As we head into budget hearings for Lowell Public Schools, I want to speak directly to our community about what we are facing – and what we are not.
This is not a situation where one group is winning and another is losing. This is not a case of easy fixes being ignored. And this is not a moment where pointing fingers will solve the problem.
This is a moment where we are being asked to make difficult decisions in a system that is under real financial pressure.
And for many (if not all!) of us – including myself – this is deeply personal.
I have children in the Lowell Public Schools. I have family members and close friends who work in the district. I see firsthand the impact our schools have on students, educators and families every single day.
That’s why these decisions are not just numbers on a page… they affect people we know and care about.
At first glance, the school budget appears to be increasing. The proposed FY27 budget is approximately $287.9 million, an increase of about $14.5 million over FY26.
But the truth is more complicated.
Much of that increase is already committed before we make a single decision. Costs for salaries, transportation, special education and employee benefits are rising significantly. These are contractual and in many cases mandated.
At the same time, the city’s anticipated cash contribution to the schools remains level-funded at $12 million, limiting how much flexibility the district actually has.
So while the total number increases, the portion we can make decisions about does not increase in the same way.
That is the core of the challenge.
To understand how we got here, we also need to look at the last several years.
During and after COVID, Lowell Public Schools made a deliberate investment in students. The district added more than 67 classroom teachers, nearly 60 mainstream paraprofessionals and over 50 special education paraprofessionals, along with additional specialized support staff to address learning loss and growing student needs.
At the same time, enrollment remained essentially flat, moving from 14,434 students to 14,387.
Those investments mattered. They improved the student-to-staff ratio and expanded support for students during an incredibly difficult time.
But much of that funding was temporary ESSER funding.
Now, as those federal dollars expire, we are being asked to bring staffing and spending back into alignment with ongoing revenue. This is a shift from temporary expansion to long-term sustainability.
That does not make the impact any less real.
Another important part of this conversation is how funding is distributed within our schools. Lowell uses a Fair Student Funding model, which means resources are allocated based on student enrollment and need. Schools with higher needs receive additional support, but it also means that when budgets tighten, the impacts can look different from school to school.
I understand why people are upset because these decisions are not abstract.
They affect class sizes, classroom supports, specialized services and the people who work with our children every day.
And that frustration is valid.
Our responsibility is not to pretend this is easy. It isn’t.
Our responsibility is to be transparent about what is driving these decisions, ask hard questions, protect students as much as possible and ensure that impacts are fair and equitable across schools.
We also have to be honest about something else… approximately 75% of the school budget is tied up in salaries and benefits, which means there is limited flexibility when costs rise.
We cannot protect everything.
That is the hardest truth in this process.
You deserve clarity. You deserve to know where cuts are happening, why they are happening and how they will impact students and schools.
This is not a moment for division between the city and the schools or between administration and families.
We are all working within the same constraints.
There are no winners in this budget. Only choices.
And the best outcomes will come not from assigning blame, but from working together – advocating for fair funding, having honest conversations and supporting the students and educators who will feel these changes most.
We can disagree on decisions. That is part of the process.
But we should not lose sight of what brings us together… strong schools and successful students.
That is the goal. And while the path there may be difficult right now, it is one we have to navigate together.
(Danielle McFadden is a member of the Lowell School Committee)
10 responses to “Op-Ed: Facing Lowell’s Budget Challenges Together”
So the past SC approved additional staff, funded by 1 time funds, they also approved an 11% pay increase (highest among all city employees). Turn to those members still on the committee and ask what their plan was. Additional teachers and paras while enrollment shrunk with those teachers getting contracted raises with zero plans on how to fund them is why the SC is in the situation now. Unfortunately you folks now have to fix the problem you caused.
And the budget IS increasing, your expenses are just increasing too fast, that is a spending problem.
Thank you for the clarity. A drop of approximately 50 students does not suggest that there is much room to layoff teachers to affect the budget problems. At best that might equal two teachers and one or teo paraprofessionals. And the negotiated raises were needed to hold onto educators who do a difficult job and we could very reasonably argue deserve more money. Increased costs, rising health insurance probably a huge culprit, higher costs of building maintenance, and good old fashioned inflation kick in there, too. I hope you have reasonable conversation based on the facts as you’ve begun to lay them out, and you all do right by the city’s teachers and students. A city is know by its schools, esp. when young families make decisions on where they want to live. Short-changing the schools will short circuit Lowell’s long-term future as ut heads into year 201.
Lowell needs strong state legislative action and advocacy as the fair solution and fix. A comprehensive review of Chapter 70, which is the state’s primary education funding formula, is failing to keep pace with the high inflation and rising operating costs. Without specific legislative adjustments to this formula, districts will continually be forced to cover increasing expenses like staff salaries, special education, and transportation, etc. with property tax overrides as a solution. We are ALL already taxed out of our minds!
Correcting the formula, could bring an additional $15.5 million or more in funding to Lowell, as well as substantive funding relief to the suburban communities. Go the legislative route!
A drop of 50 students doesn’t necessitate an increase of 160 teachers, which is the issue. Teachers and paras were added while enrollment was going down
With what I have seen first hand over the past four school years shows that cutting a significant number of classroom teachers will only lead to disaster. The city has tough choices to make in terms of what it spends its money on.
Also, another solution that understand was discussed at past Lowell school committe mtgs., and offered as a solution to the overflow of students seeking a vocational education, was to bring in more monies/funding to a school district by also offering technical education in traditional high schools so they don’t need to go to a vocational school. Substantive grants were/are given out by the Healey-Driscoll Administration to existing as well as to those school districts expanding those programs. Chelmsford High School recently received $149,544 through this program.
I also understand that new legislation, Massachusetts Senate Bill S.2690 (“An Act to improve access, opportunity, and capacity in Massachusetts vocational-technical education”), has been introduced to allow municipalities to more easily create their own vocational programs if the local regional vocational district is full. As of March 2026, Bill S.2690 was reported favorably by the Joint Committee on Education and referred to the Senate Committee on Ways and Means.
Allowing traditional high schools the opportunity to be innovative and to create their own vocational programs, especially when regional schools are full, districts can keep the higher per-pupil “vocational” funding internally rather than seeing that tuition money follow the student to a regional vocational school.
Where do you suggest a school like LHS build out space for vocational shop space? The space is already accounted for in this 400 million dollar renovation. 149k is salary for 2 teachers and zero infrastructure.
I understand that vocational and specialized “shop” spaces are primarily being integrated into the newly constructed additions and renovations. The new school building is supposed to provide students a unique 21st century learning environment that includes significant vocational-technical capacity with the new construction.
The City of Lowell FY2025 Budget Appropriation Order to Greater Lowell Technical School was $10,379,738. Approximately 1,800 to 1,900 students from Lowell attend the regional/vocational school. That’s a whole lotta money that could be kept in district.
City of Lowell FY2025
Budget – Appropriation Order FY2025 Manager Line Recommended
Number Department Description Appropriation
2025-45 Lowell Public Schools Single Line $257,137,509
2025-46 Greater Lowell Technical School Single Line $10,379,738
2025-47 Essex Agricultural High School Single Line $115,000
Cuts should come from the Central Office staff first. Several positions have been added there also.
Superintendent Liam Skinner stated at the last school committee mtg, that Lowell’s central office spending is “4% of the budget and already below the national average of 6.7%”, and that even eliminating every superintendent/asst. superintendent position would only save roughly $500,000, basically the equivalent of about one day of pay per teacher across the district”.