Public testimony during the Lynn School Committee meeting focused heavily on proposed fiscal‑year 2026 budget cuts that would reduce the district’s clinical and social‑emotional‑learning (SEL) staff, prompting repeated appeals from clinicians, parents and union leaders to preserve positions.

Why it matters: Clinicians and special‑education staff said cuts would reduce in‑district capacity to support students with trauma, behavioral health needs and special‑education services. Several speakers warned that reductions would increase out‑of‑district placements, disrupt continuity for vulnerable students and lead to higher long‑term costs.

What speakers said: Fallon Elementary clinical supervisor Megan Levitt described Fallon as “a separate therapeutic elementary school dedicated to providing intensive academic and emotional support,” and told the committee that shifting one clinical supervisor into a clinician role would “be deeply disruptive” and could drive students out of district placements. Clinician Sarah Fox Ray said the proposed cuts would leave clinicians “stretched far too thin” and warned the committee she was “really scared of the consequences.” Heather Matulewicz, another clinical supervisor, described clinicians as “pivotal players” whose removal would reduce life‑saving connections for some students.

Union president Sheila O’Neil of the Lynn Teachers Union said the cuts would affect classroom staffing and English‑learner supports. In her remarks she cited figures that were in the public record: “37 teaching positions being cut at the cost of $3,239,276,” and later referenced a total savings estimate for cuts she reported as $4,186,414 (figures presented by the speaker during public comment).

Administration response and rationale: District leaders and deputies told the committee the FY26 gap required reductions across categories. They cited a staffing standard agreed through prior contract discussions for clinical staffing that the administration said the district needed to apply to reach a sustainable budget level. Administrators also said they had tried to preserve allocations in the highest‑need schools; they reported the clinical unit would be reduced from 97 positions (current) to 81 under the proposed plan and provided dollar‑value breakdowns for major categories (clinical unit reductions approximately $1.6 million; teacher reductions approximately $1.9 million; secondary coaching reductions approximately $2.3 million; total roughly $5.8 million). The administration said principals and building leaders were consulted during budget meetings.

Points of dispute: Clinicians and union leaders said the district lacked consistent, longitudinal data to show that cuts would not harm student safety and outcomes. Administration officials said clinicians’ time-use data is inconsistent across staff and that the district needs a standardized platform — cited in the meeting as Branching Minds — to quantify services and cases for better allocation decisions. Committee members asked for clearer, school‑by‑school impact analyses and pressed the administration on alternatives and on whether administrative savings could offset some cuts.

Next steps: The committee set a public hearing and additional budget deliberations in early June. Several committee members asked the administration to return with targeted alternatives, clearer impact metrics and additional scenarios, and community advocates urged preserving bilingual clinicians and positions supporting therapeutic programs.

Ending: The budget narrative at the meeting highlighted the tension between a multi‑million dollar shortfall and long‑standing calls for more school‑based mental‑health capacity. The matter will return to the committee for votes after the public hearing; speakers asked the committee to consider the long‑term educational and social costs of reducing in‑district SEL supports.