Triton budget shortfall driven by health care and transportation could raise town assessments

The Triton Regional District Communications Committee heard Feb. 6 that preliminary budget work for fiscal 2026 shows roughly $3.28 million in added costs, driven mainly by a likely health‑insurance increase and a rebid of the district's transportation contract, leaving the three member towns facing higher assessments unless the district finds reductions or towns approve new revenue.

The committee chair, Linda Lukoski, chair of the Triton Regional School Committee, opened the meeting and asked the superintendent to review the documents the committee had previously discussed. Superintendent Brian Forgett told the committee that salary costs total about $1.3 million this year for personnel across bargaining units, that rebidding transportation produced an increase equivalent to roughly $825,000 over five years (about $235,000 per year compared with current costs), and that the district expects “roughly a million dollar increase just in health care alone.”

Those cost drivers, Forgett said, underlie a draft “level‑services” set of budget requests that increase total expenses by about $3,278,000. He described the figure as an initial illustration, not a final recommendation, and said the committee must give guidance so administration can propose targeted reductions.

Why it matters: Triton is a regional district whose three member towns—Newbury, Rowley and Salisbury—share costs under the state’s statutory apportionment method. Forgett walked the committee through an example showing that changes in each town’s minimum local contribution and enrollment can shift assessments even if the district’s overall budget stays the same: in his illustrative recalculation Newbury’s assessment would fall by $83,561, Salisbury’s by $162,790 and Rowley’s would rise by $246,351.

Committee and town representatives described local constraints. Kristen Sherry, a Rowley representative, told the committee Rowley is negotiating multiple union contracts, facing public‑safety staffing and revenue pressures and had warned the district last year it might need an override for FY26. A finance committee representative identified as Tracy said her town plans to apply a 50/50 model—committing half of new town revenues to offset school assessment increases—and estimated roughly $400,000 available, which she said would not cover the district’s full illustrated need.

Dale, speaking for Salisbury, said the town is confronting both operating pressures and longer‑term capital questions, including likely future overrides for school‑building projects; he urged the district to consider the cumulative impact on voters if operating overrides coincide with building questions.

Committee members discussed where cuts would fall if the towns do not provide additional revenue. Forgett said deep reductions on the scale of a million dollars would likely affect classroom personnel and student‑facing services, noting prior reductions to STEM and social‑emotional positions. Several committee members offered alternatives and longer‑term options: moving sixth grade into the middle school, consolidating administrative posts, or asking administrators to forgo raises, but Forgett cautioned such changes would generally produce longer‑term efficiencies rather than immediate savings and could carry construction or retention risks.

The committee also discussed state and federal funding factors. Forgett said the governor’s budget sets a floor for Chapter 70 aid at about $70.75 per pupil (translating to an estimated $156,900 for Triton under current assumptions) and that reimbursement for regional transportation in the governor’s proposal is calculated at 95%, but he warned the transportation reimbursement relies in part on one‑time funds in the governor’s proposal and that the department of education’s “cherry sheet” work may show revenue losses before final allocations.

No formal motions or votes on budget targets occurred at the Feb. 6 meeting. The committee set a follow‑up schedule: a tentative school committee budget vote Feb. 12; budget deliberations Feb. 26; a public hearing March 5; a final vote March 12; and the district communications committee will meet Feb. 27 to review tentative cuts and targets.

The discussion framed the immediate choices for Triton as a mix of budget reductions, town decisions about overrides or other revenue, and longer‑term structural changes; committee leaders emphasized they will return with more specific reduction proposals before final votes.