[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6090824,"mediaKeyId","2865688-796cc439772233eddb884cea8b33e2c2","parentId",2865688,"title","Budget committee removes proposed district substance-abuse coordinator pending more research","audioSeconds",713,"startMs",3887000,"endMs",4600000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2865688-796cc439772233eddb884cea8b33e2c2&start=3887&end=4600","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2865688-796cc439772233eddb884cea8b33e2c2/thumbnail_3887000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6090824/Maine/Budget-committee-removes-proposed-district-substance-abuse-coordinator-pending-more-research","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6090824-9421d27dae724ad4f838ee8d643227fb/orig.mp4?Expires=1772872694&Signature=kl-WXETm2Y1IFv5nfmqFxPNYBK2o-~VzQ64MVrXiHtO3~01IHzHbX4ZQpReFa9PsNXuZHkhGPgGeU5kwfs47xYpr~tpWW8hfjN5v0NqzJ0jhzekIxvgzg2VRYsYtriktoxxoPTFT47j0svf~3Dq~tCAS~ZYCqL7Wzj4ikXkGtv1xczbezmf1JJwilt5AEtr8-z52p2QSmkpbCO6tnf~6DqN8zaUupdejS5zBtQUOp68SfjNScttvQhwL~zcMwKlnSx1r~KKHZ2MJdaxNeb75mMKQYrkvgBiqWrxmbxO92INsI6yJabhF9lofI4ZYRqCujSlMOAoHzOK-ngAA0-O9DQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","RSU 40/MSAD 40","date","2025-04-03T19:56:05.977Z","article","The RSU 40 budget committee considered—and then removed from its FY2026 recommendation—a proposed district-level substance-abuse prevention coordinator position budgeted at about $90,000.

Board members and administrators debated whether the district should hire a standalone prevention/counseling position or pursue partnerships with existing community health providers. Naomi and other members urged the board to consider a credentialed substance-abuse counselor (for example, someone with specialized addiction counseling credentials). \"I would love to see it be a substance abuse counselor,\" Naomi said, noting the difference between broad prevention programming and clinical counseling.

Administrators and health staff described current partnerships. Linda, an administrator, told the committee that RSU 40 already works with LincolnHealth (Healthy Lincoln County) to deliver prevention presentations to freshmen and repeat sessions for upper grades; she described tiered approaches that include universal prevention for whole-grade cohorts and referral pathways to clinical providers. Jamie (a health teacher) said building-level staff already do a range of prevention and health-promotion work.

Board members expressed differing views. Some said a district-level specialist could provide sustained, coordinated support and possibly save lives; others warned about recruiting and retention challenges for specialized counselors and recommended exploring partnership models or grant funding first. Rachel offered to compile local resource information and to work with administrators to investigate examples from other districts.

The committee removed the budget line for the coordinator from the FY2026 recommendation and asked administration and the personnel committee to research models and report back with job descriptions, cost estimates and examples of districts using either a counselor or a prevention coordinator before considering the position in a future budget.

Ending: The proposal for a district substance-abuse coordinator was not included in the FY2026 packet forwarded to the full board; administration will research alternatives and report to the personnel committee.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Budget Committee Meeting 03/31/25","oneSentenceSummary","After debate about scope, staffing and alternatives, RSU 40 budget committee members agreed to remove a proposed $90,000 district substance-abuse prevention coordinator from the FY2026 recommended budget and asked administration to research models and partnerships for future consideration.","taxTitle","RSU 40/MSAD 40, School Districts, Maine","taxId",68150,"location","Maine","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6090829,"Budget committee keeps $50,000 surveillance upgrade and tech items after safety debate",169,6126000,6295000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2865688-796cc439772233eddb884cea8b33e2c2&start=6126&end=6295","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2865688-796cc439772233eddb884cea8b33e2c2/thumbnail_6126000.jpg","/articles/6090829/Maine/Budget-committee-keeps-50000-surveillance-upgrade-and-tech-items-after-safety-debate","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6090829-8cb446cdb293295f098a1610cdb102ca/orig.mp4?Expires=1772872694&Signature=EfLRrQV0bGzn3BSG-kc~6jr3HOoamqX3gzITMiowyGIfg9Al7kopoJAUAjd1bOe-f9Fr-cXiQKbbkPZtMyXntutw2pADMnqNF~zSQAya1ATd~RzHP8mbihEzYCjmykBYJJoMehDZMOJqb1ikZSBMcFuYwDBn462TaddiCA~rMuZl7mwcYTnkFPaexQh-gsyX-QpkRQbwaZsxKaPOLtCyGMXDHOl-wfuqrri~RZ-QmmOPSjblE-cD0FmJt-VKNDCIO6IOD2YpGQKWeYcp-X9xOdqblBTufZTaN9sPA37NzyZpFTAwYWr9yRImAB6zgbME5sfZuksU9v32Im~R6lytww__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","RSU 40 administrators and board members debated surveillance and audiovisual upgrades during the budget review and the committee decided to retain a proposed surveillance-camera capital upgrade in the FY2026 recommendation.

Administrators said the district’s current cameras and recording systems are antiquated, use multiple incompatible vendors and make investigations slow. “You go in. You sit down. One camera is five minutes off from one set, is five minutes off from all the others…that takes anywhere from two to three hours with the system that we have right now,” Linda, an administrator who works with building-level security, told the committee. She and other administrators said modernizing the system would allow staff to access cameras across buildings from a single interface, speeding responses to vandalism or safety incidents.

The proposal discussed by the committee included a multi-year $50,000 upgrade plus a one-time cabling/installation estimate of about $68,000 to bring seven buildings onto a unified system. Administrators emphasized that some cabling costs would be one-time capital expenses and that vendor offerings vary; committee members said the figure in the packet was a placeholder to begin planning and bidding.

Board members raised concerns about cost and the recurring multi-year commitment; others stressed student and staff safety. Josh Snyder, a principal, and several board members described recent vandalism and the operational burden of piecing together disparate camera systems. One board member said grainy footage had made it difficult to identify license plates or specific perpetrators when vandalism had occurred.

The committee also discussed smaller technology items presented by the technology director: updated school website integration with parent-communication software, a social-media manager tool, and a motion-picture licensing fee to ensure compliance for school athletic and community programming. Those items remained in the recommended packet; Holly (technology lead, not present) had told the committee her top priority was camera replacement.

Ending: The camera upgrade, implementation planning and associated one-time cabling work remain part of the recommended budget package sent to the full board; administrators will put the project out to bid and seek firm cost estimates before final appropriation.","Committee members voted to keep a multi-year surveillance camera upgrade and related website/video licenses in the proposed budget after administrators described limitations of the district's current camera systems and the safety benefits of a unified platform.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6090834,"RSU 40 budget committee recommends $40.8M FY2026 budget, creates reserve funds amid federal funding uncertainty",788,142000,930000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2865688-796cc439772233eddb884cea8b33e2c2&start=142&end=930","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2865688-796cc439772233eddb884cea8b33e2c2/thumbnail_142000.jpg","/articles/6090834/Maine/RSU-40-budget-committee-recommends-408M-FY2026-budget-creates-reserve-funds-amid-federal-funding-uncertainty","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6090834-cc747e063722bee7f70488ccbed1335f/orig.mp4?Expires=1772872694&Signature=Ept1n30GYYGGCtYE9jO9A4mDgYPRG-2VadH4IhOhbRv3GUXN~19O9aopZxBHaEuyfJGI982AS6roHGYjOSVShkJFhRNSNXnSip57QgAwNDGXNRt2kVawDkVzQ2Ld5a52gh6dBg0BklMJzctShj~MVcmgQZFlxTL6Xl~7Nb1IOFetcJuDQ0S3OF2gxcpMwIsLca8pflZWww4ntEICRILQljG-lzZOgaMCFr2Rkbez1qkRXEZQRoGlk-OsM0JUsFIIFRli5M1vZHXeu6c9OoY5meqq-Bhwj~J0Rknm44mGPfr9kNiA79Ha6z~4~EY3P48A~Qky~B0o5bmW6joYY8DODg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The RSU 40/MSAD 40 budget committee voted Thursday to send a proposed FY2026 general fund budget of $40,815,369 to the full board for approval and to the district budget meeting, and to establish two reserve funds to protect instruction and special-education services if federal aid falls short.

Committee members approved the package after hearing presentations on adult education, food service, system administration, debt service and capital needs and debating where to trim optional items. The motion sent to the board included language authorizing an \"improvement of instruction\" reserve (to be funded up to $750,000 if needed) and a special-education reserve (to be funded up to $650,000) for unanticipated gaps if federal grants do not arrive.

The recommendation follows presentations from administrators and staff outlining program changes and cost pressures. Karen (business manager) told the committee the district currently holds an unassigned fund balance of “around $2,000,000,” and recommended creating reserve accounts so taxpayers would not be asked to cover programs temporarily if federal Title funds are delayed or reduced. Karen said the reserve would be funded only if federal funding did not arrive and any expenditures would require separate board approval.

Budget highlights and drivers included:
- Adult education: presenters reported 18 enrolled students and an estimated 6–10 on track to complete graduation this year. The adult-education cost center shows a 4.1% increase driven chiefly by adding health benefits to the director position. (Presenter name not specified in transcript.)
- Food service: Storm Hendricks, food service director, described rising food costs and shifting dollars from supply lines into food lines at several schools. The local-tax request for food service remains $55,000; most operating costs are funded by state and federal reimbursements. “The price of food just keeps going up,” Hendricks said, noting equipment grants this year that replaced aging kitchen gear.
- System administration: the business office budget rose in contract services and technology; the committee heard an explanation that moving the accounting system to a cloud-hosted environment added one-time and recurring costs. Audit and liability insurance line items were cited as upward pressure.
- Debt service: the committee was told debt service drops by $46,544 as middle-school interest payments near expiration in FY2028; principal payments remain.
- Capital/operations: administration proposed shifting roughly $680,000 in facilities money into a lease payment structure to accelerate several critical projects (septic work at the high school, heating and ventilation controls at middle and high schools). The committee discussed using a lease to fund more work over a shorter period.

The committee also reviewed federal grant risk. Administrators reported an increase in the district’s direct certification rate when MaineCare was added, which raises the percentage of automatically certified free/reduced students and therefore affects federal reimbursement levels. However, they flagged a severe projected reduction in Title V (McKinney-Vento/compensatory) funds: an allocation that this year was roughly $124,000 was estimated by the state at about $9,400 for next year. Administrators summarized that the district’s total Title (I/II/V and related) funding is “just shy of $900,000,” and that specific program lines (about $347,000 on the budget print) represent critical services that would be difficult to replace from local taxes if federal aid disappears.

Insurance and audit costs remained a significant unknown. The district received a minimum/maximum insurance guidance of 3%–14% and is budgeting 10% for now; administrators said a 14% result could translate to roughly $280,000 more than the 10% estimate. The final insurer determinations were expected to be released to districts soon.

On staffing and program requests, the committee took several directional actions rather than final hires: it removed a proposed human-resources director and a line for board meeting video production equipment from the tentative budget after members said those were lower priority for this cycle; it also removed a proposed district-level substance-abuse prevention coordinator from the FY2026 package and asked administration to research models and options for next year. Administrators said one pre-K teacher funded through a grant would be eliminated because the grant funding is not available; they also proposed keeping one van driver position funded this year while removing a second van-driver request and finding savings in existing budgets to cover operational needs.

The committee approved the budget recommendation on a voice vote. The recording shows two members opposed and one abstention; the committee chair confirmed the recommendation will go forward to the full board and that final adjustments (for insurance and administrator contract numbers) can be made before the district meeting if needed.

The budget packet forwarded to the board preserves the district’s core programs while setting up contingency mechanisms for the most at-risk services if federal titles are reduced. Administration will present refined insurance and contract figures to the board once final numbers arrive.

Ending: The full RSU 40 board will receive the committee’s recommendation at its next meeting; any changes to the recommended figures can be made at that board meeting prior to the district budget vote.

","The RSU 40 budget committee voted to forward a $40,815,369 FY2026 general fund budget to the full board and to the district meeting, approving creation of two contingency reserve funds after hearing significant uncertainty about federal Title grants and other cost pressures.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Budget committee removes proposed district substance-abuse coordinator pending more research

Budget committee keeps $50,000 surveillance upgrade and tech items after safety debate

RSU 40 budget committee recommends $40.8M FY2026 budget, creates reserve funds amid federal funding uncertainty