Interim superintendent outlines entry plan, $2.3M in reductions and proposed high‑school bond for RSU 40

Brian Reese, the district’s interim superintendent, told the RSU 40 budget committee on March 9 that an entry review of the district’s operations, enrollment and finances has produced a draft budget and a set of recommendations intended to keep classroom dollars focused on instruction.

“We are inspiring students to achieve lifelong success,” Reese said and later stressed a literacy priority: “Students must learn to read and write before the end of second grade because after second grade, they're reading and writing to learn.” Reese framed the budget as an extension of that entry work and said the district’s low and falling enrollment is driving per‑pupil costs higher.

Reese presented multi‑year enrollment figures and per‑building cost estimates showing the impact of small class rosters. He said the district is “running seven buildings for less than 1,650 students,” and warned that buildings consume a disproportionate share of resources when enrollments decline. To address that, his draft budget proposes consolidations and staffing reductions, a package he said totals roughly $2.3 million.

The recommendation includes targeted classroom consolidations in K‑5, movement of some sixth‑grade cohorts to the middle school over time, and a total reduction of positions the administration estimates at 13. Reese said the proposal also reallocates some grant‑funded positions to cover special‑education needs without raising the overall budget.

At the same time, the administration proposed several additions it says are necessary to maintain services. Those include a billing coordinator to increase MaineCare reimbursements (the district currently budgets about $400,000 in MaineCare revenue and estimates it could reach roughly $650,000 with dedicated staffing), an IEP coordinator for preK–5, increases to middle‑school counseling and music/art staffing, and additional occupational‑therapy capacity.

Reese previewed a planned high‑school renovation bond and offered a preliminary estimate of its local impact: “the first year of the bond would be $463,000, but then every year after that, it's $2,000,000,” he said, adding that the district also faces a state‑funding shortfall of roughly $800,000 under current ED‑279 calculations. The draft budget total cited in the presentation was in the low‑to‑mid $43 million range when bond payments were included.

Board members and the public pushed for more detail and asked for written questions to be collected so administration could provide carefully documented answers. Reese asked the board to give staff a target percentage (he said the current draft reflects a 5.6% increase before further adjustments) and agreed to return with detailed cost‑center pages and a public Q&A session on March 16.

Public commenters included a Miller School special‑education teacher who described staffing shortages and safety concerns in self‑contained classrooms and urged the board to visit schools and consider the practical effects of consolidation and cuts. Another commenter asked the board to balance fiscal responsibility with care for the people who deliver instruction and supports.

The committee did not take final votes on the budget at the meeting; Reese said further refinement and a decision on the board’s direction will precede the district budget meeting and the June 9 referendum date for the bond.