Newport News Public Schools unveils $429 million FY2027 proposal, seeks $8.2 million from city
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
SubscribeSummary
Newport News Public Schools presented a proposed $429 million FY2027 operating budget that includes a proposed 3% general salary increase, $9.6 million in estimated new state revenue (worst‑case), and a request for $8.2 million from the city; the board will hold a public hearing next week and vote March 17.
Newport News Public Schools on Tuesday presented a proposed $429 million operating budget for fiscal 2027 that the district says is aligned to its five strategic goals and would ask the city for $8.2 million, a roughly 6.5% increase in local support.
"At this point, we're expecting about $9,600,000 in new revenue from the state," said Mr. Fairheart, who delivered the FY2027 operating budget presentation. He described that figure as a conservative starting point and said House and Senate proposals could provide more education funding.
The proposed budget documents a roughly 4.3% overall increase — about $17.8 million — driven largely by personnel costs. The presentation includes a district proposal for a 3% general salary increase for employees, additional increases to starting teacher and associate teacher pay, and sign‑on bonuses for high‑need positions. "Employee compensation remains a top priority," Mr. Fairheart said.
The packet presented to the board lists $429,000,000 as the total operating budget and identifies three major revenue components as of the presentation: approximately 67.6% from the Commonwealth of Virginia, about 31% from the city (the district is requesting an $8.2 million increase), and less than 1% from federal and other sources.
Mr. Fairheart outlined several line‑item and program highlights: a projected $1.1 million savings from a reduced VRS employer rate (the presenter cited a drop in the teacher rate from 14.21% to about 12.2% as used in district modeling), a $23.5 million placeholder in one chamber’s school construction proposal, and an anticipated $9.6 million in additional state funding in the presentation’s worst‑case scenario. He said the division expects to see changes after the General Assembly completes its work.
Staffing adjustments and program funding were part of the budget discussion. The district plans to repurpose some vacant or underutilized FTEs so the proposed staffing changes do not increase total FTEs, and it asked to transition about 12.4 FTEs from grant funding into the operating budget to preserve continuity of services. For the new Huntington Middle School, the proposal includes adding two security officers (bringing middle‑school staffing closer to typical high‑school security levels), reinstating five custodians removed during a prior closure, and restoring a media specialist position.
The presentation also highlighted compensation gains for certain employee groups: bus driver pay has increased about 33% since FY2021 (the presenter said a change from roughly $15.04 to $22.76), and the budget proposes a general health‑insurance cost share in which the division would absorb about $1.5 million of cost increases and ask employees to share approximately $200,000. Fairheart said the proposed employee premium increases would range from about $1.50 to $18.45 per month depending on plan type.
Board members pressed staff for clarifications. One asked why instructional services were shown as about 68.8% of the operating budget; Mr. Fairheart said some instructional initiatives (notably a city cash capital contribution for a 1:1 device program) sit outside the operating budget and therefore do not appear in that percentage. Another board member asked what enrollment and operational assumptions underlie staffing for Huntington Middle School; Mr. Fairheart said planners are targeting roughly 550–560 students for initial budgeting but noted some currently zoned students attend alternative programs and that boundary tweaks could change uptake.
Board members also asked about the origin of the VRS rate change; Mr. Fairheart said the General Assembly sets the employer rate based on the retirement fund’s performance. On questioned differences across state budget proposals, he said the district modeled both the House and Senate proposals and used a conservative starting point for its city request so adjustments could follow when final state numbers are known. He added that of the $8.2 million city request, roughly $6 million is driven by compensation; removing compensation from the request would lower the city ask to about $2.2 million.
The presenter flagged several state reallocations that will affect the division: an increase in some special‑education formulas while regional special‑education tuition and English‑learner funding would be reduced in some proposals, and a $600,000 reduction to remedial summer‑school funding under one of the state plans that the district would need to absorb locally.
Superintendent Dr. Mitchell thanked the budget and finance team for work during a leadership transition and framed the proposed budget as intended to sustain academic programs while managing rising health‑care and maintenance costs.
The district will hold a public hearing on the FY2027 budget next Tuesday; the board is scheduled to consider approval on March 17.
Votes at a glance
On a separate procedural item early in the meeting, the board approved the appointment of agents and deputy agents. A board member (speaker 4) moved to "approve the recommendation for appointment of agents" and the motion was seconded by the Chair; the Clerk recorded the roll call and the motion passed 7–0 (members recorded in roll call: "Sorrell's Law," "Harris," "Alger," "Eamon," "Brown," "Hunter," "Best").
What’s next
The board will accept public comment at a hearing next Tuesday and is scheduled to vote on the FY2027 operating budget at its March 17 meeting.
