Norfolk school leaders propose $772.9 million operating budget; board presses for tutoring, device and staffing details

Superintendent Dr. Birdsong presented the Norfolk Public Schools proposed operating budget for fiscal year 2025–26 Tuesday, asking the school board to schedule a public hearing and to forward the proposal to Norfolk City Council for appropriation.

The proposed total operating budget is $772,900,000, with a $450,000,000 general (operating) fund and a proposed capital improvement budget of $253,000,000. The administration said state revenue is the largest single source at about $263,300,000, the city contribution is proposed at $167,700,000, and the remainder comes from federal and other local funds and an estimated reversion balance from fiscal 2024.

Why it matters: the budget sets teacher pay and staffing priorities, funds tutoring and instructional supports the board has identified as key to closing achievement gaps, and determines how Norfolk will spend an expected capital package and federal/state grants.

Administrators highlighted compensation and instructional investments. The proposal raises the starting teacher salary from $57,500 to $60,088 (a 4.5% increase that the administration said combines a one‑step increase and a cost‑of‑living adjustment). Employees at the top of the scale would receive a one‑time 2.2% bonus. Instructional support is the largest single category, proposed at $319,900,000. The budget also includes $8,500,000 labeled for tutoring and related supports.

Board members pressed for detail on several lines. On tutoring, the board asked whether $8.5 million will cover the mix of local tutors and contracted university‑instructor services the division used this year. Chief Academic staff said the $8.5 million “is part of the request” and that the figure was set to meet projected need; university instructors are included within that total and the division is finalizing an RFP to reestablish tutoring contracts. Administrators said the tutoring line grew from about $6 million last year partly because local “all‑in” funding is expected to expire and will need to be replaced from the operating budget.

On technology, board members raised persistent classroom and take‑home device problems. Chief Technology staff and the administration said Norfolk maintains a replacement cycle and that the proposed budget includes funding for infrastructure. Officials reported division device counts of 28,007 Chromebooks and 6,049 iPads and said there are currently 749 devices in repair. Administrators said the district still owns more devices than students overall but acknowledged gaps in device access at some schools and described moves toward classroom sets and MiFi checkouts to manage shortfalls. Dr. Cataldo (technology staff) said wireless access points are installed “in every single classroom” where needed and that older buildings sometimes require multiple units per room; he invited board members to report specific dead spots so the technology team can follow up.

Board members also pressed administrators on mental‑health and student support staffing. Administrators said the division has increased social worker and psychologist positions in recent budgets and uses programs such as CareSolace and Panorama; they also said higher reliance on contracted psychologists has driven some purchased‑services spending. The board asked for a clearer inventory of current positions and any proposed additional hires tied to potential state funding.

Legislative and calendar notes: administrators reviewed the schedule—public hearing on March 5, recommended board adoption on March 19, and an April 1 statutory deadline to submit the proposed operating budget to Norfolk City Council, which will appropriate funds in May. The administration said any appropriation differences will be reconciled with the board before final adoption in May.

Follow ups promised: administrators said they will provide the board with (1) a comparative salary analysis showing how Norfolk’s starting and overall teacher pay compares to neighboring districts, (2) a breakdown of the $8.5 million tutoring request (including the portion for university instructors vs. local hires), (3) a device/inventory and technology‑infrastructure report, and (4) analyses on mental‑health staffing and the cost implications of policy changes the board has discussed.

Quotations (from the meeting): “For this budget, we are proposing to increase the starting teacher pay from $57,500 to $60,088. That's a 4.5% increase,” Chief Finance Officer Cheryl Spivey said; Chief Academic staff added, “The funding that was requested…there's enough funding to cover where we've been, and our current needs are being met with local funded tutors as well as contract services tutors through university instructors.”

What’s next: a March 5 public hearing and a March 19 recommended board vote. Administrators said they will return with the requested supporting analyses before the board votes on adoption.

Ending: Board members signaled general support for the priorities administrators described but repeatedly asked for more granular data—on tutoring, device access and distribution, and mental‑health staffing—before making a final funding decision.