Freetown-Lakeville Regional School District administrators presented a revised FY26 assessment that trims roughly $1,560,180 from an earlier level-services budget and described a set of staffing reductions that would be required if additional state funding is not received.

The administration said the reduced assessment represents a 2.2% increase over the current budget rather than the 5.5% increase in the earlier plan. To reach the lower assessment, administrators identified about $1.075 million in reductions that would require eliminating 16 positions across the district unless state funds become available.

Why it matters: If enacted, those personnel changes would affect classroom instruction and supports across multiple schools. Administrators said they attempted to minimize service impacts and used enrollment trends to guide recommendations about where reductions could occur.

Key numbers and distribution: The administration told the committee that the 16 positions being considered for elimination are distributed as follows: 6 positions at Apponequet Regional High School, 2 at the middle school, 1 at the intermediate school, 2 at the Assawompset Elementary School, 3 at Freetown Elementary School and 2 regional (multi-building) positions. The administration also said three of the 16 reductions would be retirements already expected next year; an additional 2–3 retirements might materialize, which could affect the final mix of reductions.

Potential state funding and proposed placeholder: Administrators described two possible sources of additional state funds that, if awarded, could reduce or eliminate the proposed staff cuts: supplemental regional transportation reimbursements tied to the state’s regional transportation fund (a possible 15%–20% uptick, estimated as $300,000–$325,000) and an incremental Chapter 70 funding increase (estimated around $75,000). Together, the district estimated a potential $400,000 of additional revenue if both measures materialize.

Because state decisions could arrive after the committee's budget vote but before town meeting, administrators proposed an alternate assessment that would temporarily increase the planned use of school-choice reserves by roughly $400,000 as a placeholder. That approach would let the district hold funds in reserve and, if the state money arrives, return those reserves to the towns rather than implement immediate staff cuts. Administrators said if the state provides partial funds the committee could pull back a corresponding portion of the placeholder; if no state funds arrive, the committee would be asked to adopt the cuts that align with the lower assessment.

Timeline and process: The district plans to hold a public hearing and proceed with a vote on the committee’s assessment in late March; town meetings in the two member towns take place in May. Administrators said the committee may be asked to finalize an assessment in time for the March vote but could delay some decisions to allow state funding determinations to arrive and to give the district time for internal line-item comparisons.

Committee members asked about underlying enrollment trends, longevity buyouts in the teacher contract and the district’s regional transportation and revolving funds. Administrators said enrollment declines at the high-school and elementary levels informed some of the recommendations and that the “longevity buyout” line increased because several teachers applied to convert accumulated longevity into short-term buyouts.

Next steps: Administrators said they will provide line-item comparisons showing the draft-a (lower assessment) and draft-b (alternate-assessment placeholder) positions, and will distribute digital materials for committee review before the March vote. The committee did not take a final vote on staff reductions at the meeting.