Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Woburn schools present FY26 draft budget: district proposes $98.16 million, a projected 8.6% increase
Summary
The administration presented a draft FY26 operating budget of $98,163,597, an 8.63% increase over FY25 driven primarily by salary step/longevity, special-education transportation and out-of-district tuition; administrators outlined major cost drivers and next steps in the city budget process.
Woburn school administrators presented a draft fiscal year 2026 operating budget on Feb. 26 that proposes $98,163,597 in spending — an increase of 8.63% from FY25.
Director of Finance and Operations Alex Dizzio summarized drivers behind the rise: about 60% of the year‑over‑year increase (roughly $4.7 million) is salary-driven, including step and longevity increases and a projected 3% cost-of-living adjustment. Special-education transportation increases (notably for contracted vans) and out-of-district tuitions were the next-largest drivers; Dizzio said special-education transportation is expected to rise by about $900,000 and out-of-district tuition by about $406,000 due to contractual tuition increases.
Dizzio reported specific FY26 draft figures and highlights: - Proposed FY26 operating budget: $98,163,597 (up 8.63%). - Roll-forward salaries and core obligations (salaries, out-of-district tuitions, special-education transportation and utilities) increase by approximately 7.6%. - Drivers included salary COLA (2.5% at start of year plus 0.5% midyear), enrollment-driven hires (science and math teachers), and restoration of positions previously grant-funded (data manager). - Technology licensing changes and PowerSchool-related software costs sum to roughly $100,000; Microsoft subscription changes also increase recurring technology costs.
Dizzio and Assistant Superintendent Maureen Ryan said the district and city will continue to review potential offsets and refinements. The administration noted some one-time offsets used in FY25 will not be available in FY26 and that the draft budget still requires review with city finance leadership and the city council. Committee members pressed for a spreadsheet version of the document and for continued attention to in‑building substitute coverage, a recurring concern raised by principals.
Why it matters: The FY26 operating budget sets the spending baseline the committee will seek the mayor and city council to fund. Key uncertainties — contractual transportation increases, out-of-district tuition growth and the availability of grant offsets — will affect the final ask.
Next steps: The administration will provide a spreadsheet of line items to committee members and continue discussions with the mayor’s office and the finance subcommittee, including requests to target some additions (in‑building subs, interventionists) that principals identified as priorities.
