Winchester Public Schools presents FY26 preliminary 'level services' budget, seeks community input ahead of Jan. 30 vote

Winchester School Committee members heard a presentation and public-comment session on the district’s preliminary FY26 level-services budget at a public hearing on Jan. 23, 2025. Superintendent Dr. Hackett and Director of Finance and Operations Andrew Marron said the level-services draft carries current services forward, adds contractual step/column increases and known contract increases, and does not include new positions.

The administration presented a preliminary level-services increase of 5.84% over FY25, using the FY25 town-meeting approved operating base of roughly $66.1 million as the starting point. The largest drivers are personnel-related costs (about $3.5 million in the roll-up) and other expenses (about $287,000). Marron and Dr. Hackett emphasized that personnel accounts make up roughly 80–85% of the district budget and that most near-term budget pressure comes from salary/step/column growth and special-education costs.

Why it matters: the committee must vote a level-services number to send to the town manager prior to Jan. 30; the town finance committee and town manager then work from that number as the municipal budget process proceeds toward a recommended district budget for town meeting. The administration and budget subcommittee said they will use February to gather staff and community input that could change the recommended budget presented in mid-March.

Key details and assumptions included in the hearing: known contracted services were budgeted at the amounts available now — for example, general-education transportation continues to be carried at known levels while food services are run as an enterprise fund and will be reprocured separately. The district is entering negotiations with five bargaining units next week; the level-services draft includes estimates for step and degree column moves and a placeholder for contract increases on the wage base. The presentation also accounted for seven known retirements and budgeted replacements at a district-average M7/Masters Step 7 level; that assumed “breakage” is expected to generate some savings relative to current spend.

Special-education costs and reserves: administrators said a special-education transportation contract increased about 35% after the FY25 budget was approved at town meeting; that rise plus unexpected in-year student needs prompted the administration to recommend the school committee request access to about $365,000 from the town-held Special Education Reserve Fund (balance cited at about $480,000) to cover FY25 unanticipated expenses. Dr. Hackett said accessing the fund requires both a school committee vote and a select-board vote and that the funds would be used for the current fiscal year.

Staff survey and priorities: the administration summarized results from a staff ThoughtExchange survey with 293 participants. Staff-rated priorities that repeatedly surfaced were: staffing and support (general and special education, coverage at the middle school), evidence-based curriculum and vertically aligned programs (literacy and math), professional development (including funds for outside experts and ongoing coaching), technology and security resources, and continuation of special-education services. The administration said it will drill down on staff feedback during building-level conversations and use results to shape a recommended budget in March.

Other operational notes: the presentation showed administrative accounting changes (reclassifying general-education transportation into a transportation cost center to align with DESE reporting), shifts of certain digital-learning staff budgeted at schools they directly serve, and the effect of staff turnover. Marron presented comparative data showing how Winchester’s current per-pupil spending compares with peer districts; presenters noted those comparisons to provide context for what would change if spending levels rose toward peer averages.

Public comments: several parents and residents called for the committee to seek additional funds — through the finance committee, town meeting, or an override if necessary — to fund curriculum change (notably elementary literacy), additional staff, and long-term capacity. Speakers urged the district to pursue state grant opportunities tied to evidence-based literacy programs.

Next steps: the school committee will vote the preliminary level-services budget on Jan. 30 and then continue community engagement in February; the committee’s budget subcommittee chairs said they plan additional subcommittee meetings and outreach to the town finance committee and other stakeholders. The recommended budget that the committee votes for town-meeting consideration is expected in mid-March.