Wachusett administrators present FY26 draft budget amid ‘hold harmless’ funding squeeze

Superintendent Dr. Riley and Finance Director Michelle Grise presented the Wachusett Regional School District’s draft FY26 budget to the Business & Finance Subcommittee on March 3, outlining a proposed 5.92% budget increase and warning that the district remains subject to a state “hold harmless” funding treatment that limits the state aid the district receives.

The presentation emphasized the budget’s centerpieces: interventionist positions targeting grades 1–2 (each to deliver four 45‑minute sessions per classroom weekly), K–5 STEAM teachers, an additional board‑certified behavior analyst, an internship coordinator at the high school and an additional nurse for safety/compliance. Administration said roughly 0.5% of the increase above level services represents the new positions; it also plans to pursue 8–10 incremental FTEs through reprioritization, retirements and grant opportunities rather than full new salary funding.

The district framed the request as a response to student performance gaps and small but impactful enrollment declines. Dr. Riley told the subcommittee the district serves about 6,700 students and is down roughly 133 students (under 2% year‑over‑year). He said the district is one of the growing number of Massachusetts districts placed into hold harmless; under the governor’s budget iteration that treatment delivers only $75 per pupil more in Chapter 78 aid for FY26 (about $501,375 for the district), a fraction of the additional aid other districts received this cycle.

That reduction in state aid, administration said, drives higher town assessments. Grise presented preliminary assessments for the five member towns under the proposed draft: Holden +8.14%, Paxton +8.50%, Princeton +7.37%, Rutland +7.83% and Sterling +5.12%. Administration contrasted the district’s staffing levels with state averages and peers, saying several staffing categories remain below the state average and that small proportional enrollment drops do not easily translate into proportionate personnel reductions without harming services.

On program details, the superintendent said the interventionist model is evidence‑based and intended to provide timely, preventive help so fewer students progress to more expensive special‑education placements. STEAM positions would expand hands‑on project‑based learning and restore related‑arts equity across towns, he said. Grise said the FY26 draft budgets a net salary/benefits increase of about 4% (with bargaining unit COLAs noted near 2.75% in recent contracts), an 8% estimated rise in commercial health insurance costs, and an 11.04% increase in Worcester County retirement assessments if paid by the July 1 discount date.

Capital and facilities needs were highlighted as ongoing pressures. Administration cited a failed suspended concrete floor in the high school auto shop (an approximate cost shown in the presentation of $350,000 for repair bids due), an urgent central office/early‑childhood roof repair (Grise referenced a near‑$250,000 cost earlier in the presentation), and a nonfunctional high‑school phone/intercom system (presentation referenced a replacement estimate in the mid‑six figures). The draft includes approximately $800,000 of capital repairs for the high school in FY26, the presenters said, while noting the larger backlog at the high school could require debt financing or a future debt exclusion.

Administration also reviewed FY25 status and revenue assumptions: special‑education tuition budgeted at about $10,000,134 (with circuit breaker reimbursements and a grant contribution used to offset tuition costs), circuit breaker reimbursements budgeted at roughly $4.5 million, a proposed Medicaid reimbursement estimate of $850,000, and a cautious $400,000 in interest revenue. Grise told the committee she is conservatively budgeting certain reimbursements because carryforward and reimbursement timing create fiscal risk.

On contingency and reductions, the presentation explained that personnel make up about 80% of district costs and estimated the conservative fiscal return from eliminating a teacher at about $50,000 (including benefits) — an example used to show the scale of staff reductions the district would need if revenues fall. Grise noted roughly ten planned teacher retirements and said each vacancy would be reviewed before replacement.

Administration proposed asking the full school committee to consider re‑admitting school‑choice students as a revenue option (the district would receive about $5,000 per choice student) but noted school‑choice tuition does not change the state funding calculation for the students’ home districts. The draft budget also includes a small use of Excess & Deficiency (E&D) of about $200,000 assumed for FY26 planning; administration said it prefers to preserve E&D to protect against midyear facility emergencies and special‑education placements.

Members of the subcommittee and representatives from member towns asked for additional detail on the hold‑harmless mechanics, Medicaid reimbursement confidence, and the district’s capital backlog. Several members urged joint advocacy with member towns to press the Legislature and governor for changes to the state funding formula. Administration scheduled a public budget hearing for March 10 and asked the full school committee to vote a budget by March 21 to meet town meeting schedules; town meetings would then consider the approved school budget.

Votes and formal motions at the subcommittee meeting were procedural: the body moved and approved (roll call) to have Vice Chair Malia chair the meeting in the chair’s temporary absence, and later moved and approved to adjourn after completing business.