RSU 14 voters approve $79.99 million budget, including first local payment for new middle school

RSU 14 voters at the district’s annual public budget meeting on May 13 approved the school board’s recommended FY2026–27 spending plan, including the written‑ballot Article 14 authorizing $19,699,326.22 in additional local funds. Election clerks reported a written‑ballot tally of 73 yes and 14 no on Article 14; most other articles were carried by voice or show‑of‑hands during the meeting.

Superintendent Chris Howell, who opened the meeting, told attendees the proposed FY2026–27 budget is driven primarily by two large and unavoidable costs: a steep increase in health‑insurance premiums and the first local debt payment for a new middle school currently under construction. "This year it's a little over $10.4 million of state money that's coming in, which is then being paid directly to the bond banks or the bond holders," Howell said, describing how state construction subsidy flows to debt service. He added the state subsidy pays roughly 84% of the middle‑school project while local taxpayers will cover about 16% and the coming budget will show the first local payment for that debt.

Howell said regular operating costs alone rose about 4.36% year‑over‑year after reductions; the district removed more than $1.2 million through cuts and is proposing a net reduction of a little over 11 positions overall. He told the room that negotiated salaries represent a large portion of the local operating increase and that the health‑insurance increase accounts for about $1.1 million of the change. Enrollment in the district is roughly 3,100 students and is projected to be stable for next year, he said.

Residents asked for clarifications during the floor debate. Andrea Moore of Windham asked what is included in Article 4, "other instruction." Superintendent Howell explained that line covers co‑curricular activities, athletics, summer school and post‑secondary enrollment costs. A different resident asked about Article 5’s $6.27 million for student and staff support; Howell said that line covers guidance counselors, social workers, nurses and district technology (staff and student devices) and that those costs are part of the overall operating budget.

Several attendees pressed on reserve and capital spending. A resident identified in the transcript as Ryan (and once as Brian) Walker of Raymond questioned a proposed transfer of up to $2.66 million into the school capital reserve fund, asking whether the listed items were "necessities or nice to haves." Walker suggested the latter and used an analogy, saying if you have extra money you might "go get an ice cream cone." Superintendent Howell responded with an item‑by‑item justification: required LED lighting conversions as fluorescent fixtures are phased out under state law, pavement and site work, wireless access‑point replacements (a portion of which is eligible for reimbursement), playground replacements for aging equipment, and storage and site upgrades to protect district equipment. Howell noted the capital reserve draws on existing fund balance and can reduce the need to ask taxpayers to fund one‑time capital items.

Moderator Blake McCartney led the meeting through the articles and explained procedure: routine articles were read, a motion and second were requested, floor discussion allowed, and votes were taken by raising color‑coded cards; Article 14 was handled by written ballot as required. For the final summary article (Article 15) the board recommended a total appropriation of $79,997,734 for FY2026–27.

Votes at a glance: the meeting carried Articles 1–13, 15–19 by voice or show of hands (no individual tallies were provided in the transcript). Article 14 (additional local funds, written ballot) carried by written ballot, 73 yes, 14 no. The moderator announced the meeting adjourned after Article 19 and reminded voters that the June 9 election will determine final approval.

What happens next: the board and administrators said they are available to answer questions in the weeks before the June 9 vote and that the ballot on June 9 will determine whether the proposed operating budget and local spending carry into the coming fiscal year.