Norwell Navigates Cuts, Questions Months After Override Vote

NORWELL – By late fall, the consequences of Norwell’s rejected town budget override were no longer theoretical across the town’s four schools.

They showed up in quieter libraries that no longer had librarians, being staffed intermittently instead by parent volunteers. In classrooms stretched thinner than before with the lack of key support roles. In emails to parents asking for school supplies to help support their children’s lessons. And recently, they showed up in the public comments online and at a School Committee meeting, where residents began asking a harder question: Was this what we were told would happen?

When voters rejected the override in May, district leaders had warned that the decision would force significant reductions across staffing, programs, and student support. Months later, those warnings collided with the realities of running schools under a level-funded budget, fueling debate over what residents understood before the vote, how decisions were made afterward, and whether the process had been fully transparent.

A Vote Framed as Preservation

In the weeks leading up to the May vote, school officials consistently framed the override not as an expansion, but as a way to hold the line.

“The proposed override does keep us at our current level,” Superintendent Matthew Keegan said during an April budget discussion. “It means we can return all of our staff, and we can maintain our cycles for technology and textbook cycles.”

Were there some new positions, too? Yes. The school committee, for example, requested new positions for an assistant special education director and a district-wide nurse. The latter would help meet the rising state reporting requirements and the increasing medical needs of students. But Keegan framed these as essential additions to maintain services to existing students. And without new revenue, he warned, the district would be forced to absorb rising costs without additional dollars.

“A non-override, literally, we have a budget this year of $33,398,000.62,” he said. “If we don’t get the override, we will have the exact same budget. All of our contractual obligations will go up in that timeframe, so that means that we need to cut positions to meet those increases.”

District leaders were explicit about the scale of those potential cuts. Keegan said roughly 24 positions, nearly 10 percent of the district’s workforce, could be eliminated, including teachers, aides, specialists, and support staff.

As the vote approached, information circulated widely. Social media posts, school-related forums, and informal community discussions outlined various scenarios, sometimes overlapping and sometimes contradictory. Residents received messages from multiple sources, creating uncertainty about which positions and programs were truly at risk.

Life After the Override

When the override failed, the district moved forward with a level-funded budget. The cuts followed.

At the elementary level, according to Keegan, the district eliminated two librarian positions, two literacy specialists, and two classroom teaching positions. Four building-based aide positions were also removed, two at each elementary school, eliminating full-time library services and reducing targeted reading and classroom support.

At the middle school, the district cut a physical education teacher, a 0.6 full-time equivalent math support teacher, and one building-based aide. Additional math support and tutoring aide positions totaling 2.4 FTE across the middle and high schools were also eliminated.

At the high school, staffing reductions included a physical education teacher, an English teacher, a French teacher, and an applied technology teacher. The district also eliminated a bridge room aide that had provided social-emotional support to students, as well as a secretarial position.

In total, the district eliminated approximately 18 full-time equivalent positions that had existed in the prior year. District officials also removed the districtwide nurse and assistant special education director positions from the budget, though those roles had not previously existed and were never filled.

By November, Keegan told the School Committee that unexpected costs were further tightening the district’s margins.

“If anything else like that comes up, we don’t have a tremendous amount of flexibility,” he said, referencing emergency plumbing and heating repairs that surfaced early in the school year.

Questions of Priority and Process

As the impacts became clearer, residents who spoke with the South Shore Times questioned whether the reductions aligned with what they believed they had been warned about, and whether different decisions might have lessened the impact.

Norwell resident Kara Vautour, a music teacher at Marshfield High School, said during public comment at a Nov. 24 meeting that she accepted that cuts were inevitable but raised concerns about how those cuts were prioritized.

“Eliminating the two elementary specialists leaves one specialist responsible for over 500 students,” Vautour said, calling the situation “educationally unsound.”

She also questioned whether residents had adequate access to the decision-making process during a period of significant change.

“During a period of major financial and educational change, residents deserve full access to the decision-making process,” Vautour said, pointing to meetings that were not recorded and limited opportunities for public comment.

A review of Norwell School Committee meeting agendas for the 2024-2025 and 2025-2006 school years found that the committee schedules time for public comment in about two-thirds of scheduled meetings, often after lengthy presentations. According to James Newman, a professor of public policy and expert in local government at Southeast Missouri State University, those opportunities for public comment are critical to building trust.

“By having public participation, the institution is able to enjoy more trust with the public due to allowing citizens to discuss their thoughts directly with the appointed or elected officials in a public forum,” Newman said. “Having comments at the beginning rather than the end allows for comments to be made more conveniently than if citizens have to wait until the end of the meeting.”

A Tense Response

At a Dec. 15 meeting, School Committee Chair Kristin McEachern said she wanted to respond to comments made by Vautour and clarify how decisions were made following the override’s defeat.

“There were several public comments made at our last meeting that I believe warrant responses, clarifications, and corrections,” McEachern said.

McEachern said the School Committee had been transparent about the district’s financial challenges and the consequences of a failed override.

“It is inappropriate and hypocritical to be fully aware of the exact student-facing cuts that would follow a no override vote, which Ms. Vautour championed, and then criticize those same reductions,” McEachern said, adding that Vautour had previously stated that “the kids will be fine.”

A Call for Better Communication from Norwell Schools

At the same December meeting, current and former officials said Norwell Public Schools needed to do a better job of communicating budget and cut information to families. Former School Committee member Mary Lou O’Leary urged district leaders to more clearly communicate what has already changed as a result of the failed override.

“What’s happening right now, and what has already happened, can be shared with residents,” O’Leary said. “That would help going forward.”

Select Board member John McGrath echoed concerns that many families may not yet understand the full extent of the impact.

“A lot of parents don’t see what’s happening behind the scenes or how much strain the system is under,” McGrath said. “They’re just thinking everything is fine.”

Looking Ahead

As Norwell officials begin early discussions on future budgets, the failed override continues to shape those conversations. School leaders have warned that this year’s reductions may be only the first chapter if costs continue to rise faster than revenues.

Keegan said that many of the same financial pressures, like healthcare costs, pension obligations, and overall inflation on things like utilities, are likely to continue to pressure the town’s budget going into next year.

“I think without question there are definitely pressure points this year that existed last year,” said Keegan. “We are working to come up with a level service budget and what will go into that budget. But it’s important to realize that with a limit of a 2-and-a-half percent increase, it’s just very hard to stay within that when fixed costs go up faster.”

“We have traditionally always done more with less,” McEachern said. “But at some point, you’re going to hit a breaking point, and we’re there now.”