Mathews County supervisors, school board agree to joint budget committee as schools present revised FY26 plan and custodial contract

Mathews County officials on April 21 discussed revised school-budget projections, staff pay and benefits, and a new custodial contract as the Board of Supervisors and School Board met in a joint emergency session and voted to form a joint committee to coordinate future budgets.

Superintendent Dr. Daniel told both boards that the division’s February budget was built on an enrollment assumption of 750 students, a 4 percent across-the-scale increase and roughly a 5 percent total pay increase once steps were included. He said the February assumptions included full staffing and three requested new positions: a secondary reading specialist mandated by the Virginia Literacy Act, a teacher assistant for Thomas Hunter Elementary School’s library, and an additional CTE teacher.

“That March, approved General Assembly budget shows increased revenue for the school division,” Dr. Daniel said, “but that is contingent on Governor Youngkin signing the General Assembly’s budget.” He detailed budget line items and cost drivers, including a Sentara health-insurance option that he said was increasing by about $322,000 and an Anthem option rising about $43,000. He also said a 5 percent salary-scale increase equated to roughly $566,000 in additional salary cost and that the total new-money request in February was about $1,100,000.

Why it matters: the school division’s state funding is driven by average daily membership (ADM); Dr. Daniel said the division is projecting 725 students for FY26 versus 750 for the current year, and declining ADM reduces Standards of Quality (SOQ) funds. He said the most recent state calculation tool (the March tool) shifts the projection from a roughly $166,518 decline to an increase of about $152,000 — a roughly $310,000 swing that would materially reduce the need for deeper cuts.

Board reaction and next steps

Supervisors pressed for clarity on payroll timing, how 10-, 11- and 12‑month contracts are accounted for, and what savings could be captured by adjusting staffing or contracting services. Several supervisors expressed frustration with the timing and level of detail in materials previously provided to the Board of Supervisors.

Board member (supervisor) Donaldson moved to create a joint committee composed of two members from each board plus the county administrator, the superintendent and finance staff to work on FY27 (and future) budgets; another supervisor seconded the motion. The board took a roll-call vote and approved the committee. The boards directed staff to provide line‑item spreadsheet detail and to meet in September–October to begin working earlier on the next budget cycle so both governing bodies can reconcile assumptions sooner.

Custodial contract and staff assurances

Dr. Daniel and school staff explained the division had solicited proposals from firms to perform custodial services and ultimately signed a contract the division says will provide 10 custodial positions (one more than the current team), a supervising position and new equipment at a reduced net cost. He said the nine custodians currently employed by the division were offered positions with the contracted firm. “The contract with the custodial firm provides us with 10 custodial positions…The individuals who are currently employed by the school division will be…offered positions with the company,” Dr. Daniel said, and he added the transition drove the timing of notices to employees.

Dr. Daniel cautioned that benefits for employees hired through the contractor will differ from current school-division benefits (for example, retirement and health-insurance packages will not be identical), but he said base salaries would be at current levels or better and that the division negotiated a guarantee in the contract that the current custodians would be offered positions.

Public comments and safety concerns

During public comment, multiple parents and long‑time substitutes urged the boards to prioritize retaining in‑school employees and raised child-safety concerns about contracting out custodial and substitute services. Kelly Lockerbie, a parent of a nonverbal child, said she was concerned that contracted staff are “not embedded the same manner that the school employees are,” adding: “Whenever we majorly see abuse cases with students that we can't talk, it's from contracted out employees.”

Other speakers urged the boards to protect special‑education staffing and to target pay increases at classroom instructional staff. Several members of the public said they saw a larger portion of payroll allocated to administration and asked the boards to examine administrative staffing as enrollment declines.

What was decided and what remains open

- Formal action: the Board of Supervisors approved formation of a joint budget committee (two members from each board, county administrator, superintendent and finance staff) to begin earlier, line‑item budget work and report back. - Staffing and pay: school leaders said they will continue to model different pay scenarios (including differential increases by employee group) and to look for savings such as contracting substitute services and adjusting custodial coverage; no final, board‑approved pay changes for FY26 were adopted at the meeting. - Custodial contract: the division signed a contract and said existing custodians were offered positions with the contractor; benefits and employment status will change under the contractor model and employees were notified in accordance with the contract timeline.

The boards scheduled further staff work, additional materials (line‑item spreadsheets and updated projections using the March state calculation tool) and a joint working schedule for fall budget planning. Public commenters asked for guarantees on continuity of staff in classrooms and for the committee to provide transparent documentation of assumptions and reconciled line items.

Ending

Board members said the goal of the new joint committee is to reduce confusion and to provide both boards and the public with clearer, earlier information ahead of future budget cycles. Dr. Daniel told the groups he will continue to refine projections and return with the requested line‑item detail and alternate pay scenarios once the state’s final budget actions are resolved.