Would you support a Proposition 2 1/2 operating override?

Leading up to the November 4 local election, the Newton Beacon asked candidates in competitive elections:

Would you support a Proposition 2 1/2 operating override to fund schools and other city expenses?

Mali Brodt, School Committee Candidate, Ward 6: Yes. To support a budget override, we need to approach the process thoughtfully, transparently, and strategically. First, we must use all available levers—state and federal funding, grants, partnerships, and efficiencies within the current budget—before turning to taxpayers. An override should never be the first or only solution. At the same time, we must vett the budget carefully, ensuring every dollar supports students, educators, and core priorities like class size, mental health, and engaging programming. We should learn from other communities that have passed successful overrides—what made their messaging effective, how they built trust, and what outcomes they prioritized. Most importantly, we need to make the case that strong public schools are a foundation of a strong community, and investing in them benefits everyone—now and in the future.

John Chaimanis, City Council Candidate, Ward 4 At-Large: No position. Presently there is no override and any position on this matter would have to be grounded in the facts at the time, looking at it as an alternative of last resort. In recent history, the school’s budget was rejected even when funds were available, creating distrust and polarization. Regardless of the reason for an override, it must be accompanied by transparent facts and details allowing the public to understand the reality. We must analyze the actual budget from a revenue and expense perspective, living within our means as the first objective. To increase revenue, we should invest in identifying all alternative sources of revenue, such as grants, foundations, and innovative financing sources. The Mayor in her most recent address about the state of the city mentioned 9 or 10 ‘levers’ that the city has at our disposal – one of which is an override. Personally, I believe that we should focus on other projects and ideas before we even consider asking residents to approve another override.

Cyrus Dahmubed, City Council Candidate, Ward 4 At-Large: Yes. Fully and appropriately funding our schools is non-negotiable, and so if a Proposition 2 ½ override is needed, I would support it. At the same time, I would seek to encourage growth and use it to delay and decrease the need for an override. We have lost out on years of revenue due to the delay in projects like Riverside, and we need to encourage opportunities for increased revenue, and be ready to capitalize them when they arise. If and when a Proposition 2 ½ override is necessary, I would encourage the City Council, Mayor, and School Committee to work together early and often to be in alignment on the communication of the override, what it will be used for, how it will achieve its goals, and how to ensure maximum transparency in the budgeting process so we can regain trust around asking our neighbors to dig a little deeper to support our shared resources.

Christine Fisher, School Committee Candidate, Ward 2: Yes. The cost of maintaining high-quality education continues to rise while funding lags behind. Before an override, the district must rebuild trust with the community by showing accountability, sharing a clear long-term plan, and demonstrating responsible resource management. Right now, many in the community feel disconnected from our schools. We need more regular communication about what’s working and what isn’t so the community understands the full picture. Only with this transparency and trust in place can we have an honest conversation about an override. Strong schools are critical to student success and to the health of our city.

Lisa Gordon, City Council Candidate, Ward 6 At-Large: The City has multiple opportunities to increase our revenues and ensure we maximize the efficiency of our expenditures. I strongly prefer that all of these options are exhausted before we consider an override.

Julie Irish, City Council Candidate, Ward 5: Yes. An operating override is one of the most significant financial tools available to the City, and I believe it should only be considered after all other options have been thoroughly explored. That means a careful review of departmental budgets, seeking efficiencies, attracting new revenue, and maximizing state and federal funding before asking residents to contribute more. If an override is proposed, it must be clearly justified by the Mayor, with transparent communication explaining exactly why it is needed and how the funds will be used. We also need to acknowledge the very real financial pressures on many residents, particularly older adults and families with lower incomes, and weigh that carefully when considering an override. If those steps are taken and the case is strong, then an override can be a responsible way to sustain our schools and critical city services.

Josh Krintzman, City Council Candidate, Ward 4 At-Large: No position. Once the city has exhausted all other options and demonstrated additional needs – then, yes, I would support an override. Out schools are facing a serious budget deficit over the next few years and we need to TRULY prioritize our schools by getting them the funding our children deserve.

Mark Laredo, Mayoral Candidate: Yes. We must have a strong case to make to the voters before even considering the possibility of an operating override. First, we need to ensure that we are providing municipal and school services in as efficient a manner as possible. Second, we must reach a point where additional high-value services can only be provided with additional funding and cannot be provided with existing resources. Third, we must be thoughtful and deliberate before we ask the voters to increase their taxes, and I will not do so lightly.

Victor Lee, School Committee Candidate, Ward 8: Yes. Newton needs to have a deeper conversation about: a) how much of a tax impact we can expect from an override; and b) exactly what the additional funds would go towards. Past efforts have come across as insufficiently explained on these dimensions. We also should not position an override as a binary yes/no decision, but in gradients. An override should be on the table, but should not be pursued without an open conversation with Newtonians first. We have to explain how, for example, even a 3.65% YoY budget increase for NPS did not come close to the thrive budget NPS should strive for – and the consequences for our schools. Additionally, we need to explore other budgetary steps first, or in conjunction: such as getting higher reimbursements for SpEd from the state and possibly decelerating the pension liability funding pay-off timetable that was previously accelerated.

Jenna Lauter Miara, School Committee Candidate, Ward 5: Yes. I support an operating override but it cannot be the first or only solution to NPS’s budget challenges. We need to continue to look for efficiencies within the district, explore all potential sources of additional funding, pursue grants and other partnerships, and make strategic investments with the dollars currently available. At the same time, we need to lay the groundwork for an effective override campaign so that we are set up for success if an override is needed. That means working collaboratively with all stakeholders, building trust with voters by demonstrating accountability and fiscal responsibility, and communicating clearly and often about the budget needs of the schools. In an override campaign, it will be crucial to have broad support from City Council, School Committee, and the unions, and to detail how new funds would be used to support a positive vision of NPS that benefits everyone in Newton because our city’s health is inextricably linked to our schools’ health.

Garry Miller, City Council Candidate, Ward 5: As noted above, an override will likely be necessary. However, I don’t want to commit until we see the proposals the new mayor brings to the table. In the meantime, I will work tirelessly to avoid one (as long as that does not mean cutting essential services), and if one is necessary, to make sure it is not just the first in a long line of overrides to come.

Jim Murphy, School Committee Candidate, Ward 8: Yes. I have two caveats: One, I can’t speak for other city expenses, so I won’t. I think NPS has been chronically underfunded and that gimmicks have papered-over the problem. Additionally, the way the budget is allocated can appear random. It causes low confidence in budget transparency, and I think that’s why the 2023 override failed, even as the debt exclusions for new school construction passed: With the exclusions, taxpayers knew what they were paying for. I followed this year’s process very closely, so I see the needs, but people being asked to write checks shouldn’t have to do that. So my second caveat is that we need a full accounting of what it costs to run our schools before we ask taxpayers to pony-up. If we do that, and if School Committee members refuse to take underfunding lying down, then I think taxpayers will listen. This year’s budget proposal was a good start. Give me more of it to work with, and I’d be willing to make the case to voters.

Arrianna Proia, School Committee Candidate, Ward 1: No. In my view, it is fiscally irresponsible at this time to call for a blanket override to address school funding needs. As a School Committee, we must first work with city partners, the Council and the next administration, to comprehensively review finances and ensure every possible lever is used to increase school funding before asking residents to approve an override. If, after exhausting all options, an override is still required, it is our responsibility to build trust and provide full transparency, clearly showing residents why it is needed and how funds will be used. The last override failed in part because of a lack of trust and clarity. If we are asking residents to dig deeper into their pockets, we must demonstrate accountability with measurable goals. Newton’s residents have diverse socioeconomic backgrounds, and an override may impact some more than others, making it vital that we prove we have acted responsibly before seeking additional taxpayer support.

Sean Roche, City Council Candidate, Ward 6 At-Large: Yes. I think the challenge for the upcoming mayor is how to quickly acknowledge the need for an override – if one exists – and build support for it. The longer we wait to have an override, if one is necessary, the larger the override will have to be and the more contentious it will be. The overwhelmingly likely incoming mayor and well over half of the City Council will have an understanding – in some cases deep understanding – of our fiscal situation. It should not require too long for the mayor to determine if an override is necessary. Delay will serve no one.

Ben Schlesinger, School Committee Candidate, Ward 5: Yes. An override should be the last option, but it may well be necessary. The cost of living in our city is high, and we owe it to our residents to exhaust all other options before asking them to pay higher taxes. We should explore adjusting the pension funding timeline, reducing free cash, lobbying for increased state funding, and generating new income from NPS, namely through grants and sponsorships, which are in the Superintendent’s strategic plan. Most of the people I speak to in the city government believe that even when all that work is done, we will face the choice of either passing an override or reducing school quality. If we get there, I will strongly support an override. As a community, we cherish our children and we know that education has been the path to prosperity for generations of Americans. We value great public education – I am a K-12 product of NPS. Our schools are core to who we are as a city, investing in them is how we express our values.

Linda Swain, School Committee Candidate, Ward 2: Yes. I believe there are additional levers we can pull before resorting to an override. These levers could include: Advocating the state for additional Chapter 70 funding; Advocating the state for additional special education dollars; Slowing the pace of paying off pension liabilities; Thinking creatively on the revenue side – including grants, fundraising, and even possible student enterprises. There may still be a need for an override in the future, but we should first explore other options. If an override later proves necessary, voters deserve a clear explanation of what it will fund and how it will affect their taxes.