Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
School board adopts FY26–27 budget amid $2 million shortfall; approves staff bonuses
Summary
The Suffolk City School Board voted to adopt the FY26–27 operating budget despite a roughly $2 million local funding gap, approved a staff bonus plan partly funded by the state, and outlined temporary reductions that would be reversed if city/state funds arrive.
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Suffolk City School Board voted Thursday to adopt its FY26–27 operating budget while outlining plans to cover a roughly $2 million shortfall in local funding and approving a staff‑bonus program funded in part by state aid.
The budget adoption (resolution 25/26‑34) passed on a 5–2 roll call after extended debate about priorities for special education staffing and teacher pay. Vice Chair Howell moved the budget; Board member Fields seconded the motion. The roll call showed votes in favor from Fields, Jenkins, Riddick, Vice Chair Howell and Chair McGee; Board members Dr. Birmingham and Slinglove voted no.
Nut graf: Superintendent John B. Gordon III and CFO Anthony Lebron told the board their best current projection includes a local funding level of about $86.1 million after the city’s action, compared with the board’s earlier request near $95.1 million. To bridge the gap in the adopted budget the administration proposed eliminating long‑term vacant positions, modest cuts to purchased services and trimming travel and training—measures described as temporary and subject to reversal if additional local or state funds arrive.
Lebron said the division’s burn‑rate analysis projects an expected year‑end fund balance after revenues and projected expenditures; he identified two mandated uses of carryforward funds: a local match for staff bonuses and costs tied to a forensic audit. “We are expecting to receive $260,000,000 in revenues for this year,” he said, and outlined the projected carryforward and uses.
On the staff bonus, the board approved resolution 25/26‑35 to pay a divided bonus package the administration had proposed: $1,500 gross for full‑time employees, $750 gross for permanent part‑time and long‑term substitutes, and $250 for priority substitutes. Lebron told the board the state will contribute $1.5 million toward an estimated $3.1 million gross cost, leaving an approximate $1.6 million local share to be covered from the ending fund balance. Payment timing: full‑time and permanent part‑time bonuses are scheduled for July 31; long‑term and priority subs would be paid in October, according to the administration memo.
Board members pushed back on tradeoffs. Several — including Dr. Brittenham and Board member Lundliff — urged protecting positions that serve special education and intensive‑intervention schools. Superintendent Gordon characterized the adopted reductions as “plan B” and said restoring vacancies and key positions would be the board’s first action if the city or the legislature provides additional funding. “This is bad that we have a $2,000,000 shortfall,” Gordon said during the discussion, urging board members to continue advocacy with city council and state representatives.
The board instructed staff to continue pursuing grants and other external revenue sources and to return with budget amendment proposals if local or state funding materializes. The administration also said contracts will be distributed starting May 18, with language allowing adjustment if the final state/local funding changes.
Actions at a glance - Adopt FY26–27 operating budget (resolution 25/26‑34): motion by Vice Chair Howell; second by Board member Fields; tally Yes 5, No 2; outcome: approved. - Approve staff bonus plan (resolution 25/26‑35): motion by Vice Chair Howell; second by Board member Riddick; tally Yes 7, No 0; outcome: approved.
Ending: The board approved the budget and the staff bonus resolution and asked administration to return with amendment options if additional funds become available from the city or the state. The board also urged members to contact city council about restoring requested local funding.

