LONGMEADOW — A preliminary budget for fiscal year 2026 presented by Longmeadow Public Schools Superintendent M. Martin O’Shea provides level services for the School Department, despite increased costs and minimal state aid.
O’Shea told the School Committee that to provide the same level of services as this fiscal year, FY26’s budget would be $44.85 million, $1.42 million more than FY25. Breaking down the components of school funding, he explained that the state determines each School Department’s foundation budget — the amount needed to provide a basic education. This figure considers several factors, including the number of low-income, special education and English learner students in a district.
The state also calculates each municipality’s minimum local contribution and Chapter 70 state aid. The minimum local contribution — how much the municipality is expected to spend on education — based on property taxes and the relative wealth of a community. Chapter 70 aid makes up the difference between the minimum local contribution and the foundation budget. However, the state is required to provide a minimum amount per student. This year, that figure is $75 per pupil. Communities often spend more than the minimum on education.
Longmeadow’s foundation budget has risen steadily over the past 10 years and is about $1 million more than in FY16. O’Shea shared figures showing that over the past decade, Longmeadow has seen an increase in its percentage of high needs and low-income students, however the state average for those categories has also increased. Longmeadow’s percentage of students with disabilities is slightly higher than the state average.
Despite this, increases to the town’s Chapter 70 aid has steadily decreased over the past few years, from a $750,000 increase in FY23 to $204,675 for FY26, the base increase allowed by law. This means that the town must make up the difference. The general fund pays for 92% of the annual school budget.
“It costs more to educate children nowadays, given the complexity of our work, given the demands, given the needs of students in 2025,” O’Shea said.
Assistant Superintendent for Finance and Operations Thomas Mazza said, “We’re hoping we’ll at least be able to maintain staffing and services” at [FY25] levels.”
The School Department is requesting an increase of 3.2%, which is less than last year’s requested budget increase. To keep a level service budget, O’Shea said some positions that are vacant due to retirements and attrition will not be filled. Fewer preschool students will allow for one class section’s elimination along with a teacher and assistant. Special education transition services will be provided through a partnership with area colleges, rather than Longmeadow public school staff. O’Shea also said there is an expected reduction in the need for services for deaf and hard of hearing students.
O’Shea said that with these changes, there would be a “nearly identical level of staffing” to FY25. Elementary school class sizes are projected to decrease slightly, with the average ranging from 16.3 to 21.3 students, depending on the school and grade level. The middle school class sizes will average between 19 and 23.6 students. Similarly, high school class sizes are expected to remain steady.
Some increases to the budget are unavoidable, particularly when it comes to contractually obligated salary increases. The schools are also expecting an increase in assessment from the Lower Pioneer Valley Educational Collaborative, which provides transportation for Longmeadow schools. Utility costs will also increase, although they are expected to be less than increases in previous years.
There are still several unknowns in the budget process, including the final figures from the state, available federal aid, the town’s fiscal position and changes to enrollment over the spring and summer.
O’Shea included a wish list of items that he would like to fund if possible. They included behavioral support, substitute teachers, support staff, full-day preschool, instructional coaches and in-district special education, which would lower out-of-district tuition costs. Ideally, the budget would also fully fund athletics and curriculum renewal.
School Committee member Julie Morgan recalled that in FY25, Longmeadow received a significantly higher amount of Chapter 70 aid than originally anticipated. Mazza said it is not uncommon for final state aid levels to differ from the preliminary budget. That funding, realized after the municipal budget has been passed, usually goes to the town to be appropriated at the fall Town Meeting, rather than going straight to the schools.
School Committee member Jaime Hensch asked if there was a cost attached to providing full-day preschool. O’Shea explained that there are currently six half-day sections of preschool. If it were changed to four half-day sections and one full-day section, there would be no additional cost. However, Mazza noted that if enrollment increased, the school would have to open an additional half-day section, which would cost the district more. While preschool enrollment has dropped by seven students this school year, the long-term trend reflects increasing enrollment.
School Committee Chair Nicole Choiniere asked how the budget affected curriculum renewal. O’Shea said there was “no major adoption that we’re pushing off or delaying” because of this year’s level service budget. Director of Curriculum, Instruction & Assessment Elizabeth Nelson said the state’s standards have not changed, but in three years, the schools may need to spend about $30,000 for the newest version of the bridges math curriculum.
O’Shea said that his number one priority for funding, should it become available, would be behavioral support in all the town’s schools. Glenbrook Middle School and Wolf Swamp Road School already have student support centers. Choiniere asked to see the costs associated with those supports. Similarly, Hensch requested a comparison of funding options and what would be cut if some of the wish list items were funded instead.
