Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Fte topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves 2026–27 FTE request after rejecting amendment to cut several positions
Summary
After hours of debate over grant coverage and legal obligations for special-education staffing, the DeKalb CUSD 428 Board approved the district’s 2026–27 full-time-equivalent staffing request; a motion to remove several positions — including a Mitchell restorative-dean role — failed on roll call.
The DeKalb CUSD 428 Board on Monday approved a district request for additional full-time-equivalent positions for the 2026–27 school year after rejecting an amendment to strip several roles from the proposal.
Board discussion centered on which positions could or should be covered by grant funding and which were legally necessary under federal special-education law. A board member moved to remove multiple roles from the request — including a district assistant athletic director, several special-education sole positions, a home-school liaison at Huntley Middle School and a dean of restorative behavior assigned to Mitchell Elementary — saying some were only partially covered by grants and therefore would increase local costs.
Administration responded that some positions are required to comply with IDEA and that other roles were included because of projected student needs. Emma, the district’s grant manager, explained that federal grants such as Title I and 1003A include restrictions on personnel funding and that some positions can only be partially paid from those sources. The board also heard that the district projects growth in students who will require specialized services and that hiring earlier improves recruitment outcomes.
The amendment to remove the listed positions failed on roll call (recorded in the transcript as 1 yes, 6 no). The original FTE proposal then advanced and passed by roll call. Board members pressed administration for clarity about which positions were grant-funded, which were required by law, and how retiree savings and “organic growth” in the budget would offset the local cost of new hires. The district said retirees’ savings (about $600,000) plus typical organic growth (about $500,000) would cover much of the local share of the added salaries.
The board also discussed a custodial floater position whose listed annual cost (approximately $115,000) was presented as producing roughly $13,300 in overtime savings; administrators clarified the district currently spends roughly $125,000 on custodial overtime, so the new position could reduce net costs. Members asked that future materials make such calculations and legal requirements clearer before votes.
The motion carries forward the staffing additions as presented; administration was directed to provide clear budget-line and grant-coverage details and to return with any required follow-ups.
