This portal has been created to keep the Belmont community updated about the Belmont School Committee's (BSC) ongoing collective bargaining negotiations with the Belmont Education Association (BEA) for a 2025-2028 successor contract. We will continue to provide updates on this site regularly, as well as via posts on our social media accounts (Facebook: BelmontPublicSchools, and X: @belmontschools). We encourage you to visit these resources often for the latest updates.

April 17, 2026

Dear Belmont Public Schools Community,

As negotiations continue, I want to provide additional context on the key issues that remain unresolved - compensation and time during the school day - and what they mean for our students and schools.

The Belmont Education Association’s (BEA) current salary proposals remain above what the Town has allocated to the schools. The BEA has stated that the parties are $524,238 apart; however, based on our financial modeling, the gap is closer to $600,000 in FY26 alone. Because salaries build year over year and include both cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) and built-in increases (steps and lanes) for experience and additional credentials, the impact grows significantly over time, to approximately $900,000 in FY27 and $1.2 million in FY28. Our projections reflect the full compounding effect of salary increases over time, which is not captured in single-year comparisons but is essential for accurate multi-year budget planning.

This is not a small gap; it represents spending that cannot be supported without reductions elsewhere.  Because compensation accounts for approximately 75% of the school budget, increases at this level would require reductions in staffing or programming, including approximately 17 full-time equivalent positions across FY27 and FY28.

These challenges are not unique to Belmont. School districts across Massachusetts are facing similar financial pressures, with many communities making difficult decisions to manage rising costs. In neighboring districts, this has taken different forms but led to similar outcomes. For example, Lexington has identified approximately 65 positions for reduction. Marblehead and Brookline have each identified more than 20 positions to cut in FY27 while also seeking significant overrides to sustain their schools. In Winchester, following a failed override, more than 30 positions have been proposed for reduction, and in Newton, positions are being reduced to fund new curriculum investments. Our goal is to avoid these types of reductions and preserve the programs and staffing that directly support students. 

In Belmont, approximately 84% of the school budget is funded through local property taxes, and the community approved the largest override in Belmont’s history in 2024 with a commitment to use those funds responsibly. The Town’s multi-year financial plan also anticipates more limited growth in school funding in future years. For these reasons, we must ensure that any agreement we reach is financially sustainable over time and does not require cuts that would impact students.

At the same time, we remain committed to maintaining competitive compensation. Belmont currently ranks among the top districts in the state in average teacher salary, and our proposals are designed to keep us competitive within the Town’s financial framework.

A second key issue is how time is used during the school day. 

Currently, Belmont students receive less instructional time than students in comparable districts, equivalent to several fewer days of learning over the course of the school year. We have proposed adding 15 minutes of instructional time within the existing 7-hour workday to begin bringing Belmont into alignment with comparable districts so students have more time for learning. This time is particularly important for implementing the new elementary curriculum supported by the 2024 override and 2025 Annual Town Meeting. 

Earlier in negotiations, we also proposed extending the 7-hour workday to create space for both additional instructional time for students and additional collaboration time for educators. That proposal was not accepted by the BEA.

We then believed there was alignment on increasing instructional time within the existing schedule, including a tentative agreement in December, which we have referenced in prior community updates. However, that has since changed. On Monday night, the BEA indicated that they no longer support adding instructional time and instead are prioritizing additional time for educator collaboration. While we recognize the value of that time, it is not feasible to add both within the current 7-hour workday structure.

To accommodate the current BEA proposal without extending the workday, the district would need to either reduce instructional time in areas such as elementary specials (e.g., art) or hire additional staff to cover classrooms when teachers are not present. These BEA proposals have significant implications for students’ educational experiences and for the district’s budget.

We remain engaged in mediation and committed to reaching agreements that are fair to our educators, responsible to taxpayers, and supportive of students. We expect to resume negotiations following April break, and I hope this week provides a chance for students, families, and educators to rest and recharge.

Meg Moriarty, Ed.D., BSC Chair