RSU 52 board reduces budget lines by $95,815, puts high‑school teacher request and AI pilot on revisit list

The RSU 52/MSAD 52 school board on Thursday approved targeted cuts totaling $95,815 that administration says trim over‑budgeted line items without eliminating programs or laying off staff, while directing administrators to return next week with more detail on additional possible reductions.

“As a result of reexamining a number of lines we were able to reduce overall expenses by $95,815,” the superintendent said, describing adjustments that include lower insurance guidance, recalculated shipping charges and scaled‑back K–2 technology hardware. The superintendent emphasized that the reductions are intended to “right‑size” budget lines based on recent spending rather than remove services.

The board also heard a staffing appeal from the high school. Evan, the high‑school presenter, told the board course‑registration projections show a shortfall in available teaching periods and that more than 140 students requested video‑production courses next year. He said the high school currently lacks sufficient study‑hall coverage and that adding a social‑studies teacher would relieve pressure across the schedule and preserve elective access.

“We have requests for 50 teaching periods, which is a discrepancy that is unusual,” Evan said. He and administration estimated a new social‑studies position would likely cost in the mid‑$60,000s; board members asked for a precise figure to carry forward. The board moved, seconded and voted to place the high‑school social‑studies teacher request on the revisit list so the matter can be finalized at the next meeting.

Board members also debated whether certain positions—most notably open educational‑technology (EdTech) posts—could be reduced to reach a modeled 1% budget cut (about $374,000 before accounting for the $95,815 already identified). Administration warned that most savings of that size require eliminating funded positions or drawing on reserve funds.

A separate vote placed a $6,200 request for a school‑configured AI pilot (described in meeting materials as a privacy‑protected, school‑focused product) on the revisit list. The item drew a sharp exchange: one board member said there is insufficient evidence that classroom AI improves learning and asked for outcome data; other members said cautious exposure and data‑privacy protections argue for piloting and educating students about the technology. The motion to add the AI pilot to the revisit list passed during the meeting.

The board also approved a motion directing administration to take a deeper look at the district’s technology hardware and software lines before the final budget vote, reflecting concern that some hardware spending could be reduced or reprioritized.

The superintendent reminded members that the district’s final budget meeting is scheduled for April 9, the district budget presentation is May 7 at 6 p.m., and the town referendum is May 21.

What’s next: administration will return to the board with refined cost figures (including a firm salary estimate for the high‑school position), additional detail from the technology review, and updated insurance guidance before the board’s final budget vote.