Vocational-school budget drives heated debate as Methuen officials weigh school cuts and town's share

Greater Lawrence Technical School's proposed FY2026 assessment for Methuen, and broader questions about school funding, dominated a long and sometimes contentious portion of the Methuen City Council's budget workshop Tuesday.

John Lavoie, superintendent-director of Greater Lawrence Technical School, told the council the district's assessment for Methuen will be $5,117,501 for FY2026, an increase he said stems largely from enrollment growth at the vocational regional school and state funding changes. "We took in 62 additional students for this school year," Lavoie said, explaining the enrollment rise raised Methuen's share of the regional tab.

The figures prompted sharply worded objections from several councilors, who said Methuen faces tough choices for its own school budget and should not automatically "rubber stamp" large increases to the regional vocational district. Councilor Ferretra called the GLTS budget "full of salaries that are overinflated," questioned administrative pay scales and said Methuen should prioritize its public schools. Other councilors echoed concerns about outsize administrative compensation and the impact on Methuen taxpayers if the town complies without pushing back.

Methuen Public Schools leaders warned the council a city administration number presented in the workshop would require deeper staff reductions than the school committee's preferred budget. The district superintendent (identified in the meeting as the superintendent of Methuen Public Schools) said the school committee had approved a net operating budget of $102,639,745, a figure the school committee backed after multiple workshops, but that the mayor's proposed appropriation to the council was lower and would increase layoffs. "The number presented to you by the city administration for the school's net operating budget of $99,456,385 would result in additional layoffs as 75 to 80% of our budget in the school department are salaries," the superintendent said.

Lavoie and Methuen leaders said the legal formula that determines GLTS assessments is set by state law and allocation rules; Lavoie said communities cannot unilaterally reduce their required contribution below the state formula. He told the council that the vocational school receives major grant funding and invests heavily in student programs and workforce development, adding, "We provide first, the first thing we give back to the community is educate." He also said GLTS has routinely pursued grant money to fund capital and program needs.

Councilors debated whether to approve the mayor's number, send the matter back to the school committee for another revision, or use limited one‑time city funds to reduce layoffs. Mayor Caffel urged the council not to cut the city number further and outlined three paths to reconcile school and city figures: additional one‑time free‑cash support, $3 million in cuts elsewhere in the city budget, or an override by voter referendum.

Councilors repeatedly emphasized they want teacher positions preserved where possible. The school department said the lower city number would increase layoff notices to an estimated 35–40 people compared with a projected 15–20 under the school committee's preferred figure, numbers that the superintendent said were changing day to day as resignations and other staffing developments were recorded.

The council did not take a final appropriation vote on the school budget at the workshop. Members discussed process options, including sending the mayor's number back if they wanted to insist the school committee's budget be the starting point for council action. Legal and charter constraints on how the council and mayor and school committee interact on budget matters were referenced during the debate.