Howard County board adopts ‘Scenario 7’ budget to close FY26 gap; debate centers on one-time funds and program restructures

The Howard County Board of Education voted 6–1 on June 4 to approve “Scenario 7,” a staff-crafted plan to balance the fiscal 2026 operating budget while preserving several student-facing positions and restructuring others.

Board chair Mosley opened the work session with the budget presentation from Superintendent Barnes, who told the board that balancing the FY26 operating budget remained the principal challenge despite what he described as “approximately $70 million of new revenue” for FY26 and investments for staff compensation, special education and other priorities. “To balance this budget, difficult decisions will have to be made,” Barnes said, adding that staff had prepared multiple scenarios and would answer questions as the board deliberated.

Scenario 7, presented by staff, is a balanced plan that relies on one‑time reserves at levels comparable to scenarios the board previously considered and preserves math and reading coaches, two grant-funded social workers, five middle-school paraeducators (kept systemwide in this scenario), athletic trainers and other student-facing positions. The scenario also would: (1) restructure the elementary gifted-and-talented (GT) program; (2) eliminate third-grade strings; (3) convert some non-school-based positions; and (4) change the staffing model for school nurses and health assistants (adding two float nurses and reducing some full/half-time health assistant allocations).

Why it matters

Board members debated whether to rely more heavily on one-time fund balance or to accept deeper program reductions now to avoid larger cuts in FY27. Superintendent Barnes and budget staff warned that using one-time funds to pay recurring costs compounds a structural deficit and can force steeper cuts the next year; Darren Conforti, the district’s executive director of budget, reviewed the system’s prior health-fund deficit and said the health fund had been stabilized, with a fund balance of about $17.9 million as of June 30, 2024 and incurred-but-not-reported claims near $9 million. “Jeopardizing that stability by overutilizing that health fund balance … does bring risk,” Conforti said.

Key board questions and staff responses

- Math and reading coaches: Board members asked whether the district’s instructional coaches are effective and whether teachers value them. Ebony Langford Brown, executive director for curriculum, instruction and assessment, said the coaches provide job‑embedded professional learning, work with students as appropriate, and are a “valued asset” in supporting implementation of revised mathematics and reading curricula. She said the district tracks both student outcomes and “adult implementation outcomes” (teacher practice) to measure impact.

- Elementary GT restructure: Langford Brown outlined the proposed restructure, which would keep core elements—primary talent development (K–2), instructional seminars (grades 2–5), curriculum extension units (CEUs, grades 3–5) and GT mathematics (grades 4–5)—but shift some instruction to classroom teachers where scheduling or staffing requires it. She said there are currently about 84 GT resource teachers and Scenario 7 would reduce that staff by roughly half to about 44 GT resource teachers while preserving CEUs where GT teachers’ schedules permit. Staff emphasized additional professional development would be required to support classroom teachers taking on some GT responsibilities.

- Middle-school paraeducators and student engagement liaisons: Several board members pressed to convert some paraeducator funding into student engagement liaison (formerly called security assistant) roles in high-need middle schools. A motion to reassign funding for five middle-school paraeducators so it would instead support three student engagement liaisons (motion by Ms. McCoy, second Ms. Ricks) was put to a roll call and failed (Yes: Mallow, Ricks, Watts; No: Chamblee, Mosley; Abstain: Dr. Chen; Yes count reported as 3; No 3; Abstain 1). A later amendment to remove the five paraeducators (moved by Ms. Malo and seconded by Ms. Watts) also failed on a 1–6 vote.

Votes at a glance

- Motion to adopt Scenario 7 as presented (moved by Ms. Watts; second by Ms. Mosley): Passed, 6–1 (Yes: Mallow, Ricks, Watts, McCoy, Chamblee, Mosley; No: Dr. Chen). Staff confirmed Scenario 7, as drafted, would balance the FY26 operating budget and allow the board to proceed to a final budget approval on June 12.

- Motion to reassign funding for five middle-school paraeducators to fund three student engagement liaisons (moved by Ms. McCoy; second Ms. Ricks): Failed, tie with one abstention (Yes: Mallow, Ricks, Watts; No: Chamblee, Mosley; Abstain: Dr. Chen). Clerk recorded outcome: “Motion fails 3 3 1.”

- Motion to remove a non-school-based photographer position from the budget (moved by Ms. McCoy): The motion received no second and was not advanced to a vote.

What staff said about specific budget items

- Fund balance and one-time funds: Staff reviewed multiple scenarios that use one‑time reserves at different levels. Scenario 7 uses $8.5 million in one‑time reserves, a level staff recommended as prudent compared with scenarios that proposed up to $11.9 million in one‑time reserves. Barnes cautioned the board that relying too much on one‑time funds for recurring costs would worsen the structural deficit and likely require larger cuts in FY27.

- Health services model: Laurel Porter, executive director for student well‑being, said the Scenario 7 health model would reduce some health assistant allocations by 0.5 FTE and add two float nurses to help cover absences. Staff noted that changes raise coverage concerns when nurses are out, which the float nurses would mitigate.

- Innovative pathways: The board adopted a restructure that shifts what had been virtual-school staffing toward evening and summer offerings; virtual-school positions proposed earlier were removed and replaced with evening/summer programming in Scenario 7.

Board reaction and next steps

Board members expressed differing tolerance for using one‑time reserves. Some argued the district should maximize available fund balance this year to preserve student services; others warned that drawing down reserves risks sharp program reductions next year and could jeopardize the health fund’s stability. Several members asked staff to provide more detailed school-by-school staffing impacts and clearer public documentation of the scenario; staff committed to posting the scenario document to the board’s public portal.

The board will reconvene for final budget action on June 12, using Scenario 7 as the starting point unless members amend it further before that date. Staff said they will provide additional detail on school assignments for positions retained in Scenario 7 and the potential staffing and scheduling implications of the GT restructure.

Ending

With Scenario 7 approved, the board moved forward with a balanced FY26 plan that preserves a number of student-facing roles while accepting program restructures and reductions in other areas. The debate highlighted continuing tensions between short‑term mitigation using one‑time funds and the need to maintain multiyear fiscal sustainability.