Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Students, teachers and parents urge board to spare music and special‑education positions as budget plan moves forward
Summary
During a long public‑comment period, students, teachers and parents implored the board to preserve the percussion EdTech and related‑arts roles and raised concerns about rapid timelines, equity implications of closing Kaler and the human impact of staff reductions.
A broad cross‑section of South Portland students, educators and parents used the board's public‑comment period on March 23 to press officials to protect arts and special‑education staff amid the FY27 budget cuts.
Eighth‑grade students spoke first. "Our percussion EdTech adds so much to our band community," an eighth‑grader, Lucy, said, asking the board not to eliminate the position that supports percussion sectionals and helps make music programs accessible.
Teachers and parents echoed that plea. Multiple staff members described the percussion instructor as a certified special‑education educator whose presence enables band participation for students with IEPs. "Percussion is the foundation of a band," a parent said; several speakers warned that cutting those roles would reduce access to music instruction across grades 5–12.
Staff also described the human toll of recent reductions: multiple speakers reported receiving layoff notices the previous week and said communication with staff could have been clearer. A Dyer staff member and other teachers stressed that several specialized positions (behavioral strategists, occupational-therapy supports and career-and-technical roles) contribute to safety, curriculum continuity and access.
Equity and process concerns: parents and community advocates raised concerns that closing Kaler — a school several speakers described as having a high share of multilingual learners and students of color — could deepen disparities and asked whether the district had undertaken a legally sufficient Title VI review. The administration said legal questions would require additional review and that formal votes would be held in future public sessions.
What happened next: the board recorded many public comments and asked administration to follow up on unanswered questions (grant inventories, redistricting modeling, and Title VI/legal review). No binding commitments to reverse specific staff reductions were made at the workshop.
