West Bridgewater officials present FY26 budget driven by special education and vocational tuition increases

Administrators presented a proposed FY26 operating budget that would raise the district’s operating request by $962,500 from FY25 and ask the town to cover an increased net contribution. Superintendent Mr. Bodwell and district finance staff said major drivers include special‑education placements and related services, and a large uptick in tuition and transportation for regional agricultural schools.

"Special education placements and services are a big part of our budget," the presenter said, explaining that related‑services staffing and out‑of‑district tuition have increased and that the district is responsible for students from age 3 through 22. The presentation noted approximately $2.7 million going to special‑education related services and a substantial increase in transportation costs depending on placement and distance.

Administrators also said the district budgeted an additional $324,000 to cover tuition for up to 10 eighth‑grade applications to regional agricultural/vocational schools (Bristol Aggie and Norfolk), a change they characterized as an unusual spike in applications this year. "We have 10 unique applications that could represent a worst‑case tuition increase," the presenter said, adding that transportation obligations would add further cost if students attend.

The district described a decline in school‑choice revenue as another pressure: last year the budget assumed 250 choice students but actual enrollment was 227, creating a current‑year shortfall. "We budgeted 230 choice students for FY26 as a realistic number," the presenter said, noting the district will accept some siblings in limited cases to avoid losing whole families.

Public commenter Jamie Po asked which COLA percentage the budget assumed for teaching services; district staff said contractual services lines included anticipated raises and that they were using a 2–3% range as a planning assumption. Administrators emphasized that final numbers could change depending on the outcome of ongoing teacher‑union negotiations.

The committee did not vote on the budget at the hearing. After debate about whether to wait for negotiated contract terms, the committee moved to adjourn the budget hearing and scheduled a follow‑up meeting to vote on the budget on March 13. Chair Robin Dragonetti called the roll for the adjournment motion; votes were recorded as Yes by Cara Lardi, David Schmir, Christine Mosi, Carrie Milton and Dragonetti.

Next steps: the district will present a final budget for a vote at the committee’s special meeting on March 13, after which the budget will proceed to the town meeting/capital process as required.