Public voices: North Andover parents, teachers protest proposed FY26 cuts as superintendent outlines $68.2 million scenario

At its March meeting the North Andover School Committee heard dozens of residents and staff oppose proposed reductions that would be required under a $68.2 million FY26 scenario presented by Superintendent Lathrop.

The meeting featured more than a dozen public commenters, including teachers, parents and the president of the North Andover Teachers Association, who urged the committee to adopt a level-services budget or provide a clearer multi-year plan instead of the cuts under consideration.

Many speakers singled out possible school closures and staff reductions. Tony Delmonico, a teacher, told the committee, “We are not, have not committed enough to our schools,” and criticized the committee for moving toward a budget level he said would further undermine classroom support. Shannon Gateley, a parent, asked, “What is the plan if the debt exclusion doesn't pass?” and pressed for clearer answers about which services — especially special education — could be cut.

Superintendent Lathrop walked the committee through a set of potential reductions intended to reach the $68.2 million target. She described the figures on a slide deck and said the $68.2 million scenario adds cuts on top of earlier reductions considered for a $69.1 million option. “In the purple budget, we did not make cuts to special education. But this is not the purple budget,” Lathrop said, noting that the district revisited every cost center to find additional savings.

The presentation listed program-level changes under discussion: additional reductions at the elementary and middle levels that could amount to roughly three teachers or six teaching assistants at elementary and middle schools; similar potential cuts at the high school; material-and-supply reductions (examples shown: $10,000 at elementary adoption funds, $12,000 at middle school materials); and further reductions in athletics ($20,000), technology summer help ($30,000), and high-school materials ($40,000). Lathrop also said that special education reductions were being considered only where administrators judge students’ needs could still be met, and she noted several anticipated personnel changes would come through attrition.

Multiple commenters warned that cuts to special education, counseling and intervention programs already reduce supports students rely on. Juliet Darmond, president of the North Andover Teachers Association and a teacher in the district, provided a list of positions she said have already been lost this year, including elementary math coaches, a literacy coach, part-time high school positions, a portion of the middle-school focus program and 17 teaching assistants districtwide.

Committee members and the superintendent emphasized the contingency arrangements that affect how positions would be reduced. Lathrop repeatedly cautioned that the scenario is not “written in stone” and said administrators would balance reductions with contractual bumping rights, retirements and other personnel movements. “When we're making these cuts, you will have to make some determination ... teachers with nonprofessional teaching status would be teachers that we're looking at first,” she told the committee.

Several speakers pressed the committee on transparency and communication. Nadia Chinchilla and Erin Harris asked why the district had not circulated the same detailed budget communications they said other nearby districts provide, and urged the committee to present a clear “plan” — including what additional funding would enable — rather than only the minimums.

Members of the public repeatedly referenced the Kittredge School closure discussion and the Kittredge School Building Committee’s ongoing work; some commenters said they believed the town has the funds to sustain level services if the committee and Select Board pursue different budgeting options.

Committee members said they will continue work with administrators to refine the scenario, and noted some reductions could be absorbed through attrition if staff choose to retire or resign. Members also discussed forming a small liaison team with the new interim finance support to develop clearer budget reporting and to bring recommendations back to the full committee.

The committee did not vote on a final FY26 operating budget at the meeting. Members directed administrators to continue developing options and to work with the district’s financial support to prepare clearer cost-center reporting for future meetings.

Ending: The budget scenario presented will go back to administrators for further refinement; the committee urged additional community engagement and pledged to return with firmer recommendations ahead of town meeting.