Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Orange Elementary School Committee hears revised budget proposal calling for 4% increase
Summary
At its Feb. 10 meeting the Orange Elementary School Committee was presented with a proposed FY26 budget revised to a 4% increase (down from an initial 10% request); the proposal preserves current staff levels but exceeds the Town's 2% guideline and will be refined with town officials.
The Orange Elementary School Committee on Feb. 10 heard a proposed FY26 budget from Dr. Liz (last name not specified in the minutes) calling for a 4 percent increase in district spending, down from an initial 10 percent request.
The revised proposal, Dr. Liz said, preserves current staffing levels and is intended as a starting point for negotiations with the Town; it remains above the Town's recommended 2 percent guideline. The committee was told the final budget number will be determined through coordination with Town officials and the Finance Committee.
Dr. Lewis (last name not specified in the minutes) described district programs and recognitions, including OES Pride, new hires, the Otterrific award, student of the month, and the 21st Century afterschool program. Marie Cole reviewed recent MCAS results, reporting that performance has ranged roughly from the 7th to the 24th percentile over the last three years; the minutes do not provide a grade‑level breakdown. Michele Tontodonato summarized enrollment trends, revenue estimates, net school spending and a preliminary cherry sheet. Phil Saisa reviewed special education enrollment trends; specific student counts were not provided in the minutes.
Committee Chair Mallory Ellis noted next procedural steps: the budget will be presented to the Finance Committee and Selectboard on Feb. 24, and the School Committee will hold a public hearing on the budget at its March 10 meeting, which is also scheduled to include a School Choice hearing.
The presentation provided the committee with data on academic performance, staffing implications and revenue estimates but did not include finalized line‑by‑line figures; committee members did not take a final vote on the budget at this meeting.
