that the Monday Morning enrollment report — which counts students by advisory — makes MVMS class sizes appear to be around 10, when actual instructional classes are larger. Fox acknowledged the reporting method and agreed to work with the data coordinator to report out by instructional section rather than advisory going forward.

Fox also articulated the educational rationale for the middle school model: cross-disciplinary teacher teams share planning time to discuss individual students holistically, coordinate writing instruction across subjects, and build student-teacher relationships that research links to academic engagement and reduced attrition.

Principal Matt Fox presented MVMS’s three overarching goals for FY26–27:

1. Develop a true middle school model — student-centered structure with cross-disciplinary team planning
2. Continue supporting student social-emotional growth through advisory, baseline strong in-class programs, and MTSS tiered support
3. Increase student voice and belonging through advisory, student council with a student representative chosen by lottery, and lunch conversations with the superintendent

Enrollment data:

• Current year: 7th grade ~179, 8th grade ~226
• Projected next year: 7th grade 175, 8th grade 184 (the large 8th-grade cohort graduating)

Staffing note: The principal proposed converting a 0.4 FTE Spanish position (unfilled after extensive recruiting) to a 1.0 FTE librarian position, describing the librarian as adding significant value to school culture and instruction.

The committee debated the perception that the school district practices ‘rollover budgeting.’ The superintendent pushed back, saying the FY26 budget is a zero-based, level-service proposal that does not add staff and reflects actual identified need. A committee member acknowledged the superintendent’s explanation but said the school committee needs concise talking points to deploy at public hearings and in response to community inquiries. The superintendent noted that line-item autonomy allows internal reallocation (e.g., moving a teacher from one building to another) without a committee vote, but that eliminating or adding sections requires committee discussion.

A committee member observed that Village School was running 10 sections per grade level despite enrollment numbers that, at the district’s typical average of 22–23 students per class, would require only 8 sections. The exchange surfaced a recurring community challenge: when enrollment declines, residents and other town boards ask why staffing does not decline proportionally.

Key points raised:

• The member was not advocating for larger class sizes or staff cuts, but asked for articulable justifications (e.g., IEP concentration in certain rooms, smaller cohort bubbles moving through) that could be used at town meeting and public hearings.
• The principal noted that classrooms rarely have just one adult; tutors, coaches, and special educators are routinely co-present.
• The superintendent noted that current class sizes of 18–23 in upper elementary are within normal ranges and that the budget is a level-service proposal — not a rollover budget — designed to meet identified needs.
• The district was noted to have had approximately 3,300 students less than 10 years ago and now has approximately 2,500, with staffing roughly flat or slightly higher.

The Village School principal highlighted several instructional priorities in place for FY26, including:

• Wit & Wisdom literacy program (Year 3), used district-wide and at partner schools
• Frequent data meetings with instructional coaches focused on multi-point trend data rather than single MCAS snapshots
• Inclusionary practices in special education, with named staff (Ashley Leedman, Victoria Ryan, Lisa Marie) supporting in-district placement
• TAT (Teacher Assistance Team) — a pre-referral, general-education support structure — highlighted as a cost-effective intervention
• Teacher-leader professional learning communities meeting every other week
• Student voice initiatives including morning announcements, a composting program, and a school counselor appreciation shout-out

Village School Principal St. Williams presented:

• School identity: ‘Village Ducks’ — acronym Dynamic, Unique, Courageous, Kind, Safe
• PBS incentive system: students earn ‘duck dollars’; rubber-duck cylinders in the lobby track class progress toward goals; weekly announcements recognize on-target grades
• Wayfinder as the tier-one social-emotional learning vehicle for communication skills and conflict resolution
• MTSS data-driven differentiation: emerging learners, on-grade learners, and enrichment-seeking students all served through small-group wind blocks and coach collaboration
• School Advisory Council meeting planned in two weeks to develop the next School Improvement Plan
• Shout-out to education PTO for help branding the mascot and producing school apparel

Interim Principal Frank Kosi, in his first year at Glover, described:

• Relationship-building as a day-one priority (guidance counselors and teachers greeting students at arrival)
• Renewed focus on professional development for positive behavior support and classroom management
• Continued emphasis on Wayfinder social-emotional learning; students responded positively
• Acknowledgment that special education department chair Lauren has been instrumental

Board discussion on class sizes and redistricting:

• Projected Glover enrollment: ~327; Brown: ~460
• DESE capacity numbers from a prior feasibility study: Glover 325, Brown 450 — both buildings are near capacity
• The superintendent stated redistricting is not warranted because both buildings are full, not imbalanced
• When kindergarten numbers at Brown were elevated this year, the district redirected some students to Glover; this practice will continue
• State regulation allows up to an average of 27 students per class before a new section is required; the board noted 18–21 is manageable but 22–24 in kindergarten is ‘a different animal’
• A committee member asked about the spreadsheet showing ‘division by zero’ errors in Glover’s page three — noted as a cosmetic issue with no numeric impact

Brown School Principal Mary outlined three building goals:

1. Strengthen multi-tier systems of support (MTSS) — now in year three, with tutor-to-teacher data sharing described as a ‘game changer’
2. Fidelity to year-two implementation of the Wisdom literacy curriculum — further ahead than year one
3. Continued tier-one social-emotional learning through Wayfinder, Responsive Classroom, and Zones of Regulation

When asked directly, the principal stated: ‘I believe my needs are met with this budget.’

The committee raised concerns about:

• Positions vacant for the entire school year and who has been covering that work
• Class sizes: projected Brown kindergarten ~18–19, first grade ~21, second and third grade ~21–22
• A request that future budget books include prior-year FTE comparisons (Brown FY25: 81.5 FTE; FY26 proposal: 82.1 FTE — net change attributed to moving a position from another building, not new hiring)
• The superintendent noted the district is actively filling vacancies and no administrator has said a needed position should be eliminated

Key points from the food services presentation:

• Lunch participation up 21% and breakfast up 44% year-over-year (excluding November, which was disrupted)
• Food services is entirely self-funded, including the director’s salary, which was moved into the revolving fund last year
• Federal and state reimbursement rates are driving the revenue surplus; the district cannot carry more than three months of operating expenses in reserve
• Catering revenue is a planned growth area to provide a buffer against federal reimbursement changes
• Staffing vacancies dropped from 13 to 1 following a new cafeteria wage agreement
• Increased scratch cooking this year; goal is to continue reducing reliance on pre-packaged foods using federal commodity (brown-box) items and fresh produce

A committee member suggested that future presentations earmark projected surplus funds for specific equipment needs (e.g., replacing Village School serving lines, estimated at over $125,000) so the public does not interpret the surplus as general profit. The superintendent confirmed that food-service revenues must remain within the food-service revolving fund.

The superintendent also highlighted the district’s new composting program now operating in all Marblehead public schools.

Todd Bloodgood presented the facilities department’s goals, emphasizing:

• Safety and security: door checks, access-card systems, camera upgrades, emergency protocol training for custodians and bus drivers
• Preventive maintenance and five-year equipment replacement schedule
• Full custodial staffing restored after post-COVID vacancies

Board discussion highlights:

A committee member noted that Sustainable Marblehead and the Board of Health were supportive of the district’s new district-wide composting program.

A committee member asked why the IT hardware line shows zero for the current budget request; the director explained prior ESSER-funded laptop refresh accounted for that spending. The committee also discussed the gray area between IT and facilities budgets when technology (such as card-access systems) is embedded in building infrastructure — a door repair falls to facilities, but a failed card reader falls to IT.

The technology director summarized five years of infrastructure work including:

• One-to-one Chromebook/iPad deployment for grades K–8; BYOD policy for high school
• Upgrade of all school security cameras and card-access systems district-wide
• Cybersecurity awareness grant renewed for the coming year
• Smart-panel teacher training ongoing; one session cancelled this year due to a professional-development day move
• Upcoming challenge: wireless access points across all five buildings will come off warranty, triggering a replacement decision (new license vs. new hardware)
• 23,736 devices connected to the district network in the prior 30 days

A presenter described ambitions to grow unified sports programming and praised the All Sports Foundation and individual sport booster clubs as essential financial and volunteer contributors. The presenter also noted interest in better tracking students who go on to college athletics and creating formal Signing Day recognition.

Key themes:

• Unified sports programs (basketball already in place) as inclusion vehicles
• Booster clubs and volunteer coaches cited as critical to broad student participation
• Desire for end-of-year reporting on student-athletes matriculating to college athletics

Lisa Maria Palo presented the student services (special education) budget:

Out-of-district tuition costs:

• FY26 projected total out-of-district tuition: approximately $5,125,865, an increase of $277,756 (5.7%) over FY25
• The OSD (out-of-district placement) rate set by the state increases 4.69% this year; transportation also increases 4%
• Current placements: 50 students; FY26 projection: approximately 47 students (a ~6% reduction in student count)
• A $100,000 offset from tuition-in students (students from other districts attending Marblehead’s special education programs)
• Circuit breaker offset: $1.5 million

Historical context provided by a committee member:

• In January 2019: 28 students out-placed at $2.7 million
• Over six years: 79% increase in number of students, 32% increase in cost
• New administration projected to reduce placements by 6% within six months of joining district

Goals:

• In-district program development (revamping over approximately two years)
• Vertical alignment from 3K through age 22
• Staff professional development including Orton-Gillingham training and certification; Landmark Outreach for language-based programming
• Strengthening family/community communication

A committee member praised the new student services team for rapidly identifying gaps and restoring processes that had lapsed.

Julia Ferrera presented the teaching and learning section of the budget:

Key priorities:

• Multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) for all learners
• Curriculum review on a five-year cycle:
  • Current year: science (K–12) and English language learners (ELL, mandated by DESE after tiered focus monitoring review)
  • Prior years covered literacy, social studies, math
  • Next year: languages, unified arts, allied arts, media literacy
• $200,000 earmarked for curriculum refresh; recognized as a recurring (not one-time) budget line
• New literacy program implemented district-wide; Wayfinder social-emotional learning curriculum launched successfully
• Assessment tools: iReady, DIBELS, ISELP added at Village School
• Professional development shifting toward in-house delivery using instructional coaches

Committee questions:

• A committee member asked about programming for advanced/gifted learners, noting this had been raised in prior budget cycles; Ferrera acknowledged assessment tools now identify students surpassing grade-level expectations and connected this to instructional planning.
• A committee member asked whether science curriculum review would address alignment with state and national frameworks; Ferrera confirmed alignment is in place.
• A committee member expressed concern about instructional software budget line declining; Ferrera explained this reflected a vendor change and some software costs moved to school-level budgets.
• A committee member asked about STEAM integration; Ferrera confirmed engineering/technology is embedded in classroom science instruction, not a separate pull-out program at the K–6 level.
• High school science labs and block scheduling raised for a future deeper-dive discussion.

Continuing the budget overview, presenters covered:

District demographics:

• 2,564 students enrolled (October 1 count)
• Enrollment is monitored weekly; district lost more than 1% of student body since mid-November—described as statistically significant, compared to prior years when the district typically gained 2–3 students in the same period.
• Declining enrollment is a statewide trend; drop will affect Chapter 70 state aid.

Circuit breaker risk discussion:

• A committee member noted the 2019 special education funding crisis was triggered in part by circuit breaker reimbursement coming in significantly lower than projected (approximately 60% instead of 75%), compounded by mid-year state budget cuts.
• Piffling confirmed the district carries a full year (~$1.53 million) of circuit breaker carryover as a reserve and does not plan to draw it down further this year given uncertainty around federal funding pass-throughs to the state.
• The district projects 40–47 out-of-district placements for FY26, down from 50 currently, yielding an anticipated reduction in tuition costs.

Chapter 70 funding:

• Chapter 70 state aid is embedded in the town’s budget allocation to schools; not separately itemized in the presentation but detailed in the budget workbook.

Mike Piffling presented detailed budget structure slides:

Expenditure breakdown by object code:

• ~79.5–80% salaries
• 3.4% supplies
• 3.9% utilities
• 5.25% contracted services
• 7% tuitions

Outside-the-budget revenue streams (revolving accounts):

• School lunch program (primarily federal/state reimbursements; all students receive free breakfast/lunch)
• User fees (athletics, after-school groups, half-day kindergarten/preschool tuition)
• Circuit breaker reimbursement: state reimburses 75% of special education costs above approximately $50,000 per student, paid the following year. District carries one full year of circuit breaker funds (~$1.53 million) as a reserve. Administration noted approximately 40–47 students will be claimable this year vs. 30 last year, potentially increasing reimbursement by roughly a third.
• Extraordinary relief: an additional circuit breaker mechanism for expenditures 125% above the prior year.
• Federal ESSA grants (Title I, II, III, IV) and IDEA special education grant (~$750,000): administration noted these grants were approved approximately one year ago and are expected to remain stable in the near term.
• Medicaid reimbursement: goes to the town generally; district works with a consultant to maximize claims through random moment time studies.

Staffing:

• 302 FTE (approximately 310 employees)
• Unit A (licensed teachers/professionals): ~302 FTE; approximately 60% are at the top salary step; majority hold master’s degrees or beyond.

A committee member raised concern about federal grant risk given national funding uncertainty; Piffling noted current grants are already approved and education grants do not appear to be a primary federal target at this time.

Superintendent John Robidou opened the budget workshop by presenting the proposed FY26 school operating budget. Key points:

• Budget request: $49,112,285 (level-service)
• Current FY25 adopted budget: approximately $46,750,000
• Increase: $2,361,174 or 5.05%
• The budget was characterized as a level-service proposal, meaning it maintains all current staffing, programs, and services including contractually obligated salary increases.
• Superintendent stated the budget does not require a Proposition 2½ override for FY26, noting that higher-than-anticipated town revenues (certified free cash) allowed the town to allocate additional funds to schools.
• A $200,000 curriculum refresh cycle was embedded in the budget—described as a recurring investment rather than a one-time expense.
• Special education out-of-district tuitions and transportation were increased to reflect known expenses.
• Utilities were increased by 4%; supplies and contracted services by 2%.
• Non-represented employees received a 2% COLA.

Budget assumptions:

Salary steps and lanes increased per settled collective bargaining agreements; supply/contracted service lines increased 2% unless otherwise specified; principals permitted to move funds within their budgets provided net increase did not exceed 2%.

Budget allocation breakdown (by department):

• ~75% goes directly to school buildings (salaries, student-focused supplies)
• ~85% of total budget is directly related to student learning and teaching
• Utilities: ~$2 million
• Salaries: ~79.5–80% of total budget
• Supplies: ~3.4%; Utilities: ~3.9%; Contracted services: ~5.25%; Tuitions: ~7%

Administration confirmed the town side is aligned with the requested number, arrived at through extensive collaboration with the Finance Committee and town officials.

Of the approximately $4.2M in new revenues projected for FY26, the town’s 50/50 allocation formula directs approximately $2.1M to the school department appropriation. An additional $250K is being redirected from the planned stabilization fund annual contribution to further assist the schools with contractual obligations, bringing the total school increase to approximately $2.35M above the prior year’s appropriation. The CFO noted the schools also turned back funds in the current year, contributing to the strong free cash position.

The superintendent presented a competency determination proposal for students in the graduating class of 2025 who have not yet met requirements through MCAS. The plan establishes three pathways:

1. Course and grade pathway (primary): Passing grades and credit in English 9 and 10, Algebra 1 and Geometry, and Biology plus one additional lab science.
2. Portfolio option: For students unable to meet course requirements (e.g., late transfers).
3. MCAS: Still available as a pathway.

The proposal is specific to the class of 2025. The superintendent noted Governor Healey has begun discussions about a statewide competency determination framework, but Marblehead will plan independently. The committee also reviewed graduation and promotion requirements, noting financial literacy requirements may apply starting with the class of 2029.

The committee voted 5-0 to approve the competency determination proposal.

The chair described the history: a second recess for K–6 was previously eliminated, reinstated after parent complaints, then removed again citing ‘time on learning.’ She consulted both MASC and DESE and was told there is no state rule that counts waiting in line or changing snow boots as instructional time.

The recently ratified teachers’ unit contract includes a provision starting the school day five minutes earlier. A joint committee of teachers, unit members, and administrators is to meet during the remainder of the school year to determine how those five minutes are operationalized, with the goal of providing a morning outdoor break effective the 2025–26 school year.

The subcommittee member said she wants the full school committee to adopt a formal policy guaranteeing two recesses for K–6. Both members agreed to:

• Ask Superintendent Cafasso and Assistant Superintendent Julia to attend the next meeting.
• Look for existing recess policy language from comparable districts.
• Draft a new policy (requiring three readings) with a target effective date of fall 2025.

The subcommittee reviewed two existing draft flag policies. Members explained that the policy effort began when Principal Dr. Carlson and Assistant Superintendent Michelle Presta asked the committee what the flag policy was and discovered none existed; under Massachusetts law, the school committee is responsible for developing such a policy.

Key process decisions:

• Two forums planned: one student-focused (timing in consultation with school administration) and one community-wide, both posted as open school committee meetings.
• Tentative date: February 13, 2025 (evening, approximately 6 p.m.) for the community forum, subject to the chair confirming her travel schedule.
• Format: Interactive forum rather than a one-way listening session, to allow dialogue.
• Morning working sessions (9:30 a.m.) will continue for subcommittee business; community forums will be held in the evening.
• After the forums, the subcommittee will finalize a draft policy to bring to the full school committee.

The budget subcommittee reported on a preliminary FY2026 budget calendar, working backward from the Finance Committee’s warrant hearing deadline of approximately April 7:

The budget hearing and a school committee vote on the budget are separate steps; the committee prefers to allow a few days between the hearing and vote to incorporate any feedback. The chair noted that the committee successfully changed the process so that the school committee now votes on its budget before the Finance Committee hearing, reversing a prior practice.

Other subcommittee updates: CPAC meeting held; Lisa Marie Alito received positive feedback. Communications subcommittee met with Marblehead TV about potential programming including a budget-focused segment and a school committee primer. A policy subcommittee meeting is scheduled for the following Tuesday. The Central Council (PCO) meeting was productive. METCO Director Kaia meets weekly with the superintendent; enrollment period is underway.

Superintendent Du distributed a draft document combining a new competency determination framework and updated graduation requirements now that MCAS scores no longer serve as the competency determination for high school diplomas.

Proposed competency determination (Option 1 — course-based):

• English: Passing grade and credit in English 9 and English 10
• Math: Passing grade and credit in Algebra 1 and Geometry
• Science: Passing grade and credit in Biology plus one additional lab science (Chemistry or Physics)

These align with the subjects measured by the 2023 MCAS. A portfolio option (Option 2) was noted for edge cases; approximately one student has been identified as potentially needing it.

Key discussion points:

• What constitutes a “passing grade” — a D/D-minus — was debated relative to rigor. Six or seven comparable districts reviewed by staff use the same “passing grade” language.
• Committee members asked whether the bar could be higher going forward, while accommodating the complexity of the current graduating class.
• The MCAS Alternative (now called the Alternative Assessment) remains available for students whose IEP teams determine it is appropriate.
• A financial literacy semester course was proposed as a future graduation requirement. Two existing courses in the program of studies were identified as potentially meeting this requirement. Implementation cannot occur for the current or next graduating class given timeline constraints.
• A vote is expected at the next meeting. Committee members asked for the draft to be posted online.

Assistant Superintendent Lisa Marie Alito presented a detailed analysis of 2024 MCAS results for high-needs student subgroups (students with disabilities, low-income students, and English language learners).

Key enrollment numbers (spring 2024 MCAS): | Subject | All Students | High Needs | Low Income | Students w/ Disabilities | ELL | |—|—|—|—|—|—| | ELA | 1,356 | 564 | 192 | 303 | 69 | | Math | 1,362 | 565 | 191 | 303 | 71 | | Science/Tech | 574 | 153 | 51 | 79 | 23 |

Key findings:

• Most high-needs students fall in the “partially meeting” category, with many on the cusp of “meeting expectations.”
• Grades 6–7 high-needs students showed the highest percentages not meeting in ELA.
• Grades 3–8 high-needs performance is comparable to state averages in 2024; in 2022–23 Marblehead was 3–5 percentage points above state in math.
• Grade 10 high-needs ELA student growth percentile (SGP) fell to 33.6 in 2024, slightly below the 40–60 average range — flagged for further investigation.
• Special education subgroup “not meeting” rates are below state averages across ELA, math, and science for multiple years.
• 8th grade high-needs math scores showed the strongest growth trend.

Major announcement: The district received a letter from the Department of Education approving full compliance in all six areas of its corrective action plan — well ahead of the scheduled June 2025 deadline. The committee praised the speed of this achievement.

Academic Discoveries review is nearly complete; final classroom observations scheduled for January 31, with a report expected in February.

Upcoming work: Landmark School Outreach Program is conducting its third visit to observe language-based settings. Athena Learning K-12 is being engaged to consult on therapeutic and ABA programs. A reading profile tracker has been implemented to identify specific reading difficulties for targeted instruction.

Additional FY26 planning topics addressed:

Enrollment

• The district has lost approximately 22 students since the strike, which the superintendent described as statistically significant
• The NEZDA enrollment projection report shows a continuing downward trend regardless of the strike
• Out-of-district special education students are counted in enrollment figures because they remain district students
• Anecdotally, some families who withdrew cited the strike directly

Staff Accountability Report

• A staff accountability report is being developed to show staffing by school and program without attaching individual names to numbers
• The report will help explain why the district’s student-to-staff ratio (10.3) is below the state average (11.9), noting that programs such as language-based special education have very different staffing models than general education classrooms
• The superintendent expressed concern about publishing individual names alongside salary figures

Special Education Programming

• The superintendent said it will take approximately two years to restructure special education programming to the point where out-of-district students can be brought back in-district where appropriate
• She acknowledged the community narrative that the district is understaffed in some areas while noting that in other pockets staffing may exceed current enrollment needs
• Victoria (Director of Student Services) and Lisa Marie have been working on reviewing special education staffing and programming

Budget Forum

• The committee discussed holding a public budget forum (separate from the statutory public hearing) as had been done in prior years when an override was anticipated; the superintendent supported holding such a forum regardless of whether an override is pursued

The subcommittee reviewed a draft FY26 budget development calendar. Key dates and process elements discussed:

The superintendent noted that budget workshops in prior years have included principals presenting their school budgets to the full school committee and the public, with a discussion of the delta between level-services costs and available funding. The committee acknowledged that for at least three consecutive years the allocated amount has not covered level services.

On the question of a potential Prop 2½ override, the superintendent stated it would be premature to discuss one until the State of the Town address provides revenue projections and the FY26 budget is completed.

A staff accountability report is in development; the superintendent indicated it will show staffing by program and building without attaching individual names to salary numbers, and will help explain the district’s student-to-staff ratio (10.3) versus the state average (11.9).

Enrollment data from the NEZDA report was distributed; the district has lost approximately 22 students since the teachers’ strike, a decline that is statistically significant (above the 1% threshold). The superintendent noted enrollment has been trending downward since she arrived (from approximately 2,710 students), and that the NEZDA projections show the same downward trend independent of the strike.

Business Manager Mike presented the mid-year FY25 budget status, noting the district is generally on track despite several pressure points:

Special Education Out-of-District Costs

• Budgeted: approximately $2.3 million for tuitions
• Projected actual: approximately $3.3 million (roughly 43% over)
• A $900,000 FY24 prepayment reduces the net current-year delta to approximately $200,000
• Transportation for out-of-district students is also approximately $100,000 over budget
• The overrun is partly attributed to bookkeeping catch-up: students placed out of district in prior years had not been fully identified and allocated in the previous budget

Legal Line

• The legal budget of $165,000 was split: $115,000 to the school committee (primarily labor negotiations) and $50,000 to special education legal
• The line is running over due to arbitrations, negotiations, and costs associated with the teachers’ strike
• Strike-related costs tracked separately include approximately $111,000, primarily police details; food services and additional invoices are still being collected
• Under normal circumstances, legal fees incurred during a strike would be charged back to the union; because the union ran out of money, the district absorbed those costs as part of the settlement agreement

Other Areas

• Custodial/maintenance retains approximately 18% of budget in reserve
• Technology retains approximately 13–14% of budget in reserve
• The district is not using reserve funds this year, which is a change from prior practice

Payroll Reporting

• Payroll is being manually encumbered due to limitations of the current financial system; this process takes approximately two hours each time reports are run
• Munis/School ERP is expected to go live for general ledger and accounts payable by July 1, 2025, with payroll and HR modules live by January 1, 2026

ARPA Funds

• The business manager entered into contracts for playground resurfacing at Glover School (priority) and Village School (secondary), and clock system replacement at the high school, all contingent on ARPA funding availability; contracts include void provisions if ARPA funds are unavailable
• Town has also budgeted capital funds for playgrounds and clocks as a backup

FY25 status: After manually re-encumbering all salaries following the new collective bargaining agreements, the district shows approximately $3.8 million in unencumbered balances. The CFO described this as neither alarming nor comfortable given unencumbered supplies and contractor costs still to come.

Special education out-placements: Out-of-district tuition costs exceed the FY25 budget. A $900,000 prepayment made last spring has been fully consumed, with an additional approximately $200,000 projected over that amount — a total overrun of roughly $1.1 million versus what was budgeted. The CFO noted that some placements were not reflected in the FY25 budget as adopted.

Extraordinary relief: The district expects to qualify for extraordinary Circuit Breaker relief from DESE for the current year, which would provide reimbursement faster than the standard one-year lag.

FY26 draft budget: A level-service draft has been prepared. Out-of-district tuition rate increases from placement schools were revised from an early estimate of 14% down to approximately 4.7%. The town’s December 11 projections show a $14 million structural deficit over three years town-wide (figure may be slightly updated due to additional interest income). No target number has been exchanged between the town and the school district yet.

Budget timeline: A budget subcommittee meeting is being scheduled for the first full week back in January. The committee discussed placing override placeholder articles on the town warrant, consistent with prior years’ practice of including a general override and a capital expense override article.

ARPA funds: The town’s ARPA funds must be committed by the end of December; schools are assisting by identifying one-time eligible expenditures including playground resurfacing, gymnasium equipment, and professional development/curriculum materials.

Brown/Lucrecia & Joseph Brown School (Principal Mary Maxfield):

• 64% ELA, 61% math meeting/exceeding — above state averages of 45% and below
• Math trend line improved from 46% (2022) to 53% (2023) to 61% (2024)
• Low-income subgroup improved from 35% to 65%
• Ranked in top 14% of K–3 schools statewide for ELA and top 25% for math
• Areas of focus: closing gap for students with disabilities, early intervention, volunteer-led enrichment groups

Glover School (Interim Principal Frank Kowalski):

• 63% ELA, 58% math meeting/exceeding
• ELA improved from 54% (2022) to 63% (2024)
• Emphasis on relationship-building and neighborhood school model to reduce absenteeism
• Rated “moderate progress” by DESE (limited data sources at K–3 level)

Village Elementary School (Principal Scott Williams):

• Fourth grade: 48% ELA, 65% math; Fifth grade: 56% ELA, 52% math; Sixth grade: 53% ELA, 58% math
• Areas of growth: fourth-grade ELA declined from 64% to 48%; fifth-grade math declined from 61% to 52%
• Sixth-grade exceeding category for ELA grew from 7% to 19%
• Implementing WIT & Wisdom writing professional development (rescheduled from January PD day)
• Sixth-grade math olympiad competition launched district-wide this fall

Marblehead Veterans Middle School (Principal Matt Fox):

• Cumulative progress toward goals: 87%, tied for 7th highest among Massachusetts middle schools
• 42 of 44 possible accountability points earned
• Chronic absenteeism reduced from 17.4% to 11% in one year
• Eighth-grade ELA: top 7% statewide for meeting/exceeding; 17th highest student growth
• Eighth-grade math: top 10% meeting/exceeding; 10th highest student growth
• Special ed subgroup eighth-grade ELA growth: ranked #1 in the state
• Seventh-grade math student growth moved from 153rd (2019) to 17th statewide

Marblehead High School (Principal Michelle Carlson):

• ELA: 78% meeting/exceeding (top 16% of high schools); Math: 76% (top 11%); Science: 73%
• Math exceeding expectations grew by 7%; student growth percentile up 4.2%
• Flagged by DESE for low MCAS participation in Hispanic/Latino subgroup
• Implementing tier-one school avoidance/absenteeism needs assessment with social workers
• Magic block: teachers can lock students into targeted sessions; four years of implementation

District-wide results (spring 2024):

• ELA: 60% meeting/exceeding (18 percentage points above state average)
• Math: 63% meeting/exceeding (21 percentage points above state average)
• Science: 18 percentage points above state average

Trends: Scores mirrored a statewide dip in 2024 after a 2023 peak. The average scale score declined by only one point. The percentage of students “not meeting” expectations rose to 8%, a 33% relative increase.

Accountability: All schools except Marblehead High School are rated as making substantial progress or meeting targets. MHS is flagged for “requiring assistance or intervention” solely due to low MCAS participation among Hispanic/Latino 10th graders (a very small cohort). Glover School is rated at “moderate progress.”

Chronic absenteeism: Non-high school buildings exceeded their reduction targets; the high school chronic absenteeism rate increased, which weighs heavily in DESE’s new accountability rubric.

MCAS graduation requirement: MCAS will no longer be a graduation requirement; the district must develop a local competency determination process. Work has begun among administration; a formal proposal will come to the committee in early 2025.

Committee requests: Members requested a future focused presentation disaggregating high-needs subgroup data (low-income, ELL, students with disabilities) by school and subject, coordinated with the pending special education program review.

Committee members agreed to move agenda items D, E, and F — all related to the school calendar and makeup days — ahead of the MCAS and financial updates, in consideration of public attendees who were present specifically for that discussion.

Finance Director Alicia Benjamin, Finance Committee Chair Alec Goolsby, and Vice Chair Molly Teets presented a preliminary three-year financial forecast for FY2026–2028.

Key cost drivers (77–78% of budget):

Revenue profile: Property taxes fund 80% of the general fund (72% levy + 8% debt exclusion). State aid is approximately 8%; local receipts 7%; free cash 5%.

Projected gap: Approximately $1.9 million in FY26, growing substantially in FY27 and FY28 primarily due to the trash contract renewal (current contractor is losing approximately $300,000/year), school salary contracts with back-loaded provisions, and out-of-district special education tuition (estimated jump from $3.7M to $4.4M in FY26).

Free cash: Certified at $8.7M for FY25; $5.5M used in budget, $1M for capital, $2.2M unappropriated. A ~$2M windfall from interest income in FY24 may push next certification higher. DOR guidelines recommend 8–10% of budget in combined reserves; stabilization fund currently holds only $500,000 (0.5% of budget), ranking near the bottom statewide.

Debt service: Current debt service is declining as high school debt rolls off (~$1.875M). Even if all authorized borrowings are issued plus the proposed $7.4M school roof/HVAC project, total debt service would remain below current levels through the forecast period.

Trash contract: Public Health Director Andrew Petty reported the current 10-year contract at approximately $127/household/year expires now; comparable communities suggest the next contract will be approximately $203/household, with recycling disposal costs rising from near-zero to $109–$119/ton (approximately 3,000 tons/year).

Board members discussed the need for a headcount and productivity analysis across departments, accelerating stabilization fund contributions, and the possibility of retaining an independent Massachusetts municipal finance consultant (already engaged by the finance director) to model override and non-override scenarios before town meeting.

Superintendent reported that DESE requires all 10 strike-related missed days to be made up as full in-person school days before June 30; the commissioner’s office confirmed no waivers would be granted and virtual days or extended instructional minutes cannot substitute for full calendar days.

Proposal A: Dec 23 + Feb 18–21 + Apr 22–25 (preserving end-of-year dates; protects graduation June 6). Proposal B: Dec 23 + Feb 18–21 + five days added at year’s end (June 23–27); risk that any snow days would then fall back into April vacation.

The committee voted 5–0 to approve Dec 23 and Feb 18–21 as school days immediately. The remaining five days were deferred pending a parent/staff survey (to be drafted by Allison Taylor and the superintendent, distributed by the following Tuesday, results presented at the Dec 19 meeting). Attendance policies are expected to be suspended for students during these makeup periods so families with pre-existing travel plans are not penalized. Saturday makeup was discussed but set aside given religious observance concerns and athletics scheduling conflicts.

The group discussed how the school budget process aligns with FinCom and the select board’s timeline:

• CFO Alicia Benjamin (town-side) and FinCom are collaborating on a three-year financial forecast to be presented to both FinCom and the Select Board in early December, ahead of the January State of the Town address.
• The forecast will model revenue (relatively predictable under Prop 2½) and expenditures under multiple assumptions, including different contract settlement scenarios.
• The school budget workshop (where all directors and principals present sub-budgets) historically occurs mid-to-late January.
• FinCom reviews the budget through liaison meetings, a budget hearing, and a warrant hearing; it votes to recommend or not recommend (approval is not legally required from FinCom).
• The school committee now votes its budget before FinCom (a change made two years ago).
• The school CFO asked what salary assumption to use for FY26 level-service budgeting given unsettled contracts; Alec suggested using the school committee’s current offer as the best available placeholder.
• The group agreed to schedule a follow-up liaison meeting to continue the FY26 budget discussion.

The school CFO (Mike) presented a detailed operational update on FY24 year-end close and FY25 budget management:

FY24 Year-End Close

• The FY24 end-of-year report was submitted October 8th, signed by the superintendent and town CFO Alicia Benjamin.
• The district closed under budget; salary surpluses from unfilled positions were transferred to prepay out-of-district special education tuitions (~$900K prepaid), a practice disclosed to FinCom and allowable by law.
• The prepayment was intended to frontload FY25 tuition costs and save staff positions.

FY25 Budget Controls

• The current financial system (referred to as “Soft R”) cannot encumber payroll automatically. The CFO is creating monthly purchase orders for each pay period beginning November to approximate salary encumbrances.
• He has met with each principal twice to verify staffing alignment.
• Out-of-district tuition lines budgeted for FY25:
  • Collaborative tuitions: $713,000
  • Private day: $426,000 (supplemented by circuit breaker reimbursement)
  • Residential tuitions: $1.2 million
  • Recovery/rehab: approximately $48,000 (budgeted; no expenditures to date)
• Circuit breaker reimbursement offsets a significant portion of private-day and residential costs.

Staffing and Enrollment

• Enrollment is declining but staffing headcount has not decreased proportionally, and in some cases increased, partly due to special education program needs requiring higher staff ratios.
• Marblehead’s staff-to-student ratio (10.3) is the lowest on the North Shore vs. a state average of 11.9.
• John (superintendent or administrator) is building a detailed staffing document showing individual teacher loads and class sizes; one example cited was a high school teacher with five sections averaging 13 students per section.

Budget Transparency Goals

• The school committee’s draft goals include publishing a budget glossary and clearer one-page summaries so the public can understand terms like “circuit breaker,” “tuition revolving fund,” and “encumbrance.”
• FinCom requested a detailed FY24 budget-to-actual report at the next meeting, including encumbrances and prepaid tuitions as a separate notation.

Following a goals subcommittee process with members Brian Oda and Allison Taylor, the superintendent presented three administrative evaluation goals:

Goal 1 – Professional Practice: District-wide culture and staffing patterns

• Conduct a teacher-by-teacher, classroom-by-classroom staffing analysis including step placement and student counts to inform programming decisions.
• Survey parents, staff, students, and community partners in fall, winter, and spring.
• Special emphasis on special-education programming and caseload equity; new assistant superintendent for special education (Lisa Marie) already working to restructure BCBA coverage (from one district-wide to one per building).
• Measurability concern raised: committee asked for clear benchmarks and periodic check-ins rather than end-of-year reporting.

Goal 2 – District Improvement: 2025–2028 District Improvement Plan (also referred to as Strategic Plan)

• Massachusetts requires a district improvement plan in three-year increments; current “Plan for Success” runs through 2026 and will be revised.
• Process: superintendent will use existing plan as a framework, work with administrative team to identify what remains relevant, distribute electronically to principals, then all staff, then parents/caregivers/students for input, then bring to school committee for approval.
• Target timeline: complete by mid-April 2025 so it can inform the budget hearing and town meeting season.
• Each school improvement plan will align to the district improvement plan going forward.

Goal 3 – Student Learning: Student voice in teaching and learning

• Work with principals to establish grade-appropriate vehicles for student feedback (K–3, 4–6, 7–8, 9–12).
• Brown School principal has already established a student leadership team.
• Superintendent plans to meet directly with student groups across the district.

Vote: Approved 5–0.

Assistant Superintendent of Student Services Lisa Marie Elito and Assistant Director Victoria Ryan presented the district’s corrective action plan (CAP) following a tiered focused monitoring (TFM) review by DESE. Marblehead fully implemented 28 of 34 standards and partially implemented 6; none were rated ‘not implemented.’

Areas of strength identified:

• Transition services starting at age 14
• Least restrictive environment
• Parental consent processes
• Team composition and attendance
• Progress notes and multilingual communication
• Assistive technology supports

Six partially implemented standards:

Corrective actions underway:

• Master tracker built for each building tracking every IEP timeline
• Weekly Friday training sessions (8–10:30 AM) for team chairs
• Twice-weekly after-school special ed meetings building-by-building
• Google Form for staff to log missed services, auto-populating a shared spreadsheet
• End-of-meeting summary document provided to parents at every team meeting
• Post-meeting parent feedback link sent after every team meeting
• Letters issued to parents when compensatory services are owed
• DESE liaison extended the October 18 corrective action deadline to November

The committee was informed the previously commissioned independent audit by Academic Discoveries has been restructured: instead of reviewing outdated documents, it will evaluate the new systems. Interviews with staff are underway; focus groups and surveys are planned. The final report is now expected in February rather than December.

Assistant Superintendent Julia (teaching and learning) and co-facilitator Angela Gano presented the results of a summer curriculum committee process involving classroom teachers, counselors, mental health clinicians, health staff, and administrators from across the district.

Why Wayfinder was selected:

• Aligned with CASEL competencies and is a CASEL Select program
• Vetted by the Stanford Education Center and Harvard’s development lab
• K–12 scope and sequence with coherent themes across grade bands (20 lessons at ~20 min each for elementary; 26 lessons at ~30 min for middle; 23 lessons at ~30 min for high school)
• Integrates with Clever and Google Classroom (digital for grades 6–12; workbooks for K–5)
• Addresses Student Opportunity Act obligations, bullying prevention policy, and district SEL priorities
• Approximately 11% average academic achievement gain reported when SEL is integrated
• Used in districts from Revere to Gloucester and thousands across the U.S.

Cost and funding: Approximately $25,000 per year (site/district license, roughly $10/student); initial years to be funded by ESSER. Multi-year contracts reduce per-year cost.

Implementation: Not in the current school year; planned for rollout next year with family letters, a counselor activity bank for tier 2/3 supports, and an implementation committee already meeting.

The motion to approve passed 5–0.

Following public comment, committee member Sarah Fox moved to take the flag policy agenda item out of order and hold a full committee discussion immediately, noting the public audience would want to hear the deliberation. The motion was seconded.

A roll-call vote was taken:

• Al Williams: in favor
• Brian Oda: not in favor
• Sarah Fox: in favor
• Jen Schaffner (remote): not in favor
• Acting chair: not in favor

The motion failed 2-3. The acting chair indicated she preferred a dedicated meeting rather than a half-hour discussion squeezed into the retreat agenda. Interim Superintendent John Rob (six weeks in the role) stated that upon further reflection he supported tabling the discussion to allow for broader community input, and acknowledged his initial position had been that a policy framework was useful. He expressed that student voice should be a priority.

The committee agreed to publicize a future dedicated meeting with evening hours and Zoom access so more community members could attend.

Finance Committee Chair Alec Goki presented a long-term financial forecasting initiative to the Select Board.

Budget Baseline

• Town-wide budget voted at Town Meeting: approximately $115 million
• Excluding enterprise funds and previously approved debt-exclusion debt service: approximately $91.5 million adjusted budget
• Of that, 83% is salaries/wages, insurance/benefits, and pension
• Schools represent 67.5% of the salary/wages category; fire and police together bring the top-three combined share to 85%

Forecasting Plan Goki described a phased process:

1. Salary & wages — FinCom liaisons assist department heads in populating a roster-level template (name, position, hours, grade, step, step date, health plan enrollment) anchored to the FY25 approved budget
2. Insurance & benefits — Alicia (Finance Director) to prepare a 3–4 slide projection with trend data
3. Pension — primarily actuarial; retirement board and Finance Director lead
4. Utilities and other expenses — including waste/trash contract as a volatile line
5. Debt service — interaction of new debt coming on and existing debt rolling off to illustrate tax-bill impact and potential override scenarios

Key challenges noted:

• Union contracts on the town side require Town Meeting ratification and have not yet been settled
• School contract negotiations also ongoing; school committee can ratify independently
• Complex stipend calculations in public-safety contracts (e.g., rates tied to specific grade/step multiplied by hours worked) make projection difficult
• ClearGov is being used but has not yet been fully built out with personnel tables for automated scenario modeling

Goki indicated the FY26 budget submission deadline to Finance Director Alicia went out before end of June — roughly three months earlier than prior years. A “level services vs. available revenues” comparison will be produced as in the prior two years. The long-term forecast is intended to determine whether an override is necessary, with Goki noting many Massachusetts towns have gone for overrides in recent years.

The committee took up a motion to increase the assistant director of student services from 0.5 to 1.0 FTE, funding the additional half-position from the pre-K/kindergarten revolving account. Committee member Sarah Fox expressed concern that the revolving fund’s establishing language may only authorize expenditures tied directly to tuition-paying students in that program, and questioned whether the use was legally permissible. Administrators responded that the position’s primary focus would be early childhood students and that using such revolving accounts for related staff is not atypical. Finance staff projected that because the hire would start mid-year, the actual cost would be approximately $47,000 rather than the full $53,000 annualized amount, a savings of roughly $8,700. The committee voted 4 to 0, with Fox voting in favor but requesting a follow-up meeting with administration to review the funding source question.

Interim Finance Director Delay reported an unencumbered FY24 balance of approximately $988,000 as of the meeting date, with two payrolls and three accounts payable warrants yet to be processed. She indicated the district had also pre-paid $900,000 in special education tuition and pre-purchased $300,000 in technology. The final surplus is expected to be less than 1% of the total budget. Any remaining balance reverts to the town as free cash without a committee vote.

The focused program review conducted in January found 28 of 34 standards fully meeting all required elements, with 6 partially met and no violations. Areas of partial compliance included: SLD determination documentation inconsistency, age-18 rights notice (SE7), re-evaluation timelines (SE12), annual review timelines (SE14), IEP distribution timing (SE18B), and service delivery delays without written parent notice. The interim director noted significant difficulty filling special education positions for the coming year and recommended increasing summer teaching staff pay above $33/hour to remain competitive. No vote was required on this item.

On the recommendation of interim Superintendent McGinnis and interim Finance Director Delay, the committee voted 4–0 to approve individual contract salary adjustments totaling $127,804, an increase of $8,162 over the amount approved at the May 16 meeting.

Following the contract vote, the chair moved to a communication survey presentation. Board members noted the survey received 568 responses and discussed logistics for displaying the data using pivot tables and presentation slides.

Interim Director of Finance Mary Ju described a rigorous RFP process: five proposals were received, all of high quality. An evaluation team including board member Alison Taylor, interim Director of Student Services Patricia Bell, and a team chair scored proposals using a structured point system. Academic Discoveries, a Massachusetts-based consultancy, ranked highest.

After reference checks and negotiations, the contract was set at a not-to-exceed price of $58,000. The review will be more comprehensive than the recent DESE monitoring audit, examining demographic data, academic performance, IEPs, process, and procedures districtwide. The committee noted the review would work in tandem with the DESE monitoring response plan.

Board member Alison Taylor praised the process and the structured spreadsheet approach used by Mary Ju to facilitate independent review of the thick proposal packets.

Vote: 5 to 0.

The committee voted 5-0 to renew the annual MOU with Essex North Shore Agricultural and Technical School (Essex Tech). Per the MOU, the per-student cost is $7,500 or the Chapter 74 per-pupil differential rate, whichever is higher.

The committee learned that the after-dark dual-enrollment CTE program — in which Marblehead juniors attend MHHS in the morning and Essex Tech in the afternoon for programs such as health assisting (leading to CNA certification), construction/craft labor, early education and care, and sustainable horticulture — will not enroll a new junior cohort for the upcoming year. The decision was budgetary (program cost was approximately equal to a full-time high school teacher) and enrollment-driven (only four students had expressed interest for the new cohort). Current enrolled students (rising seniors) will complete the two-year program.

Vote: 5 to 0.

Marblehead Veterans Middle School (Principal Fox) — four goals:

1. Vertical curriculum alignment with Village School and MHHS (Teaching & Learning)
2. Social-emotional learning curriculum and student engagement calendar, emphasizing “belonging” (Teaching & Learning)
3. Peer observation program expanded with a standardized observation tool; nearly 10 teachers conducted over 30 peer observations this year (Professional Culture)
4. Belonging survey to be administered to evaluate DEI curriculum efforts (DEI strand)

Marblehead High School (Principal Carlson) — four goals:

1. Prepare for NEASC accreditation collaborative visit (spring or fall 2025)
2. Continue vertical alignment work with MVMS begun this year (Teaching & Learning)
3. Professional learning around AI literacy and technology; a teacher AI study group formed this year (Professional Culture)
4. DEI model classrooms and curriculum lens review; a student found an outdated (10-year-old) worksheet with historical errors, leading to a social studies curriculum revision (DEI)

DESE monitoring audit discussion: A DESE special education monitoring report (three-year cycle) arrived just days before the meeting, later than the required 60 days post-visit. Interim Director of Student Services Patricia Bell and incoming Assistant Superintendent of Student Services Lisa Mariao are working with DESE. A July 1 response plan deadline applies. The committee noted the full special education program review contract (voted later in the meeting) would work in tandem with addressing the DESE findings.

Vote: Motion to approve both school improvement plans — 5 to 0.

Gina Hart presented results from the October 2023 Marblehead Youth High School Survey, administered to all students grades 9–12. Key findings included:

Response rates:

• 743 students responded to the MGH survey (85% response rate, up from 75% the prior year)
• 677 responses to the supplemental Marblehead Youth Risk Behavior Survey

Mental health data (above risk threshold):

• Anxiety: ~25%
• Depression: ~15% (decreased)
• Psychotic experiences: ~11%
• Suicidal thoughts: ~16% (decreased)
• Suicide attempt: 3% (increased from ~1%)
• Non-suicidal self-injury: ~11% (unchanged)
• 47.8% of 12th graders above the anxiety/depression risk threshold

Substance use (lifetime):

• Alcohol (ever tried a sip): ~40%
• Cannabis/THC: ~20%
• Nicotine (vaping, cigarettes, etc.): increased slightly

Past-30-day use:

• Alcohol: 6.6%
• Marijuana: 4.5%
• Nicotine vape products (daily): 5.1%

Other notable findings:

• 68.2% of nicotine vape users plan to quit within a month
• ~35% of past-30-day nicotine users report cravings within the first hour of waking (addiction indicator)
• Students overestimate peers’ substance use, a risk factor per social norms theory

Programs discussed:

• A diversion program (“I Decide” through MGH) for students caught vaping, serving ~10 students/year
• Narcan available in all district schools
• New health educator to be added at Village School (grades 4–6) for FY next year
• Stanford-partnered “Vape Free” curriculum piloted at the middle school
• High school piloted reduced phone access during academic time
• The NAN Project (free storytelling/mental health programming in ~75 schools) discussed as a potential future resource

Board members discussed refining survey questions on impaired driving, adding questions about phone/social media use, and potential collaboration between the Board of Health and the school system on community programming.

Interim Director of Finance Mary Deli reported on the FY24 budget status. During prior budget discussions, the district committed to prepaying approximately $600,000 in tuitions and technology to help support the FY25 budget. As of the report:

• $300,000 in technology orders have already been placed
• The district projects an end-of-year surplus of approximately $755,000 (after the technology prepayment)
• At least $300,000 more will be used to prepay special education tuitions as committed
• Additional surplus beyond that is expected to go toward prepaying further special education tuitions, purchasing technology not funded in the FY25 budget, and replenishing athletics and extracurricular revolving funds to help cushion fee impacts for students
• The district has signed two additional out-of-district placement agreements beyond the four previously signed, potentially increasing special education expenditures beyond what was budgeted

The committee noted that the special education program review may help identify opportunities to provide more services in-district or through collaboratives, reducing out-of-district placement costs. Business Manager Emma (departing June 7) was recognized for her work.

Gina Hart, clinical social worker at Marblehead High School, and Assistant Superintendent Julia presented the third annual Youth Risk Behavior Survey to the school committee. Key findings included:

Survey Overview

• 743 students participated, an 85% response rate (up from 75% last year)
• Conducted in partnership with MGH under a grant; a supplemental Marblehead-specific survey had 677 responses
• Survey is anonymous and voluntary; parents and students may opt out

Demographics & Protective Factors

• 85.4% of respondents identified as white (down from ~91% last year, indicating slight increase in racial diversity)
• 95.5% of students reported positive peer connections
• ~63% reported connections with staff
• ~90% engaged in extracurricular activities
• 30% reported getting 8+ hours of sleep (nearly double from the prior year)

Mental Health

• Slight decrease in students at risk for anxiety, depression, or psychotic experiences year-over-year
• 11.4% reported experiences above the clinical threshold for psychotic symptoms (which may include panic or paranoia rather than hallucinations/delusions)
• Suicide attempt rate increased from 1.6% to 3.1% (approximately doubled)
• ~45% reported struggling with body image; ~25% showed risk indicators for disordered eating

Discrimination

• Among students identifying as non-white, 35.7% reported being called racially insulting names
• Religious discrimination increased ~2%; gender identity discrimination also increased from last year
• 64% of sexually diverse students and ~80% of gender-diverse students at risk for anxiety or depression

Substance Use

• ~40% reported ever trying alcohol (consistent across all three years)
• ~20% reported ever trying cannabis/marijuana
• Nicotine use increased to 38%
• 13% of respondents reported first use of a substance at age 12 or younger — described as a notable concern
• ~70% of nicotine users reported planning to quit within the month
• 3.2% reported driving after using marijuana; 21% reported being in a car with someone using alcohol
• Small but flagged percentages reported using prescription drugs, hallucinogens, and other substances with high overdose risk
• THC potency has increased approximately 200% over the last decade, contributing to emergency room visits

Actions and Programs

• Data shared with school staff and will be shared with the Board of Health and Marblehead Mental Health Task Force
• A health educator position was approved for Village School, enabling a vertically aligned health curriculum starting grades 4–6
• District is working on MTSS-aligned social-emotional programming, including body image/body positivity instruction in health classes
• Focus group feedback this year was overwhelmingly positive about health classes and assemblies
• Survey data previously informed the Narcan policy enabling school nurses to carry naloxone

Committee members noted the alarming rate of substance use among sixth graders and younger and called on parents to have these conversations at home. The committee also discussed coordinating with the Board of Health.

Dr. McGinness updated the committee on a special education program review. An evaluation team reviewed five proposals and selected Academic Discovery, with contract negotiations currently underway. The cost proposal is $66,000, to be funded through ESSER funds, IDEA grant funds, and special education tuition revolving funds. An interim report is expected by end of September and a final report no later than December, intended to influence budget planning. The report will also serve as a resource for the new Assistant Superintendent of Student Services.

Under the Education Reform Act of 1993, school committees must affirmatively vote to opt out of the state school choice program before June 1 each year. Dr. McGinness recommended opting out due to lack of available classroom space, particularly at the elementary level, and concerns about class sizes following staffing reductions. After a brief public hearing with no public speakers, the committee voted 5-0 (Al Williams, Alison Taylor, Brian, Jen Chaper/Chatner, Sarah Fox all in favor) to not participate in school choice for the 2024-25 school year. The hearing was closed at 7:04 PM.

The committee approved Option 2 from a user fee analysis prepared by district finance staff for the 2024–25 school year, voting 5–0. Members acknowledged the decision was not taken lightly and described the fee structure as a tool to keep extracurricular and activity programs self-funded and to preserve educator positions. The chair reminded families that principals, athletic directors, and coaches can assist students for whom fees pose a barrier to participation.

The joint Finance Committee and School Committee session focused on how the FY25 school budget gap was closed after earlier presentations had shown a roughly $2.3 million shortfall.

Key financial moves:

The revolving-fund change involved fully allocating staff costs to the tuition-funded pre-K and kindergarten programs rather than the general fund — a practice described as consistent with other Massachusetts districts. The circuit breaker reserve was left fully intact.

With the restoration, planned reductions fell from 36 positions to approximately 3.7 FTE (5 positions) resulting in layoffs.

A financial advisor (Mary) noted that a 1% end-of-year surplus is typical for school budgets of this size; the current FY24 projection is approximately 2%, providing confidence that the $600,000 draw is reasonable. The School Committee voted to require financial-implication decisions to come before it for the remainder of the term to safeguard the projected surplus.

Discussion also covered:

• Paid kindergarten and equity concerns; Marblehead is one of only two Commonwealth towns still charging tuition for part of the school day
• Possibility of mandatory pre-K at the state/federal level within a few years
• Improving budget transparency through ClearGov integration and showing gross costs with offsets
• If local-receipts town meeting articles fail, the school budget may need to be amended downward by approximately $200,000

Vote: Finance Committee unanimously recommended the school FY25 budget at $46,759,110.

The Finance Committee chair delivered a detailed written statement on the FY25 budget before the vote:

Revenue highlights:

• Total new revenues above prior year: $1.5 million (1.5% increase)
• Tax levy increase: ~$1.8 million (full 2.5% Prop 2½ allowance)
• New growth estimate: ~$300,000 (conservative, in line with 3-year average)
• Free cash used to balance: $5.5 million (down from $8 million the prior year)
• New local receipts (Articles 24 & 25 if passed): $400,000 conservatively
• State aid increase: ~$500,000

Expense cost drivers:

• Wages: +3–4% overall (2% COLA plus steps/lanes)
• Health insurance: +8–10%
• Utilities: +5–10%
• Trash collection: +~20%

Budget totals:

School budget increase: ~2%; Town budget increase: ~1%.

The chair noted that the town is using 50/50 split methodology between town and school departments and warned that absent a longer-term plan, service cuts in future years are inevitable. He identified four paths to address the structural deficit: increase non-override revenues (meals/rooms tax, fees, new growth), use free cash/reserves, cut costs, or pursue a Prop 2½ override. The two prior overrides (FY22 and FY23 warrants) failed. He commended adoption of ClearGov financial reporting software as a significant improvement. Recommended unanimously.

Article 18 (transfer funds to special education stabilization) was not requested this year. The FinCom chair noted the fund was created approximately seven years ago at $250,000 and has never been drawn upon. The committee discussed Circuit Breaker reimbursements from the state and the volatility of special education costs. FinCom voted unanimously to recommend indefinite postponement.

Mark Stroud (40 Maple Street, Essex Tech School Committee Chair) presented Article 17. Key figures:

• FY24 assessment: $468,762
• FY25 assessment: $468,057 (essentially flat)
• FY24 per-pupil cost: $17,983
• FY25 per-pupil cost: $18,722 (4.11% increase)
• Marblehead enrollment: 25 students, representing a 1.783% participation factor
• District enrollment: 1,746 students, projected to grow to 1,774
• Essex Tech is the second most affordable of 28 vocational-technical schools in Massachusetts
• District received over $5 million in competitive grants this year, including an $850,000 federal grant

FinCom recommended the $468,057 appropriation unanimously.

The Select Board opened the Finance Committee warrant hearing by taking a vote on reducing the Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) line item by $250,000 to make funds available for the school budget. The CFO explained the reduction would not have a material impact on the OPEB liability in the short term.

One board member expressed concern about public safety staffing vacancies and said they could only support $150,000 going to the schools, with $100,000 kept for public safety needs. Another member noted that a consistent 50/50 split between town and school budgets had been an agreed-upon principle and expressed discomfort with the schools drawing from the town side. A third member acknowledged the hard work of the finance liaisons (identified as Molly and Alec) and deferred to professional staff guidance.

The vote was 4 to 1 in favor of the full $250,000 transfer. The board noted that anticipated year-end turnbacks from the schools would exceed this amount, and that free cash levels would be maintained to protect the town’s AAA bond rating.

Superintendent McGinness and Director of Finance Mary presented a prioritized restoration list developed collaboratively with school and district leadership. The list was divided into three categories ranked by urgency, plus an unprioritized fourth group:

Key discussion points:

• The committee had previously rejected a level-funded budget and was seeking to move closer to “level services.”
• Restoring categories 1–3 costs approximately $1.2 million above the reduced-services baseline.
• Funding sources discussed: (a) drawing down revolving accounts from 100% reserve to ~80–85%; (b) using projected year-end surplus (estimated at roughly $600,000 available); (c) approximately $340,000–$380,000 in incremental revenue from proposed athletic/extracurricular user fee increases; (d) potentially asking the town for an additional ~$250,000 from unallocated free cash (free cash came in approximately $200,000 above the state-of-the-town estimate).
• A committee member expressed concern about funding ongoing positions with one-time sources, noting FY26 budget projections are negative. The chair responded that revolving funds are recurring and that FY26 planning must begin immediately.
• Category 4 items — including after-dark programs and certain athletics stipends — were not restored. Committee members requested more detail on specific special education paraprofessionals at Glover and Village Schools before the next vote.
• The total budget voted was approximately $47,476,000. The committee acknowledged this number will be reduced by a second vote within days (possibly Monday at 5:30 PM via Zoom) once Mary finalizes revolving-fund and surplus numbers. That reduction will not cut staff — it reflects moving certain funding from the general fund appropriation to revolving accounts and surplus.
• FinCom had been scheduled to vote the school budget that same evening but collaborated with the school committee to delay, with FinCom expected to vote the following Monday.
• A spending cutoff for FY24 purchase orders was set at May 15 to protect the year-end surplus.

Vote: Motion by Allison Taylor, second by Sarah Fox — approved unanimously (5–0).

Following the public forum, the committee convened its business session to deliberate on FY25 budget next steps. Fox summarized the two budgets produced: a level-services budget (approximately 5.7% increase over current year) and a reduced-services budget aligned to the town’s revenue projections.

Revolving fund analysis: Fox and Interim Superintendent Theresa McGinnis described efforts underway to identify savings within revolving funds:

• Kindergarten and pre-K revolving accounts: Finance Director Mary Deley believes not all allowable costs are currently charged to these funds; correction could free operating budget dollars.
• Food service revolving fund: A large balance has accumulated due to federal reimbursement for all student meals. The food service director’s salary (the department’s largest) is planned to shift into the revolving fund for FY25, and possibly FY24, freeing that salary line.
• Building rental revolving fund: Deley is exploring whether utility costs for rental periods could be charged to a town utility reserve.
• Circuit breaker (special education reimbursement): McGinnis suggested moving from carrying 100% of the prior year’s reimbursement in reserve to 75% for one year to ease budget pressure. Fox expressed reluctance given recent SPED turmoil and the risk of departing from best practice. A special education stabilization fund of $250,000 funded in 2019 has not been used.

Health insurance: Fox noted that the town re-allocated $1.3 million in over-budgeted health insurance to town salary lines. She requested that approximately half ($650,000) be allocated to the school budget given schools represent over 50% of town employees; she said the response from the town side has not yet been promising.

One-time funds concern: Fox cautioned against using one-time revenue sources for recurring costs, a practice she said the town side is pursuing to bridge one more year.

Budget direction vote (informal): The moderator asked whether any committee member supported the reduced-services budget as presented. No member indicated support. Fox stated emphatically she would not vote a budget with further cuts to staff. The committee unanimously indicated the reduced-services budget is off the table.

Next steps: McGinnis said she and the principals have been prioritizing the list of proposed cuts across three scenarios (current year’s proposed cuts, last year’s 33 cuts, and an earlier aspirational list) so the committee can identify what to restore at various funding levels. She committed to providing this list before Monday’s meeting. The committee will meet Monday at 7:00 PM (location to be confirmed) to review the prioritized list and determine whether to proceed with level services, a hybrid, or a number requiring an override.

Fox: ‘I emphatically am telling you, I am not approving something that has further cuts to our staffs and our students. I’m just not.’

The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:20 PM.

Members noted that the phrase ‘fully funded’ carries different meanings to different community members—ranging from no further cuts, to restoring previous service levels, to aspirational investment. Without a clear definition, the committee has not produced a third ‘fully funded’ budget.

At the direction of the town’s finance director, the committee prepared two budgets: a level-services budget (same services as the current year, approximately 5.7% increase) and a reduced-services budget (cuts to come in at projected revenue). The finance committee and finance director set the revenue projection framework.

One member argued that a fully aspirational budget would require a completed strategic plan and a sustainable long-term funding source, which does not yet exist. The committee noted the FY25 budget deliberation was scheduled as a business item immediately after the forum.

Asked about target class sizes, members noted elementary schools aim for 20 or fewer students. Glover School averages 15–16, Brown and Village schools around 20–21. High school core-subject classes average 17–18 students.

The committee emphasized that class size alone does not capture budget pressure: post-COVID increases in social-emotional and academic complexity among both general and special education students have expanded service needs regardless of headcount. Enrollment has declined consistently for seven to eight years, a trend common among similarly sized Massachusetts communities.

Superintendent McGinnis presented the FY25 preliminary reduced-services budget, developed in response to a town appropriation yielding only approximately $755,000 in new revenue — far below the $2.5 million needed for level services.

Key budget figures: | Item | Amount | |—|—| | Level services budget | ~$47M (5.77% increase) | | Reduced services budget | ~$45M (1.68% increase) | | Deficit gap | ~$2.3–2.5M | | Out-of-district tuition (FY25 projected) | $4.4M (18.5% increase) | | Out-of-district students (FY25) | 46 (up from 42) |

Proposed cuts include:

• 36 positions / 28 FTEs eliminated
• 4 classroom teachers, 4 special educators, 2 adjustment counselors, 1 EL teacher, 2 reading teachers, 1 BCBA, 5 general ed support staff, 1 assistant principal (Vet School), 5 clerical/administrative positions, 4 lunch paras, 3 special ed paras/tutors, 2 facility staff, 1 driver, 1 assistant director of student services
• Consolidation of therapeutic program from Glover and Brown schools to Brown only
• Transfer of coaching and extracurricular stipends to participant user fees
• Elimination of elementary teacher leaders
• Significant reductions in professional development and instructional supplies

Athletic user fees — two revised options were presented:

• Option 1 (annual fee): $990 high school, $440 middle school, $290 per-student activity fee; family cap $1,800
• Option 2 (per-season fee): $540 first season, $490 second, $440 third; family cap $2,060

Interim Director of Student Services Patricia Bell also presented a staffing accountability report showing current IEP service demands versus available FTEs, noting data is fluid and that service delivery models (1:1, small group, push-in) complicate direct FTE comparisons.

Acting Director of Finance Mary Dely noted that among 13 Essex County comparable districts, Marblehead’s per-pupil spending is among the highest while its student-to-staff ratio (10.3) is among the lowest, suggesting a trade-off between staffing levels and teacher compensation.

Dr. McGinnis reported that interim Director of Student Services Ashley Bell began full-time approximately 10 days earlier and discovered data inaccuracies in the Aspen system when pulling the staffing accountability report. Corrections require direct input from special educators and team chairs; the report is now expected by end of the following week.

Veterans Middle School principal Matt walked the committee through a multi-step staffing process:

1. Communication with sending school (Village) on incoming student needs
2. Program-level staffing (inclusion: two case managers per grade level)
3. Support personnel (tutors, counselors, psychologists)
4. Specialized services (OT, PT, SLP—shared with high school)

He noted 706 current individual athletes and that the process of converting individual IEP service minutes into spreadsheet form is new and time-intensive, requiring staff who personally know students to validate data.

Committee members reiterated that the data is needed to make the case to the public and the Finance Commission for adequate funding—not to audit administration. One member noted the district has lost approximately 33 positions in the prior year on top of the projected ~35 positions in the current $2.3 million reduction scenario. The permanent sub team (Tracy Meg and Phil Witt) was recognized for keeping the middle school library accessible on a small stipend after the librarian position was eliminated.

Athletic Director Greg and Assistant Business Manager Emma Plessi presented a comparative analysis of athletic fee structures alongside peer districts in the Cape Ann and Northeastern conferences.

Current structure: High school unlimited fee $495 (covers 1–3 seasons); family cap $800.

Three proposed options (all generating roughly equivalent revenue):

Comparison context: Current family cap of $800 is among the lowest in the area; Swampscott and Triton are near $1,800.

Committee members raised concerns:

• Option 3 family cap would be roughly 101% higher than Swampscott and a 371% increase for families.
• Approximately 706 individual athletes currently enrolled (will grow to ~800 with spring registrations).
• There are approximately $102,000 in additional extracurricular advisor stipends not included in the $170,000 athletic gap figure.
• Members asked for a deeper offline analysis with Emma and Mary Delly before the budget public hearing on March 21.
• Equity concerns were raised: high fees could deter participation and create access barriers.
• If insufficient students enroll in a given sport under Option 3, the program may not be fielded.

No vote was taken. The matter will be further discussed at the March 21 public budget hearing at the PAC at Veterans Middle School, 7:00 PM.

Carrie Power (online) asked each committee member about their understanding of special education law (IDEA, FAPE) and the budget implications of potential cuts. Key points from committee responses:

• Members acknowledged special education is a legally mandated obligation that cannot be reduced to meet budget targets the way discretionary programs can.
• The committee had previously requested an RFP for an outside audit of the special education department’s processes and policies; members noted they had not yet received a response or updated information on that audit.
• Brian, a former principal and special education teacher, stated that building-level staff are well-versed in IEP administration and that the issues stemmed from the top of the pupil-services department.
• Members emphasized that out-of-district placements represent a significant cost driver and that those students remain part of the Marblehead district.

Committee members described the prior evening’s three-and-a-half-hour budget presentation by the administration. Two budgets were prepared at the request of the Finance Commission:

The budget hearing for community input was scheduled for March 21st. Members encouraged residents to review the detailed budget materials posted online.

School principals presented detailed budget reduction proposals to the School Committee for FY27. Key items discussed included:

Middle School

• Loss of the school librarian last year reduced first-semester book checkouts from a typical 2,200–5,000 to fewer than 400; the library remains open three days per week after school
• Restoration of the librarian position was on the principals’ wish list but unfunded

High School (Dr. Carlson)

• Current staffing: 132.5 FTE
• Goals include preserving tiered academic interventions (RTI, co-teaching), updating curriculum alignment, and maintaining MCAS progress back to pre-pandemic levels
• Proposed reductions:
  • Special education teachers: from 16 down to 14.6 (one position eliminated, one made part-time)
  • Special education paraprofessionals/tutors: from 15 down to 12.4
  • One school counselor/mental health position reduced (current count of 10 includes guidance counselors, mental health counselors, psychologists, and social workers)
  • Secretary positions reduced with workload redistributed
  • Non-SPED paraprofessional/tutor position already moved to SPED use
• RTI classes (6 sections in math, English, and science) and co-teaching preserved under this budget

District-wide summary slide

• Total reductions: 36 positions, 28 FTEs
• Of the 36 positions, approximately 4.2 are currently vacant and 3 are open vacancies
• Other cuts include: consolidation of the therapeutic program to Brown School, elimination of elementary teacher-leader positions, significant decrease in professional development and instructional supply budgets, partial transfer of athletics/extracurricular funding to participants
• Principals’ unfunded wish list included: middle school librarian restoration, 7 tutor positions for elementary MTSS support, 2 permanent substitute positions, staffing for Bridge for Resilient Youth program, and curriculum/data intervention coaching at the high school

School Committee discussion

• A committee member noted unemployment costs are projected to increase by approximately $400,000 due to prior layoffs
• Members highlighted that the district identified approximately $2.5 million in cuts while the town side identified approximately $1 million
• The committee chair described the presentation as the most thorough and detailed budget presentation seen, while noting the district has faced repeated annual cuts since at least 2019
• The school committee vote on the superintendent-recommended budget was tentatively scheduled for March 21
• Next steps include school advisory council presentations, staff accountability data, and a special education numbers overlay

Village School class sizes: fourth grade 21, fifth grade 21, sixth grade 18 (home rooms). Projected next year similar. The principal reiterated that supply cuts and tutor reductions are necessary to keep a classroom teacher, and that the loss of a general education tutor pool eliminates Wit & Wisdom small-group support.

The middle school principal presented a ‘Kathy Leonardson slide’ showing mode and range of class sizes by subject: English mode 23, science mode 24 (inflated because substantially separate students re-enter for science). A third of all middle school classes are already at 23 or above. Enrollment is projected flat; seventh grade has rebounded strongly post-COVID. The principal tracks cohorts back to third grade to project enrollment and anticipates the incoming class will be manageable but not small.

Both principals discussed the importance of not cutting further into special education staffing, noting legally capped class sizes of 10 for substantially separate programs and the fluidity of student needs (e.g., EI transitions at age 3).

The middle school principal presented goals including MTSS, PBIS, DEI, and Wit & Wisdom implementation, and reported the school ranks first or second on the North Shore in all four MCAS growth and achievement categories. For FY26 he is eliminating the assistant principal position (a retirement, saving the equivalent of two teaching positions) and one classroom teacher. This will bring some eighth-grade class sizes to 27 in three subject periods.

The principal warned that continued cuts could require abandoning the team-based middle school structure in favor of a departmentalized junior high model, noting he has experienced this in a prior district and considers it a serious programmatic loss. He described creative scheduling this year—cross-team teacher assignments—to absorb a larger-than-expected seventh-grade cohort (which grew from 24 to 42 students after COVID-era departures). He also noted the loss of a Latin position in a prior budget cycle created a structural scheduling problem that still affects Spanish class sizes (averaging 25–26).

The principal presented detailed data on 29 mandated special education support sections (17 inclusion, 12 through ABA, language-based, and therapeutic strands), and noted that four inclusion teachers carry an average caseload of 18 students with co-teaching in English and math.

Village School (grades 4–6, enrollment ~537 projected next year) will see the following FY26 reductions:

• Classroom teachers: 28 → 26 (–2)
• Other teachers: 3 → 2 (–1)
• Paraprofessional/tutor: 3.73 → 1.10 FTE
• School counselor: –1
• Special education teacher: –1 (transferred to Brown)
• Supply budget: –$70,000

The principal emphasized that the supply cut was chosen over cutting an additional teacher position, and that losing tutors eliminates general education support in Wit & Wisdom intervention blocks. She noted Village currently has 7 inclusion teachers with an average caseload of 10—a ratio described as favorable but set deliberately through a co-teaching model. The principal expressed concern that the therapeutic support program may be discussed for consolidation and stressed that any such shift requires community transparency, as neighborhood home-school assignment was a key promise made during the school building campaign.

During discussion of capital and program funding, the superintendent confirmed that the town’s ARPA committee voted to allocate $63,000 for Year 2 of Wit & Wisdom professional development implementation, which had been cut from the school budget. She had presented the case for continuity of the program. A 10-minute recess was then called before the second half of the principal presentations.

Brown School principal Maxfield reported FY26 reductions including a 0.5 secretary position, reduced ELL staff as a larger cohort transitions to Village, and reduced tutor hours that will cut small-group intervention capacity. She noted Brown’s inclusion teacher average caseload of 11 versus Glover’s 29.4% lower caseload, raising a question about whether outcomes differ by caseload size. A committee member noted that cutting custodians will bring the district to 20.3 FTE against a CEDS recommendation of 27, and that last year’s savings came from leaving positions vacant rather than formal cuts. The Brown School MCAS results showed increases of nine points in ELA and math from FY22 to FY23.

Both principals discussed goals centered on MTSS implementation, the Wit & Wisdom literacy curriculum, DEI team work on the BEAP document, and collaborative problem-solving. Kindergarten enrollment projections were described as difficult to forecast; the district has begun directing new-to-district kindergartners to whichever elementary school has lower enrollment, though redistricting has not been formally adopted.

To address custodial shortfalls without net new hires, the facilities director said several maintenance employees will be reclassified as maintenance-custodians on offset schedules, preserving institutional knowledge and avoiding layoffs. The director noted the district is already four positions below CEDS recommendations and said external complaints about building appearance reflect inadequate staffing rather than staff performance.

The facilities director explained that after five years he is now implementing a structured preventive maintenance program. Custodial staffing targets CEDS Level 2 for elementary schools and Level 3 for larger buildings; the district is currently below the recommended 27 FTE custodians and will fall to roughly 20 after planned reductions. The idle school building has water and gas shut off at the street, the fire panel remains active, and staff installed exterior cameras and conduct daily checks seven days a week.

The technology director reported the district now owns approximately 5,000 devices—1,493 iPads, 2,612 Chromebooks, 520 laptops, and 485 desktops—and has achieved one-to-one coverage for grades K–2 (iPads) and 3–6 (Chromebooks). Grades 7–8 use shared carts. The high school operates a BYOT model, with roughly 900 student-owned devices connecting to the network daily; in the past 30 days about 12,700 individual devices connected across all buildings. Security grants funded cameras at the idle school building. Technology staff are student-facing districtwide and respond to device issues in real time.

Special Education Philosophy & FY25 Direction

Patty Bell (Day 3 as interim director) described a shift toward using specialists such as speech-language pathologists in broader tier-one settings rather than exclusively in one-on-one instruction, particularly at the youngest grades. The goal is to strengthen universal instruction so fewer students require intensive tier-three supports.

Staffing Changes in Student Services

• Administrative assistant to the student services office: increased from 0.5 FTE to 1.0 FTE given loss of the assistant director position.
• Unfilled behavior analyst (BCBA) position: Not being filled for FY25. The school committee member noted concern; Bell indicated this is strictly a tier-three, clinically specialized role and that the current caseload does not warrant filling it at this time. She committed to reviewing service hours in IEPs and contracts before finalizing this position.

Multi-Year View

Bell noted that re-examining special education delivery models to reduce budget load will be a multi-year process. She described reviewing caseloads, efficient service delivery, and identifying model changes in the remaining four months of the school year.

Central Administration Changes

• Food Services Director: Not eliminated; salary moved from central office operating budget to the food services revolving fund.
• Assistant Director of Student Services: Position eliminated. Responsibilities are being redistributed; the special education administrative assistant will increase from 0.5 FTE to 1.0 FTE to absorb some duties.
• Central registrar: A 0.25 FTE (10 hours/week) position eliminated.
• Admin assistant hours: Minor reductions totaling fractional FTE adjustments.

Special Education Administrative Restructuring

The district currently has six special education administrators. The proposed structure assigns one to each school building, with the sixth overseeing pre-K across both elementary schools and out-of-district placements. This replaces a prior model where administrators served multiple buildings, which had been confusing operationally.

Teaching & Learning (Assistant Superintendent Ferrera)

• Office represents approximately 2% of total budget.
• Maintaining instructional coaches (viewed as critical); reduced external professional development contracts and curriculum purchases.
• Continuing to fund the I-Ready universal screener.
• One additional instructional coach is grant-funded (Title grant) and does not appear in the operating budget.
• District has four literacy/math coaches total; three are in the operating budget, one is grant-funded.
• A $75,000 Innovations Pathways grant was submitted to DESE for collaborative problem-solving training (Dr. Stuart Ablon, Harvard/MGH); reduces need for restraints by ~80% per research. Decision expected in two weeks.

Budget Overview

The administration opened with three framing points:

1. Fiscal responsibility and educational quality are both necessary simultaneously.
2. Marblehead taxpayers have rejected overrides twice in two years, so no override is assumed for FY25.
3. New Interim Director of Student Services Patty Bell (Day 3 on the job) is reviewing special education staffing grids.

Level-Services Budget

The level-services request came in at approximately $47,423,851, an increase of roughly $2.5 million or 5.77% over FY24. Major cost drivers:

• Wages: ~$927,000
• Out-of-district tuition (operating budget): ~$448,000
• Out-of-district transportation: ~$409,000
• Utility costs (gross increase ~$487,000, but ~$400,000 is a transfer from the town side, so net increase is smaller)
• IT/hardware equipment replacement plan: ~$420,000
• Various other increases (legal costs, etc.): ~$293,000

Salaries and wages represent 80% of the total budget.

Reduced-Services Budget

The town indicated approximately $1.5 million in available new revenues, allocating 50% (~$755,000) to the schools. Taking the FY24 adopted budget of approximately $44.8 million and adding $755,000 yields a reduced-services budget of approximately $45,592,667 — an increase of 1.68% over FY24 (vs. the 5.77% needed for level services), creating an effective gap of roughly $2.3 million in reductions.

Two additional budget transfers are not reflected in the 1.68% figure:

• $400,000 utility reserve transfer from the town
• Medicare payroll tax transfer for school-side employees

Budget Offsets

• Circuit breaker (special education reimbursement): ~$1.4 million; the district has now reached the recommended one-year reserve level after four years of building toward it, enabling a ~$1 million offset in the reduced-services scenario.
• Special education tuition revenues: ~$90,000 offset.
• Revolving funds (athletics fees, etc.): sound financial practice requires carrying one year of revenue before using as a budget offset.

Out-of-District Placements

• FY24: 42 students in out-of-district placements
• FY25 projected: 46 students (includes 4 placeholders)
• OSD rate increase for FY25: 4.69% (down from 14% last year)

Enrollment

• District enrollment as of October 1 (most recent): approximately 2,619 students
• Projections show slight growth to approximately 2,708 by 2028
• 108 English Learners districtwide
• School committee class-size policy is approximately 25 students; administration suggested the policy may warrant refinement by grade band (K–3 vs. upper grades)

Budget Allocation by School (Level Services)

| School/Area | % of Budget | |—|—| | High School | 22% | | High School Athletics | 1% | | Veteran School | 15% | | Village School | 15% | | Glover School | 8% | | Brown School | 11% | | Central Administration | 8% | | Teaching & Learning | 2% | | Student Services | 10% | | Information Technology | 2% | | Other/Operations | 6% |

Grants

• Federal entitlement grants (Title, IDEA): ~$1.4–1.5M annually (FY22–FY24)
• State grants: METCO, METCO ATT, Innovations Pathways (~$75,000 first year)
• Remaining ESSER/COVID funds: ~$250,000 must be spent by September
• All grants must supplement, not supplant, the operating budget per federal regulations

Tiered Decision-Making Methodology

The administration used a four-tier framework mirroring the district’s MTSS model:

• Tier 1 (last to cut): Instructional staff in classrooms
• Tier 2: Teaching & learning materials, technology, course offerings
• Tier 3: Extracurricular programs including athletics
• Tier 4 (first to cut): Professional development, transportation

Principals met repeatedly, reviewed data across schools, and made cross-school equity considerations (e.g., adjusting cuts when one school’s class sizes would increase disproportionately).

Finance Committee members argued that reviewing only the general fund appropriation gives an incomplete picture and requested a consolidated view showing:

• All grant revenues (Title I, IDEA 240, METCO, etc.) and their associated expenses
• Revolving fund balances (food service ended FY23 with approximately $564,000 in balance; school lunch revenue now exceeds costs because the state covers all student meals)
• Circuit breaker rollover treatment
• How grant spending rules vary (federal grants must be spent within roughly 27 months; IDEA FY23 balance was approximately $163,000)

The school CFO noted the financial system does not easily produce combined grant/revolving reports, requiring manual Excel work. The CFO also described that the DESE per-pupil spending figure of approximately $148,000 for Marblehead includes charter school tuition payments routed through cherry sheet assessments, making direct comparisons to towns like Lynnfield (approximately $41,000 per pupil) difficult. The district recently signed on to a benchmarking platform (described as ‘ArcX’ or similar) covering 12 comparable districts.

A Finance Committee member cautioned against presenting data in a way that pits special education spending against general education spending, while acknowledging SPED out-of-district costs are a primary budget pressure. The district has 12 students at Landmark School; Landmark and Windham Woods together serve the district’s language-based program students.

The school business administrator provided a FY24 budget update, noting:

• Transportation: Budgeted at $880,000 but estimated to reach $1.1 million in FY24, with FY25 projected at $2 million. Transportation bids are sometimes returned at $500/day with only one vendor responding.
• Tuition (out-of-district): Approximately $200,000 over budget, but offset by a $539,000 prepayment of out-of-district tuitions made in June of the prior year — the fourth consecutive year this practice has been used.
• Residential placement: A nearly $100,000 residential placement finalized in the prior week was on the district’s radar but not fully certain.
• Circuit breaker: FY23 carryover was approximately $900,000; $1.2 million received and applied to FY24; $1.4 million received and to be applied to FY25; FY26 projection is $1.6 million — though state reimbursement rate (historically 75%) may decrease.
• Unemployment line: Was increased from $100,000 to $420,000 in the prior year; fewer layoffs than anticipated meant the district had a cushion.
• Vacancy impact: Para, tutor, and custodial positions remain hard to fill due to union pay scales that in some cases start below minimum wage; the district is bringing some workers in at Step 3 or 4 rather than Step 1.

A Finance Committee member flagged that without the prepayment the district would be roughly $500,000 short on the out-of-district line. The group discussed the importance of maintaining the circuit breaker one-year rollover best practice, referencing the 2018 shortfall that precipitated the district’s financial difficulties.

Assistant Superintendent Cresta presented proposed tuition rate increases for the 2024-25 school year:

• Kindergarten rate had been held flat for 3 years as the district tried to reduce reliance on that revenue; the budget situation requires continuation and an increase.
• 163 students are currently enrolled in tuition-based full-day kindergarten; ~15% receive financial aid.
• The kindergarten program generates approximately $470,000/year used to offset teacher costs.
• 55 peer model preschool students generate approximately $250,000/year.
• The $500 increase is expected to generate approximately $27,000 more from preschool and $70,000 more from kindergarten.
• Revenue goes into revolving funds restricted to those programs.

Committee member Sarah Fox noted that charging for full-day kindergarten is increasingly unusual statewide and expressed concern that the increase is a step away from equity goals. Vote: 5–0 to approve.

Assistant Superintendent Michelle Cresta provided a budget update. Key points:

• The level services budget has been complete for several weeks; the delayed release is because the district was directed to produce both a level services budget and a detailed reduced services budget simultaneously.
• The leadership team is working to identify approximately $2.3 million in cuts, which is in addition to the $1.5 million cut the prior year.
• Cuts are organized in tiers (1–4), with Tier 4 being classroom-facing staff that administrators are trying to protect.
• A complete budget book — including line-item breakout of proposed cuts — will be distributed to committee members by the end of the following week.
• A budget workshop is scheduled for February 28 (the Wednesday after February break).
• Redistricting students across elementary schools to manage enrollment was discussed but deemed beyond current administrative capacity; incoming students may be assigned differently.

“While we had cuts last year of roughly $1.5 million, this year the $2.3 million is in addition to that $1.5 million that we cut.” — Michelle Cresta

Assistant Superintendent Julia (teaching and learning) and literacy coaches Mary Ellen Hart, Mary LeBlanc, and Rebecca Brand presented a mid-year update on the Wit and Wisdom ELA curriculum implemented K–6.

Key data points:

• In the fall, approximately 45% of K–3 students were at or above grade level; by mid-year, that figure exceeded 75%.
• At Village School, the percentage of students below grade level dropped from 47% to 35%.
• District-wide iReady data placed students in the “high performance, high growth” quadrant.

The presentation included a video of fifth-grade students conducting a Socratic seminar discussing Native American stories from their Module 1 unit. Coaches noted that Wit and Wisdom is funded through ARPA funds and that teacher-leader stipends have supported professional learning communities.

The joint session interviewed five candidates alphabetically: Alexa Abowitz, Louisa Zini, Sarah Magazine, Tom Mathers, and Mel Williams (two applicants withdrew before the meeting). Each was asked nine identical questions covering preconceived notions about the committee, day-one priorities, handling differences of opinion, the projected budget deficit (described variously as $2.2M–$2.5M), long-term commitment to run in June, collaboration, the budget reduction, transparency and trust-rebuilding, and collective bargaining.

Key themes from candidates:

• Alexa Abowitz (attorney/general counsel): emphasized communication and crisis-management skills, cited collective bargaining experience representing a school district, acknowledged the $2.3M cut as ‘ugly’ but unavoidable without revenue.
• Louisa Zini (enrichment educator, PTO background): noted she had called the Ethics Commission regarding a potential conflict with her part-time work for SPUR; expressed strong interest in running in June.
• Sarah Magazine (PTO president, Glover School): framed challenges as primarily a communications and reputation-management problem; worried most about retaining the teacher corps; declined to commit to running in June.
• Tom Mathers (prior six-month school committee term): said an override is ‘not in the cards’ given the town hasn’t passed one in 19 years; focused on collective bargaining as the central financial issue; explicitly said he would not seek election in June.
• Mel Williams (Commonwealth IT executive, retiring in five weeks): committed to seeking election; cited finance committee experience in Bedford, teaching background, and experience working with union members in state government.

Round 1 vote results:

• Mel Williams: 4 votes (Murray, Singer, Newton, Schaffner)
• Tom Mathers: 3 votes (Taylor, Grader, Nye)
• Sarah Magazine: 2 votes (Oda, Fox)
• Alexa Abowitz, Louisa Zini, Brenton Speed: 0 votes each

After dropping the zero-vote candidates, Round 2 narrowed to Williams, Mathers, and Magazine:

• Mel Williams: 6 votes (Oda, Schaffner, Fox, Murray, Singer, Newton)
• Tom Mathers: 3 votes (Taylor, Grader, Nye)
• Sarah Magazine: 0 votes

Williams was declared appointed with six votes, exceeding the required majority of five.

Committee members noted the school district is preparing multiple budget scenarios with a projected deficit that could have implications exceeding $2 million, potentially requiring major staff and program cuts. Candidates were asked their views on a possible Proposition 2½ override and how they would prioritize classroom-level spending. One candidate said he had not yet formed a position on the override and needed to understand the data better, while expressing a strong preference for protecting classroom instruction as the last area to cut.

The committee interviewed at least seven applicants — including Louisa, a candidate referred to as Ruth, Sarah (second-year Glover PTO president), a candidate identified as Tom M., and others identified as Alexa, Lisa/Louisa, and a candidate with a computer-science background — across a structured nine-question format.

Recurring questions and themes:

Notable candidate statements:

• One candidate (Sarah) said the district faces a “Herculean” task, warned the teacher corps could be “decimated” in 12–24 months, and called the situation a communication and reputation-management challenge.
• Tom M. said he believed an override “is not in the cards” this year and that the town has not passed one in 19 years; he emphasized scrutinizing unfunded liabilities and non-salary contract terms in collective bargaining.
• One candidate noted the middle school has no librarian and that history textbooks at the high school predate September 11, 2001.
• One candidate (Louisa) consulted the state Ethics Commission about a potential conflict arising from her part-time enrichment work in Marblehead schools.
• Two applicants withdrew before the meeting.

Two rounds of questions occurred because there were multiple open positions (up to three).

Director of Finance Michelle Cresta presented a three-budget framework for FY25:

The level-services budget increase of approximately $3.1M over current funding is driven by:

• Wages (steps + COLA): ~$1,000,000
• Tuition increases (OSD rate 4.69% for FY25): ~$536,000
• Transportation: ~$424,000
• Utilities: ~$487,000
• IT hardware replacement cycle: ~$420,000
• Other (legal, copiers, contracts): ~$191,000

New town revenue for FY26 is estimated at $1.2–$1.5M total, with roughly half (~$700,000) allocated to schools, bringing the reduced-services budget to approximately $45,537,000. The district cut 33 positions totaling $1.5M last year; the current target of $2.3M is described as significantly larger. Staff represents 84% of the budget.

Next steps include leadership team budget collaboration February 5, 8, and 13; school committee budget workshops February 15 and 26; and a public finance forum tentatively set for February 27 co-hosted by Director of Finance Cresta and Town Finance Director Alicia Benjamin.

The committee discussed a draft RFP for a student services audit. Members proposed additions to the scope including:

• De-escalation and restraint protocol adequacy and staff training
• Therapeutic and substantially separate program staffing and adequacy
• Parent/guardian experience in the evaluation and IEP process
• Analysis of trends in out-of-district placements with recommendations for in-district alternatives
• Review of special education chair caseloads and working conditions
• Centralization analysis for elementary special education services

The committee debated RFP versus bid process and favored an RFP to allow qualifications-based review. Members requested that the specifications prohibit bidders with staff who have current or recent (proposed 3–5 year) ties to Marblehead Public Schools. CFO Cresta noted that posting the RFP by approximately January 29th would allow the fastest timeline; each week of delay pushes the process by a week due to posting requirements.

CFO Michelle Cresta presented a high-level FY25 budget overview covering three scenarios:

Key budget drivers cited:

• Staffing COLA (2%) and step increases: ~$1.2 million
• Out-of-district special education tuition increase (OSD rate): 4.69%, projected at ~$700,000 (compounded on top of 14% increase the prior year); includes four placeholder placements
• Utility costs: ~$150,000 increase, with electricity up ~$80,000
• Out-of-district transportation: not yet projected

Cresta noted that 84% of the school budget is salaries and wages. She warned that cutting $2.2 million would require more than the 33 positions eliminated the prior year, which produced only $1.5 million in savings. Budget books were expected to be distributed the following week. The committee was encouraged to attend the State of the Town address the following Wednesday for fiscal projections across all town departments.

A committee member noted that per law the school department must present a balanced budget not exceeding what the town can appropriate, and that any increase proposed at town meeting would require an offsetting decrease elsewhere.

A committee member pressed for movement on a special education audit RFP, noting the request had been outstanding and that the departures of Dr. Donnelly and Ms. Dean from student services made the audit more urgent, not less.

Michelle Cresta noted that draft specifications had been prepared by Dr. Donnelly prior to her departure, and she needs to review those with Dr. McGinnis before sharing with the committee. The committee indicated that the scope could range from special education services only to broader tier-one services. The committee was told to expect the draft scope within approximately two weeks, by the next committee meeting.

Assistant Superintendent Cresta reported on a three-hour working budget session held earlier in the week with principals, the interim superintendent, and business office staff. Topics included additional staffing requests following recent personnel changes, enrollment projections, staffing assignments, and available one-time funding sources including remaining ESSER funds.

The committee agreed to push back the budget book release from January 12th by several days, and further agreed to align delivery of the budget with a staffing accountability study. The committee indicated the January 22nd–23rd budget workshop would likely shift to around January 29th–30th to allow both documents to be ready simultaneously.

The state of the town address is scheduled approximately three weeks out, and the committee noted information from that event could be relevant to budget discussions.

Assistant Superintendent Michelle Cresta explained:

• The district is preparing both a level-services budget (current services at today’s dollars with inflation) and a level-funded budget (flat dollars rolled forward, meaning cuts). Both will be in budget books delivered January 12th.
• A Labor Accountability Project will produce service grids showing required IEP service hours versus current staffing, which the committee chair said would be used to ensure the district is properly staffing mandated services.
• The chair (identified from context as Sarah Fox) stated she would advocate at town meeting for any additions needed to meet IEP obligations, even if aspirational spending is not possible.
• A drafted RFP for a special education audit was described as near-ready; the committee asked for it to be sent before the January 4th meeting so it could be refined and approved.

CFO Michelle (last name not clearly identified in transcript) reported that the FY2025 budget process has begun. Principal budget workbooks were distributed November 21 and are due back December 18. The full budget books are planned for distribution to the School Committee and town officials on January 12.

Two budget scenarios are being prepared:

A labor accountability project reviewing staffing and enrollment levels is also underway. The team is developing methodology for a no-override budget in the event a Prop 2½ override does not pass.

A committee member attended a MASC/MASA conference session on Chapter 70 funding, learning how the formula works and why Marblehead receives relatively less aid than other communities. The presenter offered free community presentations; the committee member immediately requested one and plans to schedule it for a broad audience including FinCom, the Board of Selectmen, and the general public.

The same member attended a Medicaid billing session and noted that special education services — including OT, PT, speech-language, and classroom ELL services — may be eligible for Medicaid reimbursement that the district is not currently capturing. She acknowledged that accessing this revenue stream requires additional administrative staff, and Marblehead may currently lack the bandwidth. She framed this as a potential net-positive investment to explore and present to FinCom.

Village School — Principal Mandy Murphy

Three goals presented:

1. Teaching & Learning: 100% of ELA and Math teachers implementing Written Wisdom (ELA) and Illustrative Math curricula with fidelity; teachers in their third year of Illustrative Math; math coach Angie Riano credited for cross-school alignment work
2. Professional Culture: Teacher-led PD at staff meetings; survey of staff expertise; train-the-trainer model to maximize limited budget
3. Belonging & Inclusion: DEI group active within PFS; upcoming ‘Rock Your Socks’ event; student-led DEI group in development

Glover and Brown Schools — Joint Plan (Principals Hope and Mary)

Same three-goal structure:

1. Teaching & Learning: Multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) implementation; Responsive Classroom training; new math intervention block added alongside existing literacy block; progress monitoring every six weeks
2. Professional Culture: Shared working groups (PBIS, Responsive Classroom, SEL, DEI, math data, ELA facilitation) meeting monthly on Wednesdays; responsive classroom training for specialist teachers in December
3. Diversity, Equity & Inclusion: Implementation of the District Curriculum Accommodation Plan (DCAP); PBIS videos featuring a lobster cartoon to communicate monthly expectations

A committee member (Brian Oda) raised a concern about combining Glover and Brown into one School Improvement Plan given their differing MCAS scores, student populations, and sizes. The assistant superintendent responded that the goals and metrics should be identical across schools — reflecting a district tier-one approach — while action items may differ based on each school’s data. The committee noted this is something to address in future planning cycles.

A committee member raised a question about the role of School Advisory Councils (SACs) in developing the plans. The interim superintendent acknowledged SACs should own the plans and confirmed she had presented priorities to her SAC, which was supportive.

Vote: 5-0 in favor for all three plans.

The chair announced that the committee will hold a series of community forums — the first focused on the budget — in early December. Unlike public comment periods, these forums are intended as two-way dialogues where the public can ask questions and the committee will answer. She said dates would be circulated to committee members within a few days and the meeting format and location would be communicated as details are finalized.

Interim Superintendent McGinness confirmed the FY25 budget process is underway, with principal-level budget conversations beginning the week before Thanksgiving. She acknowledged the process will be difficult given ongoing fiscal challenges.

Assistant Superintendent Cresta provided the timeline:

• Budget packets going to principals imminently; to be returned by December 18
• Budget books to committee members by January 12
• The town requested two budgets: a level-services budget and a reduced-services (zero-growth, flat-funded) budget matching FY24 funding
• The final budget must be balanced by law; it goes to the school committee, then to Finance Committee for review

A school committee member noted she had contacted the FinCom chair and was planning the first joint liaison meeting for early December, with Pat Franklin and Molly (FinCom chair) as counterparts.

The committee also discussed the legal obligation to present a balanced budget and acknowledged that community suggestions to simply ‘find’ additional money are not operationally feasible under state law.

The committee announced a public community budget forum to be held in early December, the first of what is intended to be a series of two-way public dialogues on the budget.

Veterans Middle School – Matt Fox, Principal

Goal 1 – Teaching & Learning: MVMS departments will implement PLCs and vertical alignment meetings with Village Elementary and MHS, aligning state standards, teaching practices, and assessments. Initial meeting held October 25 on a half-day; subsequent meetings scheduled within the 3–4 p.m. Wednesday PD window.

Goal 2 – Student Engagement: Continuation of advisory program development, including a monthly SEL curriculum committee and a student engagement calendar building on the existing year-end spirit competition.

Goal 3 – Professional Culture: Peer observation program building on 12 teacher-led tier-one practice workshops from FY23. Teachers will observe colleagues outside their co-planning teams, complete a reflective document, and share learning. Rollout begins November with observations targeting February–April.

Goal 4 – DEI: Analysis of student belonging survey data collected by the DEI committee at year-end; findings to inform advisory and tier-one instruction work.

Marblehead High School – Michelle Carlson, Principal

Goal 1 – Curriculum Alignment: MHS departments will update scope and sequence fully aligned with VMS; MCAS item analysis already underway in English, math, and science PLCs.

Goal 2 – Professional Development: Smart panel technology training planned for December PD day; faculty survey on PD needs to be distributed; teachers attending external conferences will present learning back to staff.

Goal 3 – DEI/Culturally Responsive Practice: Monthly DEI PLC developing a student survey (by January); World of Difference/ADL training for Team Harmony (now renamed A World of Difference); women-in-leadership training for female athletes to be expanded to other students; follow-up survey to staff in May.

The committee discussed AI-assisted writing feedback being piloted in social studies, AI grading comparison checks by teachers, and student-led conferences as a future initiative. The committee voted 5–0 to approve both plans and requested mid-year status updates around February.

Acting Superintendent Michelle Cresta presented FY23 and FY24 financial reports.

FY23 Closeout

• Initial budget: approximately $43,982,000
• Total spending: approximately $42,676,000
• Carryover encumbrances: $1.3 million
• One-time expenditures from vacancy savings: $615,851 (maintenance equipment, paging systems, security cameras, door swipe access, intercom systems, furniture)
• Prepaid out-of-district tuitions: $539,000
• Circuit-breaker revolving fund reached maximum allowable carryover for the first time in approximately four years

FY24 First Quarter

• 11.2% of operating budget spent as of Q1 (10.9% at same point in FY23)
• Staffing vacancies remain but are less severe than the prior year
• Out-of-district transportation and tuition costs tracking on budget
• Custodial cleaning service contract discontinued due to budget cuts; new on-call substitute custodian positions recently posted
• Safe Routes to School signs-and-lines grant awarded: $8,899 (applied by Police Chief Dennis King)

A committee member noted that contracted custodial services cost approximately three to four times the rate of an employed custodian, limiting the district’s ability to fill gaps.

The business officer outlined the FY24 budget planning timeline:

• Budget packets to go to building principals first week of November
• Principal submissions due first/second week of December
• District budget compilation: 3–4 weeks after that
• Rough presentation to committee: early January
• Capital budget items also targeted for mid-November

The committee was given a budget planning outline from the town finance director (identified as “Ella”), who set a November 13 deadline for departments to determine their numbers.

The district has been directed to produce two budgets: (1) a level-services budget and (2) a level-funding budget (same dollars as prior year). One committee member argued strenuously that neither of those budgets addresses actual student needs and stated she would not vote for a budget without a student-needs-based exercise — starting from IEPs, service grids, and staff-to-student ratios rather than rolling forward existing headcount.

The business officer acknowledged the approach and noted the district is exploring using the Aspen student information system to assist with the exercise, though teacher schedules are not entered in Aspen at the elementary level to the same detail as middle and high school.

A special education audit is in progress: the director of student services is finalizing specs and the RFP is expected to go out within weeks. A vendor recommended expanding the review beyond special education to include Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruction.

The committee also discussed the need for a budget workshop at the start of the process so that directives and priorities are communicated to principals before they build their submissions, avoiding the pattern of principals spending weeks on budgets only to receive last-minute redirections.

The chief financial officer presented the FY23 budget close-out. The district’s budget was approximately $43.9 million. A significant number of staffing vacancies throughout the year created savings that were redirected in Q4 to one-time capital items including:

• Replacement of outdated paging/caving systems
• Security camera replacements
• Door-swipe access upgrades at all four schools
• Security intercom replacements
• Furniture replacement district-wide

The total for those one-time purchases was approximately $15,000 (per ASR; context suggests a larger figure). The business office confirmed these were legally permissible one-time expenditures within the fiscal year.

Key budget outliers noted:

• Tutoring, paraprofessional, and substitute lines were significantly under-spent due to inability to fill positions; Marblehead pay rates were noted as near minimum wage and not competitive.
• Hardware was overextended by approximately 1,000% because salary savings were redirected there.
• Out-of-district transportation was overextended at roughly 200% ($290K budgeted, ~$591K expended, delta ~$301K).
• Consumables such as paper were over budget due to cost increases.

Circuit breaker reserve: The district reached a long-standing goal of carrying forward a full year of circuit-breaker revenue ($1.2 million) in reserve, a safeguard developed after a 2018 special education budget shortfall.

Out-of-district tuition: As of the meeting date, $3.7 million was budgeted and $4.4 million in funding sources was identified, leaving approximately $689,000 available, which includes six unassigned placeholder spots (~$310,000). Two additional students had pending placements. The committee asked for a briefing on how parent-placed students end up in out-of-district programs.

Acting Superintendent Cresta summarized the town’s preliminary FY25 revenue forecast, describing the projected increase as slight and insufficient to cover fixed or roll-forward costs. The town has requested the district submit two budgets: a level-services budget and a level-funding budget (holding spending flat at the prior year’s number).

Cresta noted she met with the town’s finance director Alicia that day for clarification and that all department heads would receive further guidance at a Tuesday meeting. The finance subcommittee is scheduled to meet Wednesday, October 25 at 3:00 PM. Members were directed to set up ClearGov accounts to participate in the budget process, with a caution that comments in the shared document could constitute deliberations under open meeting law.

Julia Ferrera presented the district’s 2023 MCAS results, noting overall math proficiency grew to 64% versus a state average of 42%, and ELA showed 7% growth from 2022. The high school posted 81% proficiency in science.

However, committee members raised concerns that grades 4 and 5 remain significantly below 2019 pre-COVID benchmarks:

Committee members noted that students currently in grades 4-5 were in kindergarten and first grade during remote learning, representing the cohort most affected by COVID learning loss. The assistant superintendent cited multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS), professional learning communities, i-Ready assessments, Illustrative Mathematics, and Wit & Wisdom ELA curriculum as the frameworks in place to address gaps.

A committee member raised questions about students who do not pass MCAS, and it was confirmed that retakes, appeals, portfolios, and alternative pathways are available for graduation requirements in ELA, math, and science.

The committee also discussed the persistent gap between overall proficiency and the ‘high needs’ subgroup (students with disabilities, English language learners, and low-income students), and requested future data breakdowns by subgroup. One member suggested the remaining ARPA funds (approximately $700,000) could be directed toward one-time interventions targeting COVID learning loss.

Teresa McGinness introduced herself and outlined three core values guiding her leadership: Excellence (high expectations and a continuum of services), Building Community (nurturing growth-oriented relationships), and Equity (an inclusive environment with joyous student engagement and belonging as the overarching umbrella).

Key answers included:

• 90-day plan: Establishing a communication plan with the school committee first, then central office staff and principals; gathering both qualitative (focus groups, community forums) and quantitative (three-question staff/parent survey) data; conducting a historical/present document review; developing an action plan from November to June and sharing it broadly with benchmarks.

• Budget engagement: Meeting first with the assistant superintendent of finance and town finance officials; working collaboratively with central office and principals; reviewing enrollment, staffing, programs, and anticipated caseloads; looking at alternative revenue streams including DESE federal grants (she recently wrote a grant covering 50% of a new literacy program adoption for 2024–25), Foundation grants, and Marblehead Friends of Schools; operating under the assumption that no category is off limits.

• Academic recovery (MCAS/COVID gaps): Described using I-Ready three times per year as a progress monitoring tool; in her district, one elementary school (700 students, 40% non-English-speaking parents) was recognized by DESE as a School of Recognition for growth since COVID; cited 23-point gain in math and 15-point gain in ELA over 2017–2019 from instructional coaches and cohesive curriculum; from 2022 to 2023, the district showed remarkable growth across many grade levels and one school is now 23 points ahead of pre-COVID numbers in science.

• MTSS: Described a tiered support system articulated K–8 (working on extending to grade 12); tier one covers all students academically and behaviorally; using I-Ready data and intervention blocks with four cycles per year; working on measuring social-emotional wellness growth more accurately.

• Inclusion and differentiated instruction: Defined inclusion as every student having a sense of belonging and worth; special educators and ESL teachers co-teaching or supporting within the general education setting; students are not pulled out of core instruction; described how intervention blocks allow grouping by need rather than label; used DESE’s accelerated learning roadmap adopted post-COVID.

• DEI and belonging (including METCO): Acknowledged making a mistake early in her role—chartering a bus to bring METCO families to open house without understanding community context; subsequently went to Dorchester at 5:20 AM to ride the bus and learn the experience firsthand; advocates meeting families where they are, including at senior centers; described using diversity to mean neurodiversity, learning styles, and cultural backgrounds; emphasized anti-racist professional development for staff.

• Transparency: Used the upcoming unpacking of new health and wellness standards as an example—sharing the rationale and data publicly from the start; publishing bi-weekly newsletters with a budget section every issue; sharing the ‘why’ behind decisions rather than just citing mandates; acknowledged limits around student behavioral/disciplinary information but emphasized building a culture of trust.

• Pressing issues in Marblehead: Building trust in leadership as the top priority; addressing the budget and contract negotiations; establishing stability through transparent communication and clear priorities; highlighted social-emotional recovery of students.

• What gives her pause/what she needs: Said leaving a stable eight-year position is a calculated risk reflecting genuine interest; asked the committee what they would need from her; committee members emphasized stability, hitting the ground running, transparent communication, willingness to make difficult decisions, and relationship-building with all stakeholders. McGinness also disclosed interest in applying for the permanent position if the interim role goes well; the chair clarified that Marblehead does not have a contractual clause preventing an interim from applying for the permanent position.

Janelle Pearson Campbell introduced herself as a 23-year educator who began as a pharmacy major, served as interim superintendent in North Hampton Public Schools (where she inherited 75% staff turnover and a budget deficit), assistant superintendent in Old Rochester Regional School District during COVID, and assistant director of special education in Walkin Public Schools.

Key answers included:

• 90-day plan: Visiting schools and community members, analyzing DESE data and subgroup achievement, reviewing the district website, meeting with principals and department heads, beginning budget review in October using a five-year window approach, and sharing an interactive document publicly.

• Budget engagement: Sending family and staff surveys, analyzing Chapter 70 funds with the finance team, doing a ‘shopping’ audit of existing resources, reviewing Title I/II/IV grants, working with the union on staffing decisions, and using accessible Google Docs to communicate the budget publicly.

• MTSS/advanced learners: Reviewing documentation of existing MTSS structures, using standard-based Navigator (a free DESE tool), creating onboarding PowerPoints, and reviewing schedules to identify time for acceleration and intervention.

• Inclusion and differentiated instruction: Defined inclusion as all learners being supported—general ed and special ed teachers co-teaching and intertwining their roles; noted physical classroom setup matters for auditory/visual/kinesthetic learners; described 60-minute blocks broken into acceleration/intervention time.

• DEI and belonging: Led district-wide professional development on DEI implementation; participated in the state-level Readiness Committee; developed an inclusive practice guide; emphasized community meetings to discuss data openly.

• Transparency: Prioritizing the website, sending bi-weekly newsletters with spotlights on staff, holding open community forums, and using the Marblehead Beacon for open dialogue.

• Pressing issues in Marblehead: Centering students in every decision, creating a feasible budget, and building a sense of belonging and community; referenced the district’s completed building projects as a source of pride.

• What gives her pause: Expressed excitement rather than pause at community engagement; said she would always make sure to have complete information before speaking publicly; noted she would need honesty and direct communication from stakeholders.

She mentioned that her father passed away during the pandemic, which reinforced her belief in celebrating accomplishments and focusing on the positive. She also noted she attended a school in Marblehead’s district (BR school) in fifth grade.

A finance subcommittee update noted two FY23 closeout highlights: significant savings in unemployment due to employees finding other jobs after positions were flagged for potential elimination, and achievement of the maximum circuit breaker rollover for out-of-district placements—described as best practice for special education cost management. The committee also noted that FY25 budget planning is beginning and that a meeting with the Select Board chair, town finance director, and town administrator is scheduled for the following day to align on revenue projection timelines. Absent new revenue data, another structural deficit is anticipated for FY25.

Committee member Allison Taylor reported ongoing efforts to clarify the town’s allocation of ARPA funds to the schools. She noted that a reported $1.2 million figure is disputed, pointing to approximately $200,000 attributed to a capital projects budget error from town meeting and approximately $200,000 for the schools’ 60% share of a new payroll system. She questioned whether funds used to remedy a town capital budget mistake should count as money ‘given’ to schools. Taylor and Acting Superintendent Cresta plan to meet with town officials the following week, with a goal of sharing detailed information publicly afterward.

The subcommittee shifted to FY25 budget planning. Key themes:

Timeline

• Budget packets to be sent to principals in October (targeting mid-January budget book release, consistent with last year).
• A meeting with the Select Board chair, Town Administrator, and Finance Director is scheduled for the following Friday to kick off planning.
• A joint meeting with the Finance Committee is targeted for the second week of October.
• A subcommittee-only follow-up session was proposed for the week after next.

Structural budget gap concern The chair (Sarah) noted that free cash is expected to shrink as the town’s insurance and revenue lines come in closer to actuals, creating a larger structural cliff than in FY24. She indicated that by mid-October the district should know its maximum allowable levy under Prop 2½ and the delta versus contractual obligations — without taking a position on whether an override is needed.

Cost-accountability budget model A committee member (Jen) called for a “cost-accountability budget” that would:

• Account for every personnel position by building, matched to student needs.
• Include indirect costs (primarily health insurance and retirement) currently carried by the town’s general fund.
• Provide multi-year historical trend data on health insurance spending (town-side and school-side) — data the committee said it has not previously received in usable form.

Michelle noted that medical insurance is the dominant indirect cost driver; teacher retirement is paid through the state MTRS system, and the district’s own contributory retirement obligation covers custodians, clerical staff, and full-time tutors.

Health insurance / GIC The committee discussed needing a breakdown of GIC plan enrollment (individual vs. family, specific plans) and historical actuals to build projections. A committee member noted this would be “another whole budgeting exercise” layered on top of the normal budget build.

Other items

• A potential employee buyout program was floated as a way to manage long-term personnel costs; noted as a contract-year issue.
• The school administration’s lack of a seat at the table for municipal employee union (MMEU) negotiations was raised as a concern if the school is to bear indirect MMEU costs going forward.
• Chapter 70 funding mechanics were discussed; the district receives it via town appropriation, with the actual figure sometimes not confirmed until July.

The CFO (referred to as Emma/Amber) and the business manager (Michelle) reported that FY24 out-of-district placements currently show a $157,000 unspent balance against a $3.7 million budget, with actual costs running at approximately $3.5 million.

Two notable financial accomplishments were highlighted:

1. Circuit-breaker revolving fund — After four years of effort, the district has for the first time carried forward the maximum allowable one year of circuit-breaker revenue (roughly $1.2 million). This provides an insurance reserve for unexpected special-education costs.
2. Prepaid tuitions — Using FY23 surplus funds, the district prepaid nearly $540,000 in collaborative tuitions, creating a recurring buffer against volatile out-of-district costs.

A $94,000 transfer was noted from the unemployment line (which had excess funds because most of the 33 cut positions resulted in resignations rather than layoffs) to cover a superintendent separation-pay line.

Transportation costs for out-of-district placements were flagged as a historically volatile line; the cost grew from roughly $300,000–$400,000 four years ago to over $1 million last year. Final transportation figures for FY24 were not yet available as placement was still ongoing.

Superintendent Cresta noted three handbooks (Veterans School, elementary — covering Glover, Brown, and Village — and the high school) were placed in the shared drive, with the high school copy still having minor formatting issues. Changes are largely annual updates plus legally required additions on dress code (religious hairstyles) and school discipline. A new item at the high school involves a vaping diversion program through Mass General Hospital.

A committee member raised questions about: conflict resolution policy referencing school committee policy KE, dress code enforcement consistency, and the definition/threshold for bullying. The chair suggested members send their questions to administration before the next meeting and that the vote be taken at the next meeting. The committee also noted that going forward, handbooks would be reviewed and approved each spring rather than in September.

A committee member asked whether the new Written Wisdom literacy curriculum sacrifices teacher individuality in pursuit of equity. The assistant superintendent explained the district aims for equity and alignment — students deserve equal access to instruction — while still allowing educators to make professional decisions within the curriculum framework. The district uses professional learning communities (PLCs) and literacy facilitators at each grade level. Accommodations remain in place for special education students.

Superintendent Cresta reported grades 1–12 returned Tuesday and preschool/kindergarten returned Thursday. Convocation featured Dr. Judy Carrington speaking on staff mental health and wellbeing. Warm-weather mitigation measures were in place — additional fans, moving hotter classrooms to cooler areas.

On the special education program review: Cresta said a memo was added to the school community drive the evening before the meeting. She and Dr. Donnelly plan to meet with two prospective review firms that week. The goal is to have the review mostly complete before the budget process begins in December. A committee member asked that the school committee be involved in scoping the review.

The committee waived its three-reading policy adoption process for two policies at the request of Acting Superintendent Cresta:

1. Wellness Policy ADF — Updated to meet state requirements from DESE’s Office of School Nutrition, including provisions for a minimum 15 minutes of daily elementary recess, wellness committee meeting frequency, and annual reporting. Adopted 5–0. The wellness committee will review operationalization of specific provisions and report back to the committee.

2. Life-Threatening Allergy Policy JLCDD — A new policy acknowledging life-threatening allergies in schools, requiring staff education and individual student plans. Referenced within the wellness policy, making adoption of both simultaneous. Adopted 5–0.

Cresta explained that the food service director had recently alerted the administration that both policies needed to be in place before the start of school for the district’s school lunch application to be approved by the state. A committee member emphasized that the waiver request originated from the administration, not the committee.

Superintendent Michelle Cresta provided district updates covering several areas:

State Budget / Free Lunch: Massachusetts approved universal free school breakfast and lunch for all K–12 students. Cresta clarified this is funded by state and federal taxes, not free to taxpayers, and that meals must be complete meals per state guidelines. The Chapter 70 increase does not directly change the district’s FY24 appropriation, which was set at town meeting.

Enrollment: Village Middle School enrollment grew by 54 students overall (from 395 to 449), with seventh grade at 238 versus a projection of 221 — the third-highest single-grade increase in 15 years. Thirty of those students are new to the district. Class sizes in seventh grade world language classes will be at or near 25. Cresta noted charter school enrollment changes appear to be contributing to the increase.

FY23 Closeout (preliminary figures): | Item | Amount | |—|—| | Total operating budget | $43,982,273 | | Total expenditures through June 30 | $42,676,176 | | Encumbrances | $1,306,095 | | Turnback to general fund | $2 | | Out-of-district tuition prepaid | $539,497 |

A formal closeout report is expected within a month.

FY24 Superintendent Separation Funding: The district identified approximately $150,000–$200,000 in savings from the unemployment line (fewer layoffs than budgeted) and an estimated $100,000–$150,000 from lower-than-anticipated starting salaries for new hires, for a combined estimated absorption of $250,000–$350,000 to cover the separation agreement costs.

The committee had an extended discussion on whether to amend the wellness policy to require a second daily recess for elementary (and potentially K–6) students. Key points:

Current practice:

• A roughly 20-minute midday break exists in the schedule.
• A morning snack/break period also exists, but whether students go outside varies by teacher; some classes were not permitted to leave the classroom.
• The removal of a second recess was attributed to “time on learning” concerns.

Committee position:

• Both members expressed strong support for reinstating a second recess, at minimum for K–3 and potentially K–6.
• Member Alison noted she had contacted DESE and MASC and found no statute explicitly classifying transitions and line-walking as non-instructional time.
• Multiple peer districts were cited with stronger recess or physical activity minimums (e.g., Lexington mandates two recess breaks; Norwood and others adopt 300 minutes/week per Shape America guidance; Wellesley recommends recess before lunch).
• Many districts reviewed include a clause prohibiting withholding of recess as punishment.

Administration caution:

• Michelle (assistant superintendent) and Julia (new assistant superintendent for teaching and learning) noted that school schedules have already been distributed, teachers return in approximately 2.5 weeks, and any change involves union negotiations and principal scheduling.
• Julia offered to convene a collaborative meeting with elementary school leaders to discuss options.

Next steps:

• The subcommittee chair will schedule a follow-up open meeting the following week with Julia and building principals to continue the discussion.

Assistant Superintendent Michelle reported that a district wellness committee convened last fall and, after multiple meetings, recommended a revised wellness policy (ADF) on June 12. Key issues:

• The existing policy was not compliant with updated state nutrition guidelines.
• One bullet referencing a not-yet-adopted life-threatening allergy policy was removed; an amendment will be brought back in coming months.
• The updated policy requires adoption before the start of the school year to maintain eligibility for the free and reduced lunch program.
• The current recess language in the new draft requires a minimum of 15 minutes of recess per day for elementary students but does not specify the number of sessions.
• The chair noted the existing adopted ADF does not appear to contain any specific recess time requirement.
• The committee agreed to send the policy to the full School Committee for a vote, potentially waiving the three-readings requirement.

During the FY24 budget discussion, conversation about the reduced-services staffing budget priority list led to discussion of how to use the projected FY23 surplus. Fox recommended a comprehensive audit of the Special Education department.

Fox asked for a motion to allocate funding for an audit. Moved by Schaeffner, seconded by Alison Taylor.

Superintendent Buckey recommended speaking with the Director of Student Services prior to making any decisions to move forward with an audit.

Roll call vote: 4-1.

• Yes: Schaeffner, Alison Taylor, Ota, Fox
• No: Meagan Taylor, citing she would like Dr. Donnelley’s input prior to voting

User fee adjustments for the 2023-24 school year. A chart of suggested fee adjustments was shared.

The change

• $12 more per athlete
• Increase in the family maximum

Revenue impact and use

• About $26,000 in additional revenue
• To fund freshman sports coaching positions and transportation costs for freshman athletics

Motion to approve the amended rates moved by Alison Taylor, seconded by Schaeffner. Passed 4-0 (Meagan Taylor had not yet joined remotely; she joined at 5:40 PM).

During the FY24 budget discussion, Committee Member Jennifer Schaeffner introduced a new proposal:

“Working with administration to look at a zero-based budgeting for staffing specifically. She also recommended bringing in an outside consultant to complete the process. It was recommended that the discussion be continued at a meeting in August.”

Sarah Fox also requested an update on out-of-district tuition at the August meeting.

Where this sits in the ZBB chain

This is the third of the four ZBB conversations at School Committee in the historical catalog:

The pattern: each iteration is more specific than the last (define methodology → full methodology presented → specific scope + outside consultant proposed → concrete request and committed follow-up). The follow-through declines as the specificity rises: Cresta’s methodology presentation generated nothing; Schaeffner’s outside-consultant proposal was “continued to August” and doesn’t reappear in the catalog; the 2025 committed Oct 28 methodology meeting didn’t happen.

Other budget items this meeting

• OOD SPED prepayments: process in place since FY20. Cresta recommended a $500K prepayment for FY23. Anticipated FY23 surplus also estimated at ~$500K.
• Special-education audit: Fox moved to allocate funding for an audit; Schaeffner seconded. Superintendent Buckey recommended speaking with the Director of Student Services first. Passed 4-1 (Meagan Taylor no, wanted Dr. Donnelley’s input).
• Reduced services staffing budget priority list reviewed; discussion about using one-time surplus funding to fund recurring staffing costs.

The committee discussed an FY24 budget document listing all changes from the FY23 budget, reflecting the elimination of 33 positions due to the override failure. The chief financial officer (Michelle) explained the document shows every line-item change made to balance the budget after abandoning new-year requests.

Key financial facts discussed:

• The school district carries a projected year-end surplus of several hundred thousand dollars, estimated at approximately $500,000
• The CFO plans to prepay special education out-of-district tuitions using surplus funds before the July 14 fiscal-year close deadline, a practice used in prior years
• The CFO does not recommend using one-time surplus funds to restore recurring positions, noting it would create a structurally unbalanced FY25 budget
• The expense side of the budget is over budget; surplus exists only on the salary side due to vacancies, retirements, and resignations following the announced cuts
• The special education reserve fund (approximately $250,000) has been preserved intact

Debate over restoring cuts: One committee member strongly advocated reinstating freshman sports, citing urgency (fall practice begins in mid-August) and describing the cost as “de minimis” in a roughly $43 million budget. Another member argued the committee should not prioritize non-academic spending before academic positions (e.g., middle school librarian) and wanted to know whether user fees could be raised to self-fund freshman sports.

A member pushed back on the framing that restoring any cut would undermine credibility, arguing that Massachusetts General Law gives the elected school committee sole budget authority and that using a legal surplus mechanism for student benefit is appropriate.

Votes:

• Motion to table reinstatement of freshman sports pending additional financial data from CFO: approved unanimously
• Motion to immediately reinstate freshman sports: failed (vote count unclear in transcript)

The committee also discussed:

• ARPA funds: a member expressed frustration that Marblehead imposes additional local restrictions on ARPA disbursements beyond U.S. Treasury requirements, and advocated resubmitting previously denied school ARPA requests to the ARPA committee and Select Board
• Public records: concern raised that the district may have not complied with a Massachusetts Secretary of State order to release public records; chair committed to consulting district counsel (Chandler & Miller)
• Property sale inquiries: the superintendent clarified the committee has no authority to sell school properties (e.g., Coffin School) and use proceeds directly for the school budget; proceeds would go to the town’s general fund

A summer working session was tentatively scheduled for July 6 (four to eight p.m.) to review year-end financials and FY24 budget tracking, with a second session around July 24 for professional development with MASC or MISD.

The superintendent reported that building principals set literacy and math goals and in most cases met or exceeded them on i-Ready assessments. He expressed concern about a reported 50-year national low in academic results for 13-year-olds.

Assistant Superintendent Julia Carrera presented the district’s new ‘Wit & Wisdom’ ELA curriculum, a knowledge-based, research-aligned program selected in collaboration with schools. Key implementation details:

• K–3 teachers and ELA teachers in grades 4–6 received initial training
• Literacy leaders at each grade level received additional training
• A full-day training for all teachers is planned for August return
• The existing ‘Foundations’ phonics program will continue alongside Wit & Wisdom
• The curriculum is designed to engage advanced learners through knowledge-based texts

Committee members asked about phonics integration, supports for students with additional needs, and differentiation for advanced learners. Administration confirmed the program was recommended by collaborating schools and families were engaged through PTO meetings.

The committee voted 4-0 to approve user fee rates for the 2023–24 school year as proposed. A committee member noted appreciation for the incremental approach to fee increases, referencing a past instance of a large one-time jump that had been hard on families.

The committee also discussed the state’s universal free lunch program for all students, which the Senate did not include in its budget (the House did approve it). Staff noted that families who qualify for free or reduced lunch would have fees automatically waived in the online system without having to request a waiver, preserving their privacy. It was noted the state program does not look likely to continue but that the situation remains uncertain.

A committee member raised a discussion item about having full accounting of employee benefits and indirect costs within the school budget. The superintendent’s office noted that while the district reports total costs to the state annually (approximately $60-70 million versus the roughly $40 million direct district budget), consolidating benefits administration would require taking on HR functions currently handled by the town.

The assistant superintendent noted this is not straightforward: employees currently go to town offices for benefits; cancellation processes are handled by the town; and there are many shared service costs (treasurer’s office, accounting, Parks and Recreation for fields, DPW time) that would need to be allocated. The committee agreed to explore a report during the summer on what steps would be required and what the stress points would be for such a transition.

The superintendent introduced Gina Hart, school social worker at MHS, noting the district had not conducted a youth risk behavior survey since 2007. In the superintendent’s first year, the district adopted the state survey and Hart subsequently improved it further for the 2022-23 school year using the MGH/MGHI beside school-wide assessment tool.

The superintendent presented enrollment and class-size data, noting current enrollment of 2,563 with approximately 2,562 projected for next year. The presentation challenged a community claim of a 10:1 student-teacher ratio, showing no class averaging 10 students exists at any school. A committee member noted a discrepancy between DESE’s publicly reported figures and internal weekly reports, attributed to DESE’s October 1st snapshot methodology versus real-time enrollment tracking.

The superintendent was emphatic that the reduced-services cut list — developed with principals and directors — is final: if the override does not pass, those cuts will be made; if it does pass, those same positions will be restored. The superintendent stated it would undermine staff who have already left the district expecting their positions to be cut if any cuts were later walked back.

The district committed to making weekly enrollment reports publicly available to address transparency concerns.

High School Principal Dan Bauer, Assistant Principal Lindsey Donaldson, and (via Zoom) incoming Assistant Principal Michelle Carlson presented on the history of course leveling and the school’s phased elimination of CP2 (College Prep 2) sections.

Background: MHS has four course levels: AP, Honors, College Prep 1 (CP1), and College Prep 2 (CP2). Research dating to the 1930s and peaking in the late 1980s-90s shows that lower-level tracking can create inequitable educational experiences.

The problem with CP2: Principal Bauer reported that CP2 classes at MHS had a disproportionate concentration of students with IEPs—upwards of 60-80% in some sections—compared to the school’s overall IEP rate in the low 20s. Students in CP2 often traveled as a cohort across multiple subjects, effectively creating a separate sub-group and limiting scheduling flexibility.

Phased elimination: | Subject | Status | |—|—| | English | CP2 eliminated in prior year | | Social Studies | Never had CP2 | | World Language | CP2 (Spanish) eliminated in 2017-18; replaced with introductory/global sequence | | Math | Algebra 1 CP2 being eliminated next year (freshman level, two-year rollout) | | Science | Biology CP2 being eliminated next year |

Supports in place: Over 20 co-taught classes at MHS pair general and special education teachers. An MTSS teacher training is scheduled to begin the following Monday, coordinated by special education chair Lauren Skelton. The school also runs RTI (response to intervention) courses.

Key assurances: Principal Bauer and Dr. Bucky emphatically stated there is no plan to eliminate honors or AP levels. AP test participation at MHS is high—reportedly higher than some larger neighboring schools—partly because MHS requires students in AP courses to take the exam.

Peer districts that eliminated CP2: Beverly High School (2010), Swampscott (2014), Masconomet (end of current year), Wellesley, Dover-Sherborn, Winchester, and West.

Committee members requested ongoing data sharing to address community concerns about “averaging down,” and Principal Bauer agreed to bring outcome data in future presentations.

Dr. Bucky reported on several district updates:

MTSS / Advanced Learning (K-8): DESE is partnering with Northwestern University’s talent development program to create a continuum of services for above-grade-level students. Marblehead has been nominated as a pilot district for roundtable discussions.

Literacy Curriculum Adoption: After a 5-month process involving a 15-member review committee (teachers, coaches, administrators), 12 meetings, visits to 7 implementing districts, lesson pilots, and 60 educator feedback forms, Wit & Wisdom was selected as the new K-6 literacy curriculum. It replaces the Lucy Calkins writing component while phonics program Foundations remains in place. The adoption is funded through ARPA (as the math curriculum was). Materials will be sent to teachers before summer, with stipended professional development planned.

Superintendent International Trip: Dr. Bucky was selected by MASS to represent Massachusetts on a superintendent exchange trip to the Dominican Republic (October 5-8), focused on STEM education, at no cost to the district.

Student Representative: Junior Kat Piper was introduced as the incoming student representative for the next school year.

The meeting opened with a public hearing on School Choice for the 2023-24 school year. Dr. Bucky presented a memo recommending the district not pursue School Choice, noting the financial situation with an upcoming override vote and the possibility of reducing staff by 33 positions. The committee moved, seconded by Allison Taylor, and voted 4-0 to accept the recommendation. The hearing was closed at 7:02 p.m.

Health Director Petty reported that after the finance committee meeting the finance director identified additional funds, raising the Board of Health budget from a proposed $303,879 to $313,091. The only remaining reduction from the prior year is approximately $1,188 in mental health psychological counseling contract services — a cut made because state grants restrict the board from reducing employee hours. The board noted it may revisit using ARPA funds to restore mental health spending after town meeting, depending on the outcome of the override vote. The finance committee had already taken its vote using the revised $313,091 figure.

Article 32, a placeholder for a school supplemental appropriation, was indefinitely postponed at the school committee’s request. The school department’s override-related funding is captured entirely in Article 31. Voted unanimously.

The school Finance Director confirmed approximately $250,000 sits in the special education stabilization fund, classified by DESE as a reserve fund. No new contribution is being requested for FY24 given tight budget conditions.

The Finance Committee noted that special education costs increased approximately $176,000 in the general fund this year and by approximately $850,000 the prior year, reflecting growing out-of-district placements and transportation costs. The stabilization balance has never been drawn upon since it was funded five or six years ago.

Article 27 was recommended for indefinite postponement unanimously.

A committee member introduced a discussion on next steps for the district’s five-pillar ‘Plan for Success’ strategic document. Key themes included:

• Adding measurable benchmarks to each pillar so the committee can track progress rather than waiting until 2025–26.
• Aligning planning with future budget cycles (FY25 and beyond).
• Proposing that point persons for each pillar compile current work into a shared document, with the option to form ad hoc subcommittees (e.g., for curriculum).
• Improving communication to the community about actual class sizes and enrollment-based staffing.

On the FY24 budget, a member noted that the Finance Committee had praised the school district’s financial transparency as a ‘gold standard.’ The committee discussed supporting Article 31 (the Prop 2½ override) at the upcoming Town Meeting warrant hearing. Members indicated they had publicly stated the need and expressed confidence in administration’s ability to manage under any budget.

The chair called the meeting to order at 6:03 PM and immediately moved to two sequential votes on the FY24 school budget.

Vote 1 — Base Services Budget (Article 30): $44,837,273, representing an increase of approximately $855,000 over FY23. Passed 4-0 (Allison Taylor, Megan Taylor, Sarah Gold, Sarah Fox all in favor; Tom Mathers was not yet present).

Vote 2 — Level-Services Budget (Article 31): $45,971,790, representing a 4.52% increase over FY23. Includes contractual salary increases, utilities, curriculum, and known special education costs. Passed 5-0 (Tom Mathers joined before this vote). This appropriation is contingent on passage of a Proposition 2½ override at both Town Meeting and the subsequent ballot.

Following adjournment at 6:07 PM, the chair noted she would proceed to the Finance Committee meeting at Abbott Hall to seek their support for both figures ahead of Town Meeting.

School Committee Chair Sarah and Superintendent Dr. Buckley presented the FY24 school budget in two forms:

Key budget drivers:

• Contractual payroll obligations: +3.85% (~$1.4M)
• Out-of-district special education tuitions: +14% (state-allowed rate increase, ~$385,000); historically 2–3% annually
• Utility costs: projected +37.9% for FY24 (electricity, gas, water)
• Chapter 70 state aid: +1.29% (~$80,000) — committee and superintendent noted the Chapter 70 formula is opaque and appears to disadvantage communities with declining enrollment

Enrollment: Currently 2,622 students vs. 2,704 in FY22 (–82 students). District has reduced roughly nine teaching positions in that period consistent with enrollment decline.

Special education reserves: The circuit-breaker revolving fund has a balance of approximately $250,000; best practice is to carry one year’s circuit-breaker reimbursement. The fund has never been drawn upon but has not been grown through additional town appropriations.

Reduced-services staffing breakdown: Roughly one-third are retirements not to be refilled, one-third are currently vacant positions, one-third are filled positions to be eliminated. Impacts include fewer class sections at multiple elementary schools (larger class sizes), elimination of the middle school librarian, and elimination of the freshman sports program (~$40,000–$45,000 all-in cost).

ARPA: An ARPA grant request covers supplies, equipment, materials, and professional development previously in the aspirational budget.

The committee voted unanimously to approve the reduced-services budget of $44,837,273. The school committee noted it had voted the same evening to request the level-services figure as its override ask, consistent with the Select Board’s number.

Superintendent Dr. Bucky opened the FY24 budget hearing by highlighting district achievements before presenting the fiscal situation. He explained that payroll obligations and out-of-district special education tuitions (rising 14% vs. a historical 2–3% annually) are outpacing revenue, while the district’s Chapter 70 state aid increase is only 1.29%.

Enrollment is projected essentially flat at approximately 2,562 students.

Level-Services Budget (4.52% increase):

• Funds all contractual obligations
• Eliminates 7 vacant positions and repurposes 3
• Maintains freshman sports, school librarians, and special education staffing
• Requires a Prop 2½ override

Reduced-Services Budget (1.82% increase):

• Eliminates 33 positions
• Cuts include: world language teachers (Latin eliminated at middle school), paraprofessionals, middle school librarian, freshman coaching positions, special education co-teaching staff, elementary classroom teachers, technology integration specialist, and a custodian
• Increases class sizes district-wide
• Takes $92,000 from the building-use revolving account

Dr. Bucky also noted approximately $350,000 in ARPA requests being brought forward for equipment and materials (non-recurring), and outlined capital items agreed upon with the town including a new school bus.

Town Administrator Thatcher provided a broad budget status update:

Two budget columns under development

• Balanced budget: built to current known revenues with no override revenue; requires roughly 4% average cuts across departments; some departments left untouched where further cuts would effectively eliminate services.
• Level-services budget: represents the actual cost to maintain current programs and staffing, including 2% contractual salary increases plus step increases for all union and non-union employees.
• The dollar difference between the two columns defines the potential override ask.

Revenue side

• Governor’s FY24 budget released March 1 showed a net increase for Marblehead of approximately $7,000–$8,000 on Cherry Sheet numbers (state aid less state assessments).
• Final local aid numbers not expected until the legislature finalizes the state budget in June.

Free cash and stabilization fund

• Approximately $10.5 million in free cash was used as revenue in the current-year budget (~10% of the operating budget); the committee acknowledged this cannot be eliminated in one year.
• The existing stabilization fund holds approximately $500,000 (funded twice at $250,000 each).
• A potential second component of the override would direct funds toward building the stabilization fund, imposing a higher two-thirds town meeting threshold for future withdrawals versus a simple majority for free cash.

ClearGov budget software

• System is still being built out; department heads have logins and are working through training modules.
• Expenditure data uploaded in detail; revenue at summary level; personnel/salary tables still being uploaded.
• Current budget cycle will still use Excel; Finance Director Alicia will produce a digital budget book for FY24 even if departments are not yet fully onboarded.

Liaison check-in summary

Upcoming schedule

• March 27: Budget hearings, first half of departments (votes on Article 30 components)
• April 3: Budget hearings, second half of departments
• April 10 (latest): Warrant hearing including Article 31 override discussion
• Town Meeting: approximately two weeks after warrant hearing

Following the budget liaison meeting held earlier that day, the committee discussed the FY24 budget outlook:

Town funding signal: The Select Board chair told the liaison not to assume the ~5.4–5.5% level-services figure would automatically appear in Article 31; the schools may need to further reduce their ask.

Electricity costs: CFO Michelle identified an additional $142,000 increase in electricity costs. The superintendent recommended putting forward $22,000 in the level-services budget and seeking the remainder from the town’s utility reserve fund, which she was scheduled to discuss with the finance director the following day.

Reserve fund discussion: The CFO explained the district’s three revolving funds (circuit breaker/SPED reimbursement, user fees, and preschool/kindergarten tuition). The circuit breaker fund was projected to bring in approximately $1.3 million for FY24, though not confirmed until July. The committee discussed the 2018 tipping point when circuit breaker reimbursement came in significantly below projections with no reserve safeguard.

Override structure: The liaison clarified that any future service-level override would be department-specific, not town-wide; the town’s current position is that no town-wide service-increase override is being recommended.

Article 32 status: Members clarified that the committee voted on Monday only to determine what budgets to present at the public hearing; no final budget vote had been taken and no warrant article had been definitively removed. The committee planned to present two budgets at the public hearing, hear community input, and vote a budget the following Monday.

Superintendent Dr. Bucky opened the meeting by describing the school district’s difficult budget situation. Because the town had not yet provided a funding figure with the public budget hearing four days away, the committee on the preceding Monday agreed to present two budgets:

• A level-services budget maintaining current operations
• An austerity budget with significant reductions to personnel, programs, and resources

The superintendent noted the community’s prior concerns that a standalone school override would not succeed, particularly without collective bargaining provisions for teachers, and expressed a preference for pursuing a joint approach with the town in a future cycle after collective bargaining concludes.

Dr. Bucky (Superintendent) convened the emergency meeting because the district was required to post budget figures before Thursday for the upcoming public hearing. He outlined three scenarios under discussion:

Key points raised:

• The level-service figure was disputed: the town had not confirmed whether out-of-district SPED placements, utilities increases, and curriculum contracts would be included.
• Dr. Bucky advised against going out alone on an override as the district did the prior year, noting voters “sent a very clear message.”
• Member Tom argued that expansion-of-services requests should be separated from the current financial reality and that the aspirational budget risked spending political capital on “a bridge too far.”
• Member Sarah Fox (chair) argued it was her duty to present all three options and let the community weigh in before the committee decided; she was the sole “no” vote.
• The austerity budget, if enacted, would require cutting approximately 30 FTE positions and eliminating freshman-level sports, per information already posted on the district website.
• Charter school reimbursement funds flow back to the town general fund and do not return directly to the school department.

• A finance committee member (Allison) asked about charter school students returning and whether the associated savings/costs flow back to the school department.
• The CFO clarified: charter school assessments and reimbursements appear on the cherry sheet (state revenue/assessment document to the town), not within the school department budget. The school does not receive any direct benefit when a student returns from charter.
• When charter students return, they increase the school’s pupil count requiring service, but the funding adjustment stays on the town side.
• Enrollment as of the prior June 20 (end of FY22 school year): 2,510 students. As of Monday morning: 2,662 students — an increase of 152 students.
• The enrollment increase is attributed to: children returning from private schools post-COVID, re-opening of the Brown School, and week-to-week fluctuations from families moving into the district.
• The school CFO noted that roughly 27 charter students returned in the current year, adding to the enrollment the school must service without a corresponding budget increase.

• Using the DESE (Department of Elementary and Secondary Education) website, the school presented North Shore peer-community comparisons showing Marblehead below average on per-pupil expenditure and average teacher salary.
• Teachers not on the layoff list — but facing larger class sizes and fewer supports — are also at risk of leaving for nearby districts (Beverly, Salem) offering 6% higher pay and better-resourced environments.
• A finance committee member (Alec) requested the specific DESE link to the peer-community comparison screen be shared with the full committee.
• The DESE site provides a five-year analysis enabling trend comparisons across Essex County districts.
• The school noted that per-pupil spending figures reported by DESE include charter school expenditures on Marblehead students, which can make the district’s own spending appear higher than it actually is.

Staffing Impact of Reduced-Services Budget

The superintendent (Dr. Bucky) shared a document — broken out school by school, program by program — showing the staffing reductions required to reach the austerity budget:

• 18 positions identified as layoffs/reductions in the aggregate
• 37 total people across all bargaining units would not have a position with Marblehead Public Schools next year (combining layoffs, unfilled vacancies, and retirements not replaced)
• Notable cuts mentioned:
  • Freshman sports eliminated
  • Reduction in high school science teachers
  • HR Director position
  • Speech pathologists
  • Paraprofessionals (impacts differentiated instruction)

“The ripples through our community will be significant.” — Dr. Bucky

Key procedural constraint: By contract, the district must notify staff of involuntary transfers by April 15 and issue layoff notices (‘pink slips’) by June 1. Because the override vote result won’t be known until June 20, the district will have to pink-slip staff before knowing whether the override passes — risking permanent loss of those educators to other districts given the regional teacher shortage.

• Unemployment costs for laid-off staff are approximately $300,000, meaning the district would need to further reduce its workforce just to fund that cost.
• The document was shared with unions the prior day; principals were having quiet conversations with affected staff.
• The union contract includes bumping rights, so the specific individual affected by a position cut may differ from the position listed.

FY24 Budget Overview

The school CFO (Michelle) shared a detailed line-item budget document with three columns:

• The level-service budget represents a ~5.06% increase over FY23, driven by approximately 3% from union/administrative wage increases and approximately 2% from non-salary contractual obligations (utilities, out-of-district tuition, i-Ready software at $110,000, math curriculum at $166,000).
• The austerity (‘pink’) budget assumes an $800,000 increase from the town and results in a staffing cost decrease of roughly $37,000 versus FY23, achieved through layoffs and unfilled vacancies.
• i-Ready (assessment software, $110,000/year) and the math curriculum ($166,000/year) were originally funded by ESSER and state grants; they are now contractual obligations entering the operating budget in FY24.
• Electricity costs have risen approximately 33%, contributing roughly $212,000 in increased costs. The town’s energy reserve is capped and has been fully utilized in recent years.
• Paper costs have risen approximately 72%; a case of copy paper now costs over $49, up from $22 two years ago.
• The school department noted it has exhausted its three revolving-fund offsets: circuit breaker, special ed tuition, and kindergarten/preschool tuition accounts.

“Our bare bones budget is assuming the town can come up there $800,000.” — School CFO

A finance committee member (Alec) calculated that salary increases account for approximately 3% of the 5.06% level-service increase, and non-salary contractual obligations account for approximately 2%.

Budget Situation Overview

The superintendent and CFO (Michelle) outlined three budget scenarios being prepared for the committee:

1. Austerity budget — Level-funded or below, requiring a significant reduction in force (RIF) of more than 30 positions across the district; would increase the student-to-teacher ratio by at least 7%.
2. Keep the lights on budget — Rolls forward contractual obligations, special education placements, transportation, and utilities with no headcount change.
3. Aspirational budget — Described as sub-$8M increase; includes priority items identified by principals and directors. Many supply, technology, hardware, and professional development line items were already scrubbed to reach this figure.

A critical bottleneck is that the town has not yet closed its books as of March 2 (the night of this meeting). The school committee is waiting on the town’s appropriation guidance before finalizing its budget to submit to finance committee, with a budget hearing scheduled for March 21 and a likely committee vote on March 23.

Town-School Financial Tensions

Committee members expressed sustained frustration about several financial practices:

• Health insurance: The district received health insurance information the day of the meeting but did not yet know whether it was a positive or negative variance. Anticipated 3–5% increase range.
• Benefits accounting: Last year the district was asked for the first time to include insurance costs when adding new positions — a change never previously required — pushing the budget over $3 million. When positions are vacated through retirement, the district does not recoup those insurance costs.
• Chapter 70 state aid: Under Massachusetts law, Ch. 70 funds flow to the town’s general fund and cannot be directly appropriated to the schools without a town meeting warrant article or special legislation. A committee member proposed establishing a dedicated revolving account for Ch. 70 overages. The CFO noted no other non-regional district she knows of receives Ch. 70 directly. The governor’s FY24 budget proposes the largest Chapter 70 increase ever; committee members noted other districts are directing the bulk of this increase to their schools.
• ARPA/ESSER funds: The district received approximately $400,000 of the town’s ARPA allocation; committee members argued this should have been closer to $3.25 million given that schools represent roughly 50% of town expenditures. A recommendation was made to pursue remaining unallocated ARPA funds for one-time, non-recurring needs such as technology and curriculum materials.

Priority Spending Items

Key items identified as district priorities that didn’t make the cut in the current aspirational budget:

• Mental health supports: school counselors at all levels
• Curriculum coordinators / data coaches at middle and high school
• Permanent building substitutes (floaters)
• STEAM programming at Brown School (dedicated space promised to community)
• Literacy phonics materials and decodable texts
• Technology hardware and software

Override Context

The town is expected to bring a structural deficit override question (described as “Article 31”) to voters; the exact size has not been voted by the Select Board and no budget has been formally presented. Committee members noted they were told their budget is being kept as a separate warrant article — which one member called “punitive” — and that even if the override passes, it may not fully cover the district’s contractual and staffing needs given ongoing SPED cost growth.

“We’re going to have to lay off these teachers… because our teachers deserve the world. It’s just we’re never going to get there unless we all work together.”

The committee agreed the next meeting (March 16) will continue to refine the aspirational budget, and the March 21 budget hearing will be the public presentation of all three scenarios.

The superintendent highlighted PSAT results showing the class of 2025 composite score rose 39 points, with math 21 points higher than the prior year and 31 points above the state average. The class of 2024 composite was 2 points above the prior year’s class and 33 points above the state in reading/writing. The PSAT also serves as the National Merit Scholar qualifying exam. Additionally, Marblehead High School seniors received early action/decision acceptances to 132 different colleges, universities, and technical schools. Sports highlights included the girls swim team winning a state championship, both ski teams placing second at states, and a runner named Ryan qualifying for nationals in the 600-meter event.

The committee discussed the process for building an override budget scenario. Members requested that the superintendent provide a prioritized list of positions and programs ranked from the baseline ‘austerity’ budget upward, rather than working from the aspirational budget downward. Members noted that new program positions from the aspirational budget (e.g., diversity coach, behavioral coach) would not be included in the override request.

The Finance Committee’s warrant hearing has moved from March 27 to approximately April 11, with a final Finance Committee vote expected around April 3. The committee discussed scheduling its own public budget hearing at least three weeks before the Finance Committee date and agreed to coordinate calendars offline.