Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bristol board forwards superintendent's proposed budget amid $3.4M special‑ed shortfall; approves calendar change
Summary
After a detailed budget review and debate over staffing and special‑education costs, the board voted to forward the superintendent's proposed 2027 budget to the city board of finance (one commissioner opposed) and unanimously approved reducing the 2025–26 school year from 181 to 180 days to ease summer scheduling.
The Bristol Board of Education voted to forward Superintendent White's proposed 2027 budget to the city board of finance after a multi‑hour review of current deficits, staffing requests and potential revenue options tied to expanded in‑district special‑education programs.
Jody Bond, who presented budget worksheets shared with board members on March 4, told the board the district currently anticipates a special‑education shortfall of approximately $3.4 million for the year and that the revised total budget shown in materials is about $140.46 million once requested supplemental appropriations are included. "We anticipate approximately 3.4 million," Bond said during the presentation.
Board members pressed staff on fixed cost drivers: an $8.37 million increase in salaries (a contractual, fixed cost), rising benefits, an increase in student transportation costs and $1.64 million in outplacement tuition. Bond and the superintendent explained that some new positions (53 in the superintendent's ask) are included in the request; several classroom and specialist roles were discussed in detail.
A commissioner questioned a single occupational therapist line listed at $110,000 for salary and benefits; staff said they would follow up on comparables and noted that some services are presently contracted at higher per‑hour costs. Michelle Ovasser, principal at West Bristol School, described the classroom realities that underlie calls for additional kindergarten teaching assistants and math instructional support teachers, saying those employees provide critical tier‑2 interventions and behavioral support that otherwise push students toward higher‑cost special‑education placements.
The board also discussed repurposing positions following planned redistricting and attrition to create math IST positions without increasing the net headcount; staff estimated attrition savings equivalent to about eight teachers that could be redirected. Several board members and staff outlined a longer‑term strategy to expand in‑district special‑education programs to bring tuitioned students back from costly out‑of‑district placements and cited prior program revenues as part of the financial case for investment.
When members moved to approve the superintendent's budget as presented for referral to the board of finance, the motion passed with one recorded opposition: Commissioner Van Ger voted no.
On a separate calendar item, the board reviewed union survey data on using April break days as instructional days and discussed the state minimum of 180 instructional days. To allow students to finish earlier in hot late‑June buildings, the board voted unanimously to reduce the 2025–26 school year from 181 to 180 days, which will move the last day up by one day.
What happens next: The proposed budget will go to the city board of finance for review; staff promised follow‑up on salary comparables and contract detail questions raised in the discussion. The calendar change takes immediate effect for the 2025–26 school year.
