Northampton council rejects measure to let council increase school budget; vote 3–5

The Northampton City Council declined on May 1 to accept Chapter 3.29 of the Acts of 1987, an order that would have given the council the option to increase a school budget (Northampton Public Schools or Smith Vocational) above the mayor’s submitted figure during the annual budget process.

The council vote to accept the order failed by a roll call tally reported at the meeting (three in favor, five opposed). The order had been presented in second reading after referral to the Finance Committee, which issued a neutral recommendation with Councilor Maiori opposed.

Supporters, including multiple public commenters, urged the council to opt in to gain an extra tool to protect school services after repeated midyear staff reductions. Ace Tayloe, a Ward 3 resident, said the measure was “another tool in the toolkit” and urged council approval. Several parents and teachers urged immediate action to avoid further cuts to classroom supports and interventions.

Opponents and skeptics warned that accepting the measure would force the council to cut other municipal departments or seek overrides within constraints set by Proposition 2 1/2. Mayor Sherra argued the mayor’s office carries statutory responsibility for preparing a balanced municipal budget and that accepting the order could require rapid, late-stage decisions that would reduce services elsewhere. As she summarized the city’s practice, “the mayor has a responsibility to produce the budget in a city form of government.”

Council debate referenced a written, revised legal opinion from the city solicitor (dated April 9) and guidance from the Division of Local Services (DLS). The council president read the solicitor’s corrected opinion aloud at the meeting: the revised opinion states that the city council would not be able to draw on reserves to balance an increased school budget without the mayor’s agreement. City staff and councilors reported that DLS staff said the school committee’s budget recommendation is the figure the school committee votes for and that DLS will give advice only about state law, deferring local charter interpretation to local counsel.

Councilors split along lines of process and practicality. Councilor Moulton said she lacked appetite to attempt last-minute cuts to other departments to cover any increase the council might approve. Councilor Clemmer said the measure would create “an unfair system where only the school department can lobby for more money, and every other department can only lobby to be spared cuts.” Councilor Rothenberg argued the tool would help the council negotiate and apply pressure where the schools are in crisis.

The Finance Director, Melissa Nardi, and other staff noted that the city is operating at its levy limit; any local increase would require either reductions elsewhere in the operating budget or use of reserves with mayoral consent. Nardi also noted the city regularly reviews non-property revenue projections and that those lines are part of the budget picture.

The council did not adopt the order at the meeting. Several councilors and public speakers urged continued advocacy at the state level and greater year-round collaboration between the council, School Committee, and mayor’s office. The mayor and several councilors said the upcoming formal budget hearings (scheduled for May 27 and June 4) will be the next opportunity for public testimony and negotiation.

Authority and legal context: the measure would have accepted Chapter 3.29 of the Acts of 1987; the mayor and staff cited Mass. Gen. Laws c.44 §32 and the Division of Local Services guidance during discussion.

Outcome: Motion to accept Chapter 3.29 failed by roll call; no change to current budget authority was made.