Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lowell School Committee approves one‑year extensions and 3% raises for three assistant superintendents after heated public comment
Summary
The Lowell School Committee voted 5–1 (one absent) on March 18 to extend three assistant superintendents’ contracts for one year with a 3% pay increase, drawing extended public comment from teachers and residents who said cuts to frontline staff should take priority over central‑office raises.
The Lowell School Committee on March 18 approved a one‑year extension with a 3% salary increase for three assistant superintendents, passing an amended motion 5–1 with one member absent after more than an hour of public comment criticizing the timing amid possible classroom cuts.
Teachers, paraprofessionals and community members used the public comment period to urge the committee to prioritize classroom staffing. Diane McClain, a Lowell teacher for 31 years, told the committee the timing was “more than unfair. It’s appalling,” and said cuts to paraprofessionals, tutors and social workers would hollow out classrooms and harm students. Anna Amlashe, an art teacher at Pawtucketville, said her school is losing three paras and a social worker and asked the committee to “staff the classrooms first.”
The superintendent and supporters defended the leadership team and the proposed one‑year renewal. A UMass Lowell associate dean and district partner, Stacy Sashell, urged the committee not to risk losing central‑office capacity, saying the administration’s work supports districtwide improvement and that a short, standard raise can be justified for key administrators.
Why it matters: The vote comes as the district confronts projected budget pressures and a reported staffing imbalance since federal COVID-era ESSER funding ended. Speakers argued the city’s budget choices and the timing of contract approvals send a message about priorities; supporters countered that the central office has helped raise graduation and attendance metrics and that some increases are needed to retain leadership.
What the committee voted on: The motion approved a one‑year extension for three assistant superintendents from July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027, with a 3% pay increase and no changes to contract language. The amended motion was moved and seconded on the floor and passed by roll call, tallying five ayes, one nay and one absence.
What supporters and critics said: Critics repeatedly urged the committee to seek more information about a reported $9 million shortfall before approving raises, to negotiate with city leadership for restored school funding, and to prioritize direct student supports. Supporters and the superintendent said that, notwithstanding difficult choices, the district has made gains in graduation rates and attendance and that central office reductions in past years shifted resources to schools.
What happens next: Committee members and staff said they would provide additional contract and budget details at upcoming budget hearings scheduled for April. The decision does not itself eliminate or restore school positions; future budget actions will determine any staffing reductions or restorations.
Ending: The committee moved from the contract vote to the superintendent’s strategic updates and a broader FY27 budget presentation, and it scheduled public budget hearings in April to continue community review.
