Parents, teachers and social workers urge Cincinnati School Board to spare counselors and social workers amid budget cuts

Dozens of parents, school social workers and teachers told the Cincinnati School Board on May 4 that proposed staff reductions would harm students’ mental‑health supports and attendance gains, while the treasurer and administration said flat revenue and state funding changes leave few painless options.

The hearing of the public, which filled multiple hours of the evening session, centered on proposed reductions the administration flagged in its fiscal 2027 planning. "At a time when child and adolescent social emotional needs are at an all-time high, it would be totally irresponsible to remove the school staff that provides most of the social emotional supports needed for our students," said Dr. Winona Oliver, special education liaison for the Cincinnati Federation of Teachers.

Speakers offered granular targets. Naomi Maderas, identified in her remarks as the lead school social worker, told the board the district is considering "a proposed reduction of 23.5 school social worker FTEEs," and Audrey Ray, a school counselor at Walnut Hills High School, said the plan would cut "17 school counselor positions for next year. That's nearly 30% of our department." Both numbers were raised repeatedly by parents, union officials and staff in the public‑comment period.

Supporters of the positions tied them to everyday student safety and progress. "You would not just be cutting positions. You would be reducing access — access to crisis intervention when a student is suicidal, access to someone who can show up at a home when a student stops coming to school," Naomi Maderas said. Lauren Polling, a school social worker, described home visits and suicide screenings as routine work that kept students in class.

Administration officials said they face structural revenue limits. Treasurer Mike Gustin and budget staff summarized two primary pressures: recent property‑tax appraisal changes and a state funding formula that has left the district on a declining "guarantee" payment path. Jeremy Galahue, who led the budget review presentations, told the board administration had identified roughly $34.1 million in items “not recommended for funding” and still faced a remaining gap of about $19.7 million.

"There is a dollar amount I have to figure out how to get to," Superintendent Murphy said during an exchange with trustees, framing the district’s options as constrained by revenue policy. She and treasurer staff urged trustees to weigh tradeoffs rather than assume all services can be preserved without additional local revenue.

Speakers urged other strategies: targeted contracting changes, partnerships with the city and nonprofit organizations, and a coordinated campaign to place a new‑money levy on the ballot. CFT representatives and parents said a levy was essential to restore services lost after several years of cuts; union members also advised the board to exhaust contract and contractor reductions before eliminating staff.

Board members pressed administration for more data and alternatives. Several trustees stressed they would like side‑by‑side options showing different combinations of cuts and their projected impacts so the board could compare tradeoffs and justify any final votes to the public.

The district will return with additional detail in subsequent board meetings: administration asked trustees for guidance on the remaining $19.7 million to close the FY27 gap while preserving core student‑facing services.

Ending: The board did not take final votes on budget items at the May 4 meeting; trustees asked for more modeling and data ahead of decisions required to adopt a balanced FY27 budget.