Methuen committee adopts $142.1 million FY27 operating budget after hours of public testimony and divided votes

Public testimony at the Methuen School Committee’s May 7 public hearing emphasized the real-world effects of proposed cuts before the panel approved a $142,143,368 fiscal‑year‑2027 operating budget.

Teachers, parents and retired educators packed the meeting to press the committee to use Methuen’s free cash to avert staff and program reductions. ‘‘Cutting those who provide direct services to students is clearly a dystopian idea,’’ said Tom Myers, a retired teacher who asked the committee to recommend that the City Council transfer reserves to cover the district shortfall for one year.

The superintendent’s office presented a revised budget that administrators said reduced $4,700,000 from an earlier proposal and placed the district’s operating request at roughly $118 million pending state aid. Acting Superintendent Dr. Golovski said the reductions primarily affect positions and programming and noted that some requested additions remain grant‑funded or tied to CTE resources.

The public comment period included repeated appeals for a one‑time use of town reserves. ‘‘If you cut at the numbers being stated, you’re going to have a school district that is going to decline tremendously,’’ said Sarah Kalla, a longtime Methuen Public Schools employee. Ben Thompson, another district employee, warned the committee that the plan could cost ‘‘a minimum of 35 educators’’ their jobs.

Members debated procedure and numbers before taking a series of separate roll‑call votes on budget components. A motion to adopt the operating net school‑spending figure of $106,590,457 failed on roll call. The committee then approved total non‑net school spending (largely the transportation contract) at $11,855,430 and an estimate for city chargebacks ($23,697,481). On the final roll call, the committee adopted the combined FY27 operating budget — net, non‑net and chargebacks — at $142,143,368 by a 4–3 vote.

Several committee members voiced discomfort about the choices they faced. ‘‘If I wasn’t the mayor … I would be voting no,’’ said the mayor, who also explained a statutory obligation to present a balanced city budget to the city council. Member statements ranged from urging structural reforms such as solar projects and bus‑arm enforcement to calls for greater state advocacy around Chapter 70 and special‑education reimbursements.

Speakers raised procedural concerns about timing and the effects of the committee’s votes on layoff notices. Vice chair and other committee members discussed pursuing one‑time city support and continuing advocacy at the state level; some said the committee’s vote tonight would be only one step in an ongoing negotiation with the city council and the state.

The committee closed the public hearing and, after the final vote, adjourned at 7:57 p.m. The adopted budget will proceed to required city‑council and administrative steps and remains contingent on final state aid numbers and any subsequent municipal actions to shift one‑time funds.