Triton officials outline FY26 budget cuts, cite double‑digit health‑care increases and potential town overrides

Triton Regional School District finance staff and school committee members on a district committee meeting described a tentative Fiscal Year 2026 budget that assumes a roughly $2,450,000 increase in operating expenditures — including a $1 million increase attributed to rising employee health‑insurance costs — and outlined a mix of confirmed reductions and “to be determined” savings as the district and its three towns weigh overrides.

Bridal Perry, director of finance and operations for Triton Regional School District, told the committee that the district “got a 16.12% on our medical plans, our HMOs and PPOs, and a 10.23% increase on dental.” She said the budget currently includes about $1 million for health care and that the district is targeting $300,000 in savings through plan‑design changes and cost sharing.

The budget document the committee reviewed is an updated version of the tentative budget the school committee approved Feb. 12. Perry said items shown in yellow on the materials mark changes from that tentative version, and that trustees and staff have continued to “tweak” reductions since the committee finalized the tentative budget.

Why it matters: health‑care increases and uncertain state and federal funding are driving difficult choices for staffing and programming. Perry said the district is pursuing both reductions and possible revenue changes while awaiting potential state corrections and local override outcomes that will determine final town assessments.

Key points discussed

- Health insurance: Perry reported double‑digit increases on medical and smaller but still notable dental increases; the budget currently assumes about $1 million in additional health‑insurance costs and a $300,000 savings target from plan adjustments.

- Circuit Breaker / Student Opportunity Act: Perry said recently available state corrections tied to special‑education Circuit Breaker funding created new revenue prospects; she described the Circuit Breaker change as linked to the Student Opportunity Act and said the first funded year presents partial corrections that may produce additional revenue in FY26.

- Confirmed reductions and program changes: The packet lists three confirmed reductions. Among the changes are combining the middle‑school autism (TLC) and the Essentials program schedules with the high school to allow shared staffing next year; Perry estimated this consolidation would save close to $200,000 for FY26 but said the change may need to be reversed in FY27 depending on enrollment.

- Grant rolloffs: Two positions — a multilingual instructional assistant at Salisbury and a special‑education teacher previously funded by grants — are shown moving into the general fund because the grants are ending. Perry said the district will shift to a licensed English‑learner teacher for Salisbury next year as student distribution has shifted.

- Class size and specialist reductions: Officials discussed protecting early‑grade interventionists and specialists but warned that further cuts could increase elementary class sizes, reduce teaming at the middle school and shrink elective offerings at the high school. The committee discussed moving some art, physical education and library positions from full‑time to shared FTEs across schools, noting that would reduce the district’s capacity to provide interventions and substitute coverage during absences.

Local fiscal context and override planning

Perry said two of the district’s three towns have indicated they plan to pursue an override; Salisbury indicated it does not intend to go to an override and, based on discussions, Salisbury could support roughly a $650,000 increase within its ability to pay. Using the tentative figures discussed, Perry said Newbury’s per‑pupil assessment would fall from $5.87 to $5.33, Rowley’s would move to about $9.49 (from a touch over $9 million in assessments), and Salisbury’s assessment would drop from $7.17 to $6.51. Perry summarized the district‑level operating increase as about $2,450,000 and described a remaining gap of roughly $432,000 that the committee still needs to close.

Perry outlined the calendar for final decisions: a public hearing is scheduled next week (state legislators were invited to attend), the committee expected to provide final guidance for a final budget, and the school committee plans to approve a final budget on March 12. Perry said if a town fails an override on the May 13 election, the district would have to reconvene to reduce the budget and resubmit it; towns have 45 days to hold another town meeting if needed.

Discussion vs. decision

Most items discussed were options and provisional approaches rather than formal votes. The committee and district staff identified confirmed FY26 reductions (the three items noted in the packet) and several program or staffing changes that would remain contingent on final town assessments, state corrections and enrollment changes. Committee members expressly avoided naming individual positions to be cut until final numbers require those identifications.

Quotes from meeting participants are taken verbatim from the committee record and are attributed to the speakers shown in the meeting materials.

Ending

The committee will hold a public hearing next week and return to finalize the FY26 budget on March 12. The district’s final budget will depend on the results of any local overrides in Newbury or Rowley, Salisbury’s town meeting outcome, and potential state supplemental funding tied to Circuit Breaker and Chapter 70 adjustments.