Concord School Board approves preliminary FY2026–27 budget, restores three elementary teachers and trims staff

The Concord School District School Board on Wednesday approved a preliminary FY2026–27 budget that holds district spending near the current level while restoring three elementary classroom teachers and adopting a handful of fee and staffing adjustments.

Chair called the meeting to order and, after an early nonpublic session under RSA 91‑A, business staff presented an updated budget snapshot showing the general fund roughly $191,920 higher than a prior baseline and total funds down about $105,111 (about 0.4%). Mister Dunn said the local tax rate projection remained close to prior estimates and that small changes would translate to only a few dollars per $400,000 home.

The board front‑loaded its largest personnel decisions. After extended discussion about class sizes and enrollment projections, members voted to amend a motion and restore three elementary classroom teacher positions to be placed at administration discretion; that motion passed 5–4. Supporters said targeting kindergarten and the largest classes would yield the greatest instructional benefit, while opponents argued the district must balance personnel restorations against a tight overall budget and uncertain state aid.

“We tweak this thing,” the Chair said during the discussion, noting the board can revisit allocations in October or as registration data becomes available over the summer. Several board members urged that restored positions be flexible and that placement be guided by principals and enrollment trends.

The board also approved several revenue and fee moves. Members voted to raise preschool tuition by 7% across the board, noting the program is a part‑day model, and approved an increase in assumed facility rental revenue of $25,000 based on updated rates. Athletics fees and activity fees were discussed at length; staff reminded the board that a 10% activity fee increase had been approved previously and offered two alternate fee models for consideration.

On staffing reductions, the board debated changes to permanent substitute positions. After multiple amendments to the proposed reductions (initial proposals ranged higher), the board approved an amended motion to remove two additional permanent substitute positions (in addition to three vacancies the district will not fill), while staff noted adjustments to the call‑in substitute budget would be used to manage coverage.

Education and student services drew particular attention. The board asked administration to bring back, by a date certain, a plan identifying reforms and expense‑side adjustments in the student‑services budget amounting to roughly 1% of the tax rate (a figure board members estimated in the neighborhood of $760,000). Members repeatedly stressed that any changes must comply with federal IDEA and local IEP obligations.

“I don’t want to deny a child services,” one board member said, urging that cost‑saving ideas focus on how services are delivered rather than whether students receive them. Board members discussed contracting versus in‑house provision, nurse staffing, out‑of‑district placements and other drivers of the rapid growth in student‑services spending.

The board also approved a temporary limitation requiring the superintendent to obtain board approval before filling certain non‑instructional vacancies for the upcoming fiscal year, while explicitly excepting previously authorized teaching and principal hires.

After a final staff update on numbers and tax‑rate sensitivity, the board voted by roll call to approve the preliminary FY2026–27 budget as presented: all funds totaling $123,983,665 with a general fund of $115,205,146. The motion included deposits to specified reserve funds and authorization for staff to make adjustments to reflect the board’s intent.

The board adjourned after the vote. Administration told the board it will continue to monitor enrollment, state and federal aid and local property valuations and will return with details the board requested.

What’s next: staff will bring the student‑services cost‑reduction plan and any July/August staffing placement recommendations to the board; the board retains the option to revisit the budget during the October review cycle.