At a special meeting on the district’s 2025‑26 budget, the Okemos Board of Education heard multiple public comments urging trustees to retain the district’s gifted‑and‑talented coordinator as administrators laid out proposed reductions.

Two public speakers described the coordinator as a unique district resource that cannot be absorbed by other staff if the position is cut. “I’m here tonight to advocate for Jennifer Eddy’s position to be maintained,” said Simon Delil, who identified himself as a parent. Gracie DeLagentre, a third‑grade teacher at Cornell Elementary, told trustees, “The role of our gifted and talented coordinator is paramount to their success.”

The board’s budget work session later put the gifted‑and‑talented coordinator on a short list of items for “further discussion.” Superintendent Hood told trustees how the coordinator’s work intersects with district MTSS (multi‑tiered system of supports) coaching and that the district could reassign or reframe duties if cuts are made. Hood also said the administration is weighing options for how to deliver services if a position is reduced or eliminated, and that tradeoffs would affect both students and staff capacity.

Trustees debated whether MTSS coaches could take on gifted work. Hood said both functions overlap but warned that “we can’t take our gifted and talented person, have her continue to do everything she currently does alone, and take on MTSS. That’s not physically possible.” Trustees asked whether the Ingham Intermediate School District could be contracted for technical support in other areas and whether any reductions would increase staff overtime or risk burnout.

Board members and staff emphasized legal and programmatic constraints. Executive Director Lentz explained that reductions to special education funding in the general fund do not change services required by students’ IEPs; any cut discussed targeted non‑IEP positions and general‑fund capacity. Trustees repeatedly framed decisions as difficult and asked administrators to return with implementation details before making final decisions.

The board did not take a final formal vote to remove the gifted‑and‑talented coordinator. Instead, trustees used a consensus check and straw tallies during the work session and agreed to postpone any final decision about this position until the board reviews the full draft budget on June 9 and adopts a budget at its June 16 meeting.

Parent and teacher speakers asked trustees to consider students who are “twice exceptional” or who need differentiated instruction even when they have high grades. Trustees acknowledged those remarks and said they would incorporate community feedback before finalizing recommendations.

The board’s next public review of the draft 2025‑26 budget is scheduled for June 9, with a formal adoption vote expected June 16.