AACPS superintendent recommends $1.8 billion FY2026 operating budget; asks county for $94.3 million

The superintendent of Anne Arundel County Public Schools on Jan. 21 presented a recommended $1.8 billion operating budget for fiscal 2026 and asked the county for $94.3 million in additional local funding.

“we are requesting $1,800,000,000 in total operating funds,” Matt Stanski, chief financial officer, told the board during a public workshop led by Board President Robert Silkworth and Superintendent Mark Bedell. Stanski and AACPS staff walked board members through revenue assumptions, enrollment shifts and spending priorities that shaped the recommendation.

The recommendation breaks down as roughly 56.3 percent county funding, 32.5 percent state funding, about 5 percent from local fund balance and roughly 3.1 percent each from food service and federal sources. Stanski told the board the district’s September 30 enrollment count is 85,034 students and that demographic shifts are driving changes in formula revenue: compensatory education rose 2.4 percent, multilingual learners grew 6.8 percent and special education rose 2.7 percent year over year.

Why it matters: the district faces growing student need and a state funding formula tied to local wealth per pupil, which places more of the funding burden on wealthier counties. Board members repeatedly pressed for clarity on how the district will sustain expanded services while handling proposed reductions in some state Blueprint line items.

Stanski said the recommended operating budget includes $56.9 million for compensation increases (including a 3 percent cost-of-living placeholder and step increases), $23.8 million for Blueprint-mandated items, $42.5 million for student achievement enhancements, and specific investments in special education, multilingual learner supports and early literacy. The proposal includes $8 million to bolster the district health care fund and range-specific salary and career-ladder funding for bargaining units.

Board members raised questions about class sizes, staffing equity across schools and supports for student mental health. Several board members told staff they want to prioritize funding for core programs before adding new initiatives. “Having class sizes north of 30 for elementary schools is not okay,” said Miss Shaba during the discussion, pressing staff to guard against unintended consequences created by the Blueprint funding formula and compliance requirements.

The superintendent and CFO said the district will watch several state proposals closely. Under the governor’s proposed state budget, Stanski said a handful of Blueprint formula amounts would be reduced or delayed: the collaborative planning time requirement appears delayed by four years, and targeted student index and direct per-pupil amounts for some categories are adjusted. Stanski specifically flagged a $2 million projected reduction to the Transitional Supplemental Instruction (TSI) tutoring line and a proposed $90 million statewide reduction for nonprofit consortium grants that provide community mental-health supports. The administration signaled it may seek local backfill for high-priority programs if state funding is cut.

Board process and next steps: the board is scheduled to vote on a budget on Feb. 19 (continuation Feb. 20 if needed), and staff will submit the board’s request to the county executive by March 1. The county council is required by the county charter to strike a budget by June 15; the board will confirm on June 18 with an implementation date of July 1.

The workshop included questions about a number of line items: a proposed $6.1 million laptop program to provide Windows laptops for grades 9–12 (with Chromebooks redeployed to lower grades), a $1.1 million request to implement a new learning management system, $12.6 million proposed to backfill certain school support positions if TSI funding is cut, and targeted increases for special education (about $14.3 million total) and multilingual learner staffing (roughly $2.8 million for pay and positions).

The administration emphasized personnel is the dominant cost: about 80 percent of unrestricted dollars go to salaries, wages and benefits, and nearly 90 percent of personnel costs are “in front of students every day.” Stanski told the board the district has no current social worker vacancies and that pay scales for pupil personnel are broadly comparable with neighboring jurisdictions, but board members said they want clearer line-item detail and comparative pay data.

Ending: board members and administration agreed to continue detailed budget work in coming weeks and to provide additional clarifying information — including staffing allocation dates (initial staffing allocations are scheduled for Feb. 10) and line-item responses to follow-up questions — before the Feb. 19 vote.