Superintendent Langlas outlines $1.17M in cuts as Lewiston schools prepare FY27 referendum

Superintendent Jake Langlas presented a revised Lewiston school budget to the City Council, saying the school committee approved roughly $1.169 million in reductions and will move a local funding proposal of $32,885,176 forward to the referendum process. Langlas said the revisions reflect the May 12 referendum results and efforts to meet state and federal mandates while reducing the local ask.

Langlas said special education remains the largest cost driver, describing it as “a special education cost driver of over $5 million,” and told the council that reductions approved by the committee reduce the local ask while leaving difficult tradeoffs. “Improving instruction is the strongest means to improve outcomes,” Langlas said, arguing the district must protect classroom supports while addressing steep cost drivers such as transportation, utility contracts and a recent workers‑comp increase.

The superintendent said the school committee’s reductions bring the budget to a local funding proposal of $32,885,176, a 4.35% local increase year‑over‑year under the revenue assumptions he presented. He told the council that the mill rate calculation on the package would move the mill rate from 13.61 to 14.07 (a 46‑cent change) and estimated the increased annual cost to a homeowner with a $150,000 valuation at $685, figures Langlas placed on the table for voters.

Councilors pressed Langlas about job impacts. When asked how many positions would be eliminated, Langlas said the number fluctuates with retirements and vacancies but that the budget as proposed leaves “above 20 people in this budget that will lose their position.” Several councilors and parents voiced particular concern about cuts to special‑education positions and a multilingual coach line. “Eliminating anyone’s position in the special‑ed department makes zero sense to me,” Councilor Long Champs said. Councilor Roy also urged caution about trimming trade and technical programs, noting the long‑term workforce benefits those programs provide.

Public speakers at the hearing urged clearer public education about how state and federal subsidies offset local costs. Langlas and clerk’s staff emphasized that more than $89 million of the proposed school budget is attributable to state subsidy under the education funding formula and encouraged residents to use posted documents and a June 2 council adoption to inform votes on the June 9 referendum.

The council’s discussion will continue before any final municipal vote; the superintendent said the council was scheduled to act June 2 to place the school budget on the June 9 referendum. The superintendent also emphasized that some positions proposed for reduction are vacant or tied to retirements, and that the district is pursuing grants and other strategies to mitigate the impact.

The council did not make any final decision on the school budget at the presentation; the item will be before the council for further action ahead of the referendum.