The primary agenda item was the financial strategy following the approval of the Fiscal Year 2026 budget, which included an override that passed. This approval resulted in an additional $38,000 allocated to the school district and nearly $129,000 to Groton. However, Groton’s initial override request failed, prompting discussions about a possible second attempt. The town manager of Groton suggested that the select board consider another override request, with June 28 proposed as a potential date for the ballot. Meetings were scheduled with Groton’s select board and the school committee to further discuss these matters.

The conversation explored options should Groton’s override fail again. One option considered was modifying the budget at a special town meeting, with a potential reallocation of approximately $200,000 in available funds. Board members examined the implications of doing nothing, learning that state law mandates the board of assessors to adjust the school assessment if it is reduced after the annual town meeting. This adjustment could result in a $200,000 tax levy capacity for Fiscal Year 2027. A board member, initially confused by the implications, was reassured that if no action was taken, the town would only raise enough funds to support the schools, preserving the additional capacity for the following fiscal year.

The potential of gifting funds to the school district was another point of discussion. A board member expressed apprehension about the implications of such a gift, especially after asking the town to raise taxes to meet the school’s needs. This member highlighted concerns that such a move could lead to a continuous cycle of needing more overrides, questioning the sustainability of this funding model. Another board member noted that while an override would benefit the schools, it would necessitate cuts to municipal budgets. They emphasized the need to consider the long-term financial implications of gifting funds and the potential complications it might introduce in future budgeting cycles.

The interconnectedness of the town’s financial decisions was a recurring theme, with the board acknowledging that these choices could lead to unintended consequences. They recognized the importance of evaluating options thoroughly, considering both the town’s and the school district’s long-term financial health.

The board also addressed the financial implications for the Dunstable school system, particularly in relation to previous override votes and assessments from neighboring towns. Concerns were raised about the public perception and financial realities facing the town. It was noted that if the override for the school did not pass, Dunstable could be in a stronger financial position, albeit not a desired outcome. The conversation highlighted the challenges of securing overrides to meet financial obligations and the strain of maintaining a balanced budget while addressing school needs.

The dynamics of the regional school system were also discussed, with emphasis on the involvement of parents and community members in voting based on their ties to the educational district. Questions arose about why Groton did not pass its override last year and how they allocated funds differently. Groton had $620,000 in excess levy capacity, which they chose to redirect towards the school district, unlike Dunstable, which faced significant challenges in securing overrides.

Skepticism was expressed regarding the likelihood of securing another override in the next fiscal year. Concerns were voiced that Dunstable might struggle again to meet financial obligations. The town had previously reduced municipal budgets to accommodate the school’s needs without additional overrides, leading to an ongoing cycle of financial strain. The complexities of maintaining a balanced budget while addressing the needs of the school were acknowledged, with a participant advocating for transparency and community involvement in future discussions.

Discussions also included the process of re-certifying the school budget. While the overall budget would remain the same, opportunities were identified to lower assessments based on anticipated state funding increases. This involved considering reductions in the original override amount from $673,000 to $544,000. Historical context was provided, noting that the last successful school override occurred in fiscal year 2004, with failed attempts in 2016 and 2017. The dialogue emphasized the importance of a calm and transparent approach to future override discussions.