Swampscott officials present FY26 school budget to select board and finance committee; ask is 4.79%

School leaders presented the school department’s recommended FY26 budget to a joint meeting of the school committee, select board and finance committee on Thursday, asking for a $1.55 million increase — 4.79% over FY25.

Superintendent Pam Angelakis and budget lead Cheryl (presentation name) walked members through a multi‑step process that narrowed initial leadership requests. The first draft from school leadership was an 8.98% increase; that was reduced to 7.52% after internal review and further trimmed to the recommended 4.79% through a mix of revenue moves (revolving funds), program prioritization and one‑time offsets.

Key elements and assumptions in the recommended FY26 budget:

- Compensation and staffing: The district estimated total compensation would rise about 5.7% year‑over‑year, driven by steps/lanes on teacher salary grids, annual steps and non‑collective bargaining employee adjustments. The superintendent said roughly 74% of total compensation is for teachers. - FTEs and program changes: The recommendation adds modest instructional capacity (for example, a 1.0 high‑school math teacher and a fifth‑grade position at the middle school were discussed) while holding the district to a net increase of about 0.2 FTE overall versus FY25. The budget also shifts some costs to revolving funds (athletics, building use, extended day) and assumes capital funding for planned device replacement. - Transportation: The draft eliminates an extra courtesy bus the district had temporarily added for elementary pickup and reverts to providing transportation only for mandated riders. - Special education: The presentation reviewed circuit‑breaker reimbursement and the town’s Special Education Reserve Fund. Assistant Superintendent Martha Raymond said the reserve balance was approximately $471,000, with a statutory cap at 2% of net school spending (about $712,000 for Swampscott). The group discussed the long‑running unpredictability of out‑of‑district tuition and high transport costs for certain placements; staff said regional transportation collaboratives and careful forecasting are part of the mitigation strategy. - Grants and forecasts: The presentation noted a recent notice from DESE cutting the district’s Title I allocation by about $105,000; it also referenced a preliminary governor’s budget that would increase net state aid by roughly $446,000. The Innovative Pathways grant funding for career & technical education was described as likely to continue but at a reduced level in the near term; the budget therefore keeps some pathway costs on grant funding rather than local tax support. - Collective bargaining: The superintendent confirmed the district is in active negotiations with three units (teachers, educational support professionals and tutors). Both sides have committed to weekly talks and a target to reach agreement by May, but leaders cautioned that outcomes remain uncertain and will affect final compensation costs.

Committee members asked detailed questions about MTSS (multi‑tiered systems of support), the decision not to add a full high‑school psychologist this year, options to strengthen prevention‑focused counseling and how incentive and IRA reimbursements from the new elementary school project will be applied. Town and school officials said MSBA and IRA receipts are project‑restricted for the most part, whereas National Grid incentives are treated as miscellaneous town revenue and would flow to the town’s fiscal accounts for appropriation.

Next steps: The school committee planned a public hearing and possible vote on the budget on Feb. 6; the charter requires the final budget to be submitted to the town administrator by Feb. 15. Officials urged members of all three boards and the public to send questions in writing so staff can provide detailed follow‑ups ahead of the Feb. 6 hearing.