Chelsea proposes $261.7 million fiscal 2026 budget with largest increase for schools, adds public-safety staff

Deputy City Manager Michael Mason presented the City of Chelsea’s proposed fiscal 2026 budget, a $261,701,228 spending plan that the administration said increases citywide spending by about $16.7 million from last year and would send roughly $153.7 million to Chelsea Public Schools.

Mason said the proposal is “our second budget session for the fiscal 26 budget, for the city of Chelsea,” and described priorities that include expanded public safety staffing, maintaining a conservative posture to protect the city’s credit standing, and investments in schools and operations.

The draft budget covers the city’s operating and capital requests. Education accounts for the largest share, about 58.7 percent of the total budget, and Mason said the Chelsea Public Schools allocation rises about $10.5 million year over year; public safety spending is listed at about $33.6 million. Other line items shown in Mason’s presentation include general government ($9.47 million), department of public works ($10.3 million), employee benefits (about $20.9 million) and debt service (about $3.1 million). Mason said the total equals roughly $261.7 million compared with $245 million in the prior year, and he repeatedly cautioned that the City Council can still change the draft.

Mason explained revenue assumptions and constraints. He said the administration used the governor’s budget numbers for state aid when preparing its forecast and referenced the state education-aid formulas discussed in the presentation, including the Student Opportunity Act and chapter 70 (the transcript also refers to “chapter 78” in one passage). Mason described local property taxes and “new growth” from development as revenue sources; he said fines and forfeitures account for about 0.9 percent of city revenue and that the city has been conservative when forecasting investment income.

On staffing and operations, Mason outlined several specific changes the administration proposes or has already implemented: the Chelsea Police Department moved to a 4-by-4 schedule in January and the administration is budgeting an additional sergeant to make the schedule work; the draft adds four firefighters to staff a planned additional engine (Mason estimated about $334,000 for those salaries, exclusive of benefit costs, which are reflected in the employee-benefits line); the administration plans to bring some previously contracted mechanical work in-house and budgeted for two mechanic positions partly charged to other funds; and two positions funded previously by American Rescue Plan Act money (including a community health worker) are proposed to move onto the general fund.

Mason also described internal restructurings and vacancy-driven savings: a long-unfilled Office of Emergency Management position and an unfilled assessing-office clerk will not be funded; the personnel department will eliminate two part-time roles and instead add a full-time human-resources assistant and an assistant director, which the administration said will increase HR capacity and succession planning. Mason said those changes, along with other adjustments, produced roughly $563,000 available for new additions in the general fund after accounting for offsets and reserve changes; he noted he would double-check one slide where a departmental net number appeared inconsistent.

Debt and regional assessments factored into the picture. Mason said Chelsea’s share of regional school costs — he cited Northeast Vocational School as an example — is rising because of a large MSBA-backed school construction project and changes in enrollment-based assessments; he said the city is the second-largest sending community to that vocational school and cited a roughly $308,000 year-over-year increase tied to those costs. Mason described an earlier financing tool (referred to as TELP) used for a microgrid project and said debt-service payments are increasing year over year, noting some renegotiation of schedules reduced pressure compared with an earlier estimate.

Mason said department heads began submitting capital needs in October and that the capital requests informed the budget book. He announced the finance and communications teams are launching a new interactive budget website in April that will let residents explore the budget online rather than only reading a static PDF or printed book. The next steps he outlined: City Council budget hearings in mid-May and a council vote on the budget scheduled for June 2; the fiscal year would begin July 1 if the council approves the appropriations.

Public comment at the meeting highlighted infrastructure, safety and youth services concerns. A resident who identified herself as Beatrice urged a stronger focus on public-safety spending and raised road and sidewalk conditions and concerns about gang activity. Another speaker urged expanded programs for teen mothers, comprehensive sex education and more recreational opportunities for youth. Several commenters called for investment in after-school and youth-center programming and job opportunities for teenagers; a commenter cited external organizations such as Roca as potential partners. Program manager William Palacios (self-identified) encouraged residents to engage with the process. Mason responded to several public comments, saying the administration is investing in public safety, has used ARPA funds to support services and will consider the speakers’ priorities in this and future budget cycles.

No formal votes were taken at the session; Mason repeatedly reminded the audience that City Council can modify the draft proposal during its hearings. The administration presented a balanced draft that pairs new personnel additions with vacancy savings, contracting changes and other offsets; Mason said several items are contingent on council approval and ongoing contract negotiations.

Mason introduced members of his finance team during the presentation: Patrice Montefosco (treasurer-collector), Alicia Oriana (senior financial analyst), Ed Dunn (director of budget and grant administration) and James Sullivan (chief assessor). He also referenced City Manager Fidel Maltez as his supervisor.

The administration provided many line-item figures in the presentation slides; Mason acknowledged one slide contained an error he planned to correct with staff. He emphasized the administration’s aim to maintain the city’s fiscal strength and creditworthiness while funding education, public safety and targeted operational improvements.