Northampton school budget hearing draws sharp public concern over special education, staffing and reading gains

Northampton ' At a March 27 public hearing on the proposed fiscal 2026 budget, the Northampton School Committee heard sustained public comment urging adoption of the district's "strong" budget option, which administrators say would restore positions cut in recent years and add staff targeted at reading and social-emotional supports.

The hearing brought multiple speakers from across the city to the podium, including parents and current and former school staff who described long-standing staffing shortfalls and disparities among elementary schools. A parent said the district's actions had crossed legal lines, and asked the committee for an independent investigation and immediate personnel actions.

The budget discussion centered on three options presented by Superintendent Dr. Bonnie Bonner: a city fiscal-target proposal (referred to publicly as the "4%" option), a level-services option and a stronger, 13.24% request developed from building-level needs. Dr. Bonner said the strong budget "captures some of the positions that were cut last year" and would expand interventionists, coaches and other staff to implement the district improvement plan.

Why it matters: Committee members and many public speakers said adopting the strong budget would give the district a realistic chance to reverse declines in staffing, reduce high class sizes at the secondary level and expand literacy interventions students need now. The mayor, citing municipal revenue forecasts and rising fixed costs, said the city's available additional revenue would not cover the strong budget without an override.

Public comment and district response

Speakers who identified themselves as parents, teachers and longtime community members urged the committee to adopt the strong budget. Karen Hidalgo, a school counselor at Northampton High School, said the high school is "understaffed and has been for many years" and listed vacancies she said constrain course offerings. Benjamin Spencer and others praised district staff while urging the committee to take further action beyond a budget.

One parent who said they had filed a complaint with the state office described a transcript they supplied from a school meeting and said in part: "The district violated 6 different state education laws and that their actions constituted a denial of access to free and appropriate public education." The parent asked why involved staff had not been placed on administrative leave and called for an independent investigation; Superintendent Dr. Bonner replied: "We are investigating the serious nature of the incident ' and there are due process rights ' and there is a process in which we go through when it involves our personnel. And so we are in the process of the investigation. And once that investigation is complete, there will be a report, and then I will follow-up." (Dr. Bonner)

Budget specifics discussed

Administrators described three budget scenarios shown to the committee: - A fiscal-target or "4%" option that the mayor and council have discussed as a possible city target. - A level-services budget (presented as roughly a 7.7% increase over FY25) intended to maintain current staffing and contractual obligations (COLA/steps) but not to add most new positions. - A strong budget (a 13.24% request) compiled from building principals' requests to restore and add positions the schools say they need to achieve district goals.

Bobby (district finance staff) and Dr. Bonner said a strong-budget request included additional interventionists, coaches and paraeducators. The district identified an estimated shortfall of about 5.8 paraeducator full-time equivalents tied to student needs; Bobby said adding 5.8 paras would cost about $220,684 and that adding roughly 14 paras to reach a higher service level would raise costs by about $500,000 above level services.

Mayor Jean Louis Sherra warned of city budget constraints and a broader economic slowdown. He told the committee the city projects roughly $4,071,941 in additional revenue next year but also faces a projected health-insurance increase of 10.5 percent (about $1.4 million). "So," he said, "the strong budget is an increase of $5,100,000 over FY25 ' that would require a $6,000,000 override this spring," language he used to explain the city's limited fiscal headroom.

District improvement and reading instruction

Dr. Bonner and curriculum staff described a multi-tiered plan to address reading and math gaps: (1) strengthen Tier 1 instruction through professional development (science of reading, Orton-Gillingham training), (2) expand Tier 2 supports by adding interventionists and coaches who work with classroom teachers, and (3) preserve Tier 3 individualized special-education services. Dr. Bonner said professional development plans and curriculum implementation schedules should be available for the committee by June.

Several committee members and public speakers pressed for specificity on how the budgets translate into measurable reading gains, especially for older students who are multiple grade levels behind. Committee member questions focused on screening and services for secondary students and whether current interventions produce demonstrable improvement.

Where things stand

No final budget vote was taken at the hearing. The committee discussed meeting dates in April; members debated whether administration should produce a line-by-line scenario showing which positions would be cut under a 4% city-target budget before the committee votes. Some members said they would vote for the strong budget as the policy choice for the schools and allow the city council to weigh fiscal and operational trade-offs.

The superintendent and staff said they would continue to refine numbers, address follow-up questions from committee members, and provide more detail on professional-development plans and staffing implications for each budget scenario.

Ending

The committee closed the public hearing portion and moved into further internal discussion and planning; formal action on the FY26 budget remained pending future meetings.