RSU 04 board debates restoring two teachers as proposed budget rises 8.85%; members press for stipend and supply cuts

The RSU 04 school board spent more than an hour debating whether to restore two teaching positions to the proposed fiscal‑year budget as staff presented a bottom line that would raise total spending to $23,486,544.82 — roughly $1.9 million, or 8.85%, above last year.

Board members repeatedly said teachers, support staff and facilities should be top priorities. "If it's affordable, [I] would put teachers back in," one board member said, while another argued that the administration should be trusted to place newly funded teachers where they are needed most. Members were split on whether to specify placements (for example, a high‑school science teacher versus lower‑grade interventionists) or to provide the administration with a number of positions to allocate.

Several board members pushed for concrete offsets. Members identified non‑salary lines and supply accounts as potential sources of savings; staff said supply lines vary by school and are coded to cost centers per state Department of Education accounting practice. One member estimated cost‑center‑1 stipends at about $106,000 and asked for updated participation rates and an itemized stipend list so the board could assess whether reducing stipends could free funds for teachers. Staff responded that stipends are largely contractually defined and that reducing them typically requires eliminating the activity they fund.

Board members also raised a $24,600 increase in high‑school contracted services (line 38). Staff explained the bulk of that change was rebuilding a JMG contract (about $27,500) that had been paid forward in a prior year and was being restored in the current budget.

Superintendent and finance staff described the main budget drivers as salary and benefits (approximately $1,025,009 added) and non‑salary increases (approximately $888,006), and presented per‑pupil supply examples that showed wide variance among schools. Staff proposed a menu of staged reductions in prior years and offered to return with several reduction scenarios tied to percentage thresholds so the board could choose a target and see the impacts.

Board members expressed worry that an 8–9% increase would fail in referendum, repeating last year’s experience with multiple votes. Staff said revenue numbers would be distributed the following week and reiterated the timetable: a public hearing (scheduled for April 3) and a deadline for board action before the referendum. The meeting concluded without a formal vote on restoring teacher positions; the board asked staff to prepare revenue figures and a prioritized list of reductions for the next meeting.