Amherst School Committee and Superintendent Clash Over Restoration of Interventionists and Paraeducators for Specials
Photo: depositphotos.com
Report on the Meeting of the Amherst School Committee, June 16, 2026
This was a hybrid meeting held in the Town Room of Town Hall. It was recorded.
Present: Deb Leonard, Chair; Andrew Hart; Laura Jane Hunter; Bridget Hynes; Sarah Marshall
Staff: E. Xiomara Herman (Dr. Xi, Superintendent); Shannon Bernacchia (School Finance Director); Tonya McIntyre (Executive Director of Student Academic Success); JoAnn Smith (Interim Director of Student Services and Special Education Administrator)
Much of the four-hour June 16 meeting of the Amherst School Committee (ASC) was devoted to requesting changes to the FY27 elementary school budget. The FY27 town budget was approved by the Town Council on June 15. The ASC voted 4-1 at this meeting to allocate $189,371 in unanticipated funds added by the Town Council on June 15, to reinstate two interventionists (reading and math specialists) whose positions had been cut. The ASC then voted 4-1 to direct the superintendent to reallocate $187,500 from building administration, central administration, expense accounts, consulting fees, contingency, and curricular expenses to fund five designated full-time paraprofessionals supporting music, art, technology, library, and physical education at the elementary schools.
Superintendent E. Xiomara Herman (Dr. Xi) objected to the directives, noting that the school budget has already been approved and that it is the purview of the administration to determine spending within specific cost centers. Nonetheless, the superintendent was directed to return to the next school committee meeting with a revised budget accommodating the votes.
Background
The committee learned on June 15 that the Town Council had allocated an additional $120,000 to the elementary schools beyond what the town manager had proposed in his budget. This was still $300,000 short of what the committee had approved in its own budget proposal. The council acknowledged that it could not dictate how that extra allocation would be spent, but councilors spoke of their preference that it be used to restore two interventionists whose positions would otherwise have been eliminated.
Bridget Hynes moved to use the full $120,000 plus $69,000 that the town had realized from a lower-than-expected regional assessment — and which the town manager allowed the schools to retain — to reinstate the two interventionist positions.
Dr. Xi disagreed, calling the move “unprecedented micro-managing.” She suggested that those funds should be placed in an appropriate cost center, allowing the district to do what needs to be done. She emphasized: “I am not in support of how you are doing it.” She said, “I feel that if you place it in the appropriate cost center, you allow the district to do what needs to be executed, and principals identify needs for their building. You allow for staff to determine, based on student needs, who should be standing in front of children, and who should be supporting children, and where those positions should be. For me, the school committee does not have the day-to-day interactions or [is] even looking at how our student population changes, [how] our student needs change, [how] enrollments change.”
“We have heard from the community and the council that this needs to be a priority,” – Deb Leonard, Chair, Amherst School Committee
ASC Chair Deb Leonard said that she had consulted the school’s attorney, who advised that the committee would be within its rights to specify how that money should be spent. She said, “We have heard from the community and the council that this needs to be a priority,” indicating that she thought the committee had an obligation to be responsive to those concerns. She noted the committee’s concern that the administration did not seem to prioritize an interventionist/coaching approach. (See Page 2 of Finance Director Shannon Bernacchia’s budget memo for a list of all positions cut for FY27.)
The motion passed 4-1, with Sarah Marshall voting no.
The committee then went on to lament the plan to cancel or reduce specials (art, music, physical education, technology, and library) because the existing budget requires cutting five paraeducator positions that support those programs. Members noted that specials teachers at the new Amethyst Brook Elementary School face doubled student loads (approximately 30 classes per week) and raised concerns that overloading will drive staff attrition in the first year of the new school’s operation.
The discussion resulted in a motion to restore the five positions. The committee originally sought $200,000, then reduced the figure to $187,500 after Bernacchia calculated the cost of restoring the five positions with benefits, informing the committee that not all paraeducators elect to take benefits.
There was considerable discussion about where an additional $187,500 could be found in the budget to be reallocated to restore those positions, with committee members speculating about potential sources. Hynes noted that the contingency fund has doubled from the previous year and wondered if it could be a source. Laura Jane Hunter wondered if money could be taken from the technology budget, asking whether the district needs to purchase Chromebooks every year. Others suggested looking into curriculum costs (inquiring how much the iReady program costs the district) or cuts to the central office.
Dr. Xi cautioned the ASC not to speculate and not to make any decisions without running the full numbers, also noting that such changes should not be made on the fly, that much time had been spent trying to make all the pieces of the austere budget fit together, and that a change in one part of the system could produce unanticipated consequences elsewhere.
Sarah Marshall objected to the suggestion that funds could be taken from the central office budget. She pointed out that “we just don’t have the budget that we want” and warned, “It’s too easy to look at the non-student-facing positions and say we can take the money from that. We forget the demands that are placed on administration — for example, the demands we have made for more attention to bullying, to addressing restraint and seclusion, to families, and to reducing absenteeism. It’s not the student-facing people who address these things. All of these things and many more take administrators. They are doing the things that we are really insistent on. Are we willing now to do without those things?” She concluded, “This is irresponsible budgeting.”
“I am concerned with the diminishment of the work that the leadership team puts in. It feels like this discussion is being dismissive of their work. [The people in the central office] are hard-working and also short-staffed. The work of the central office makes it possible for student-facing personnel to do just that.” – E. Xiomara Herman (Dr. Xi), Superintendent of Schools
Dr. Xi also objected to seeking the funds in the administrative budget, suggesting that it was disrespectful of the work done in the central office. She said, “I am concerned with the diminishment of the work that the leadership team puts in. It feels like this discussion is being dismissive of their work. [The people in the central office] are hard-working and also short-staffed.” She reminded Leonard that the last time she visited the central office she had to wait 10 minutes to be buzzed in because there was no one available to answer the door. She continued, “The work of the central office makes it possible for student-facing personnel to do just that. We serve the school committee; we serve the schools; we serve the students. I would like us not to be dismissed.”
Hynes said, “What I think is going on is that everyone is looking for someplace where we have some flexibility. We don’t have any flex when it comes to the union contract. I suggest we ask — what do we want to get for our elementary schools, and how can we ask you to come back with something that we can vote on?”
Marshall said, “The problem we are trying to fix is not the superintendent’s fault. It’s not our fault. It’s not the community’s fault. There is not enough money. And it is foolish to try to create a new budget with back-of-the-envelope calculations. I am happy to have another meeting with the superintendent to discuss possibilities, but I oppose this.”
The motion passed 4-1, with Marshall voting no.
Public Comment
Ellen Guidera, representing the Special Education Parent Advisory Council (SEPAC), expressed support for Collaborative Problem Solving (CPS) professional development implementation; urged replacement of Safety Care with Ukeru crisis response training for de-escalation; requested that reflection rooms at Amethyst Brook be genuinely calming rather than institutional in feel; and called for neuro-affirming expert input on policy and space design.
She noted that “DESE guidance to reduce and eliminate restraint and seclusion has been in place since the 2020-21 school year, but experience has demonstrated that current practice is ineffective at reducing restraint and seclusion in our district. Several of our recommendations were not integrated into the final plans for Amethyst Brook.”
Relinquishing Wildwood School Building to the Town
The ASC voted unanimously to relinquish the Wildwood Elementary School building to the town effective Sept. 1, 2026.
Other Committee Business
Superintendent’s Report
The superintendent’s report emphasized K-6 restructuring readiness.
- Negotiations for use of the Middle School building (owned by the district) by Chestnut Street Academy have concluded, and the lease is out for signatures.
- Amherst Police Chief Gabe Ting is coordinating with the district to develop a traffic plan for Amethyst Brook Elementary.
- Eversource issued new standards in May after the district applied in January to connect the solar panels at Amethyst Brook to the grid; that connection is now delayed, possibly beyond the start of the school year. The town manager has engaged state Sen. Jo Comerford and state Rep. Mindy Domb in what he described as a “full-court press” to resolve the matter.
Caminantes Program Review
Tonya McIntyre, Executive Director of Student Academic Success, provided an update on the review of the Caminantes dual-language program. The review is ongoing and will be completed in July. Caminantes enrollment is being corrected to a strict 50/50 ratio of native Spanish and English speakers (14 each for incoming kindergartners). Currently, native English speakers outnumber native Spanish speakers.
- Current enrollment: 217 students. The program has drifted toward an immersion model — with more English speakers than Spanish speakers — and this is now being corrected.
- Preliminary UMass data show positive trends, but the review is not complete; the final report is due in July and will be presented to the committee in August.
- ELL students in Caminantes are Spanish speakers developing English proficiency; not all native Spanish speakers have limited English.
- The status of the bilingual reading interventionist position (moved to a classroom teaching role) and its restoration implications remain unresolved pending budget decisions.
- The discussion included consideration of continuing Caminantes into middle school.
- The original working group may be reconvened after the final UMass report is complete.
iReady / Ready Classroom
McIntyre also reported on a curriculum review of iReady and Ready Classroom Math, adopted as part of the district’s requirement to meet the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s (DESE) High Quality Instructional Materials (HQIM) standards.
- The distinction between iReady and Ready Classroom was clarified: iReady is a digital diagnostic tool; Ready Classroom Math and Magnetic Literacy are curriculum materials. They were adopted in 2019 as part of district equity work and selected for bilingual availability (Spanish/English), real-time diagnostic data, and curriculum consistency across classrooms.
- Some costs are covered by DESE grants and consortium agreements; full cost breakdowns will be sent to the committee in response to their request.
- Concerns raised include screen time, worksheet-heavy delivery, equity outcomes in Ready Math versus alternatives such as Eureka Math, and unverified claims about facial recognition.
- The district is eligible for DESE curricular grants only if it uses High Quality Instructional Materials such as iReady.
Student Safety / Restraint Policy
JoAnn Smith, interim director of Student Services and Special Education administrator, reviewed four pending motions regarding student safety and the ongoing review of the district’s restraint and seclusion policy. Smith noted that the district is transitioning to a new policy on restraint and seclusion, that alternatives exist, and that schools across Massachusetts appear to be moving away from restraint and seclusion practices — prompting the district to take a close look at its options.
- CPS (Collaborative Proactive Solutions) training is underway: More than 20 staff members signed up within one day of the announcement; participants will be compensated at the professional development rate.
- Smith estimated the CPS training cost at approximately $10,000; a 12-hour baseline training will be scheduled partly in the summer, with a professional development day planned for November.
- Ukeru, the proposed replacement for SafetyCare, is currently being researched. Training is not locally available and requires travel; the plan is to send a few staff members first before undertaking wholesale replacement.
- The investigation into restraint incidents is still pending; the district is awaiting a final report from the external investigator.
Thumbnail image: depositphotos.com