Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the School Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Groton-Dunstable superintendent previews preliminary FY26 budget, warns of roughly $2 million gap

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Groton-Dunstable Regional School District Superintendent Dr. Jeff Bruno presented a preliminary FY26 budget and two scenarios to the school committee on Jan. 8, 2025, saying the district faces at least a roughly $2 million shortfall that will require further discussion with the towns of Groton and Dunstable.

Groton-Dunstable Regional School District Superintendent Dr. Jeff Bruno presented a preliminary FY26 budget and two spending scenarios to the school committee on Jan. 8, 2025, saying the district faces at least a roughly $2 million shortfall that will require further discussion with the towns of Groton and Dunstable.

Bruno said the superintendent’s proposed “level services” budget would be $51,485,770 — a 7.84% increase over the prior year — and would reinstate two positions (a school counselor and a school nurse) while reducing one central-office administrative assistant position. "What I'm presenting this evening is going to be a look at a very preliminary proposed budget, as well as two scenarios based on kind of where we are fiscally," Bruno said.

The nut graf: the proposed budget aims to preserve core services and to restore two student-support roles, but under current revenue projections it would increase the assessment to each town by roughly 10% (Groton about 10.2%, Dunstable about 10.6%). Committee members focused on the likely effects of another round of cuts if additional revenue is not secured, and on how the district should communicate options and consequences to residents.

Bruno and the district finance staff walked the committee through enrollment trends (relatively flat districtwide with some shifts among schools), prior cuts that have already increased class sizes, and the district’s revenue assumptions. The superintendent noted the proposal does not restore the staff cuts taken in FY24–FY25 and therefore still "falls short from what can best support the educational needs of all of our kids." He provided two scenarios: the superintendent’s proposed operating budget (the higher “ceiling”) and a smaller balanced budget option (the lower “floor”) that would result in much smaller assessment increases.

Sherry (school finance/administrative staff) described the procurement steps on a separate facilities-related item: the district ran a qualifications-based solicitation for the building-envelope scope, received five proposals and would like to enter contract negotiations with GRLA. Sherry asked the committee to raise any objections to releasing a letter of intent to GRLA; no committee member objected. "I would just ask that you, the school committee agrees that I can release this letter of intent to GRLA," she said.

On assessments and town contributions, Bruno and staff explained how state Chapter 70 aid, the district’s excess & deficiency (E&D) balance, and the regional agreement’s rolling-average split (approximately 77% Groton / 23% Dunstable) together determine each town’s final assessment. Using current assumptions the superintendent’s proposed budget would raise Groton’s assessment by about $2,692,398 (10.2%) and Dunstable’s by about $847,000 (10.6%). Under the smaller, balanced option the assessment increases would be roughly 1.4% for Groton and 1.9% for Dunstable.

Committee members repeatedly emphasized the real-world effects of prior cuts: Faye warned that another $2 million reduction could mean roughly 27 fewer full-time-equivalent positions and widespread program reductions. Several members urged clear, centralized communication with residents: the committee and administration agreed to host a budget information forum on Jan. 22, to maintain a centralized FY26 budget page and rolling FAQ on the district website, and to gather community impacts and questions for public distribution.

Other operational and planning notes from the presentation: - The district proposes reinstating two positions: one school counselor and one school nurse; in addition, the plan reduces one administrative assistant position in central office. - The proposed FY26 operating budget total: $51,485,770 (7.84% increase year-over-year). - The district expects to use $400,000 of E&D for FY26 budgeting (down $100,000 from FY25), and emphasized by-law limits that E&D cannot exceed 5% by law. - Timeline: the district will publish the full budget book by Feb. 12, hold a public hearing on Feb. 26, and must certify the FY26 budget by March 12. The district plans a community open house for the new Florence Roche building tentatively on Saturday, March 1, followed by a budget forum.

Committee members discussed outreach strategies (in-person forums, FAQs, translated materials, posts to a centralized budget landing page, and soliciting anonymous community statements about impact) and possible long-term strategies (an operational audit, tapping MSBA and other grant opportunities for capital/energy projects, and exploring shared services where feasible). Dr. Bruno and staff noted that some capital needs could be addressed through grant programs tied to an energy manager and MSBA processes, but those opportunities likely will not affect FY26.

Votes at a glance: - Meeting minutes (Dec. 18, 2024): motion to approve; motion moved and seconded; roll-call recorded as unanimous (see actions array for member-level votes). - Warrants: motion to approve payroll warrant of $1,151,686.63 and two AP vendor warrants (AP total $1,358,962.60) for a grand total of $2,510,649.23; motion moved and seconded; roll-call recorded as unanimous (see actions array for member-level votes).

Ending: The committee agreed to continue budget deliberations at upcoming meetings, begin the public outreach planned for Jan. 22, and to return a more detailed proposal once town revenue guidance and any responses from Groton and Dunstable officials are available.