The Deep Fractures in Framingham Government Are On Full Display in the Broken FY27 Budget Process

For 8 years, the City of Framingham annual budgets have been dominated by the #1 priority of the City Council: low taxes.

To provide context for the full appreciation of how bad this FY27 budget is, here is some background.

The First 4 Years As a City (2018-2021)

The first 4 years, when Yvonne Spicer was Mayor, saw City Council enforcement of a 0% tax levy increase policy which:

• Choked off city tax revenue increases, with a complete stall in 2021. After 4 years, the loss in city tax revenue, due to the 0% tax levy increase policy, reached over $24 million/year.
• Throttled back capital investment in roads, roofs, and the water & sewer system, leading to large increases in maintenance backlogs.
• Lowered local funding increases for the Framingham Public Schools to about $1.2 million/year, compared to $3.3 million/year in the last 5 years as a town (2013-2017)
• Triggered a city bond rating downgrade by Moody’s Ratings.

The primary City Council objective in those budgets was always a 0% tax levy increase, not improving the schools, city infrastructure, environmental action, senior services etc.

That was the City Council’s only goal and only plan.

The 4 years were a severe austerity cycle for the schools and city services.

The Second 4 Years As a City (2022-2025)

In the first Sisitsky term, city financial reserves ballooned by more than $50 million, and the Moody’s bond rating downgrade was reversed.

Most of this was achieved at the expense of the schools

The City Council successfully pressured the Mayor into cutting local funding for the schools, to the tune of about $18 million in total over 4 years.

Here is a chart showing local city dollars supporting the schools, with the cut years shown in red:

That money, drained from the schools, boosted cityside reserves, helped the city bond rating, and kept property tax increases low.

The basic tradeoff was to keep taxes low, and boost financial reserves, at the expense of students.

This City Council goal was achieved by taking advantage of the large inflow of money from the state Student Opportunity Act (SOA) which was designed to boost the prospects of low-income, special needs and non-English speaking immigrant children.

As that SOA money flowed in, local funding of education was cut, and SOA money filled that gap, so nothing much of an educational boost ever reached the students.

The 4 years were a time when substantial state aide for the schools was hijacked, with City Council approval.

The Current FY27 Budget

This budget cycle began with the City Council, voting 11-0, for the Mayor to plan for a 3.5% levy increase, well before the Mayor’s budget submission.

The City Council financial leadership had done the math, and they knew this was going to be a tough year, with the tax revenue stream damaged by the 2018-2021 austerity cycle, the SOA no longer a source for illegitimate cityside financial relief, and union agreements coming due, with 3.5% cost of living increase, as a modest response to high post pandemic inflation.

The only goal and plan of the City Council remained 'low taxes', even in the face of all of this prior history.

When the City Council signaled to the Mayor that it would only support a 3.5% tax levy increase, it had absolutely no idea what that meant for the schools, and all the cityside services. That could only come from a full, detailed budget review.

The City Council put down a tax marker well before any budget creation was complete.

Then the Mayor submitted his budget which had a tax increase of 4.5%, and included a cut of $2 million to the schools budget approved by the School Committee on March 4, 2026.

The City Council leaders knew that if they accepted the Mayor’s submission, the $2 million cut to the schools budget would be set in stone, as the City Council cannot cut that schools budget item.

King and his cohorts wanted bigger cuts to the schools, so they rejected the budget out of hand, and forced the Mayor down from his 4.5% tax increase to a 3.5% increase, by making some cuts on the city side, but by also hitting the schools much harder, with a $4 million cut.

The implications of that were explained in a recent article:

In a Forced Play the School Committee Sacrifices Two Crown Jewels of the Framingham Public Schools

Viewed in context, this was the 3^rd hammer blow to the schools, with the prior two being:

• 2018-2021: Lowered local funding increases for the Framingham Public Schools to $1.2 million/year, compared to $3.3 million/year in the last 5 years as a town.

• 2022-2025: Diverted of most of the Student Opportunity Act money away from low-income, special needs and non-English speaking immigrant children.

So, the FY27 budget, which is due to be approved by the full City Council on June 16, 2026, is a disaster for the schools.

But, just as this is the 3^rd hammer blow to the schools, so is this the 9^th year of a really bad budget process which the City Council controls.

This really gets to the root of all the problems facing Framingham government and the community.

The Full Picture of the Broken City Council Budget Process

In each of the 3 budgeting periods described above, the City Council budget process has been totally controlled by the five member City Council Finance Subcommittee, so that six City Councilors, a majority, have always been totally excluded from the budget review process, including all of the meetings with departments and with the schools administration and School Committee.

Six City Councilors never got to voice their opinion, or ask a question in any budget review meetings, until the final one where the Finance Subcommittee brings the final budget package back to the City Council for its stamp of approval.

Six City Councilors have had no role in city government for weeks as the muscular Finance Subcommittee stacked with 'old guard' politicians decided everything, based on low taxes, no planning, disconnection from community values, and a flagrant disregard for the city charter.

As noted earlier, the whole process was a sham, as well ahead of the 'budget review', the entire City Council voted 11-0 to set the property tax increase to 3.5%, in a classic example of ready, shoot, aim.

And the schools are not the only problem.

Using the budget process as cover, the administration, with the full support of the Finance Subcommittee ‘old guard', carried out a departmental reorganization, without the required charter review. The Director of Senior Services was summarily fired, as was the Director of Parks & Recreation.

The Director of Library Services is now running the Callahan Center, with zero credentials or experience in the management of senior services.

Further, the Library Trustees and the Council on Aging were completely left out of the decision loop. These bodies are primary advisors for the government and for them not to be consulted is an outrage.

One cannot imagine worse behavior by a local government.

Finally, the new charter change mandating the creation of a Chief Climate & Sustainability Officer was TOTALLY IGNORED.

The Charter Review Committee carefully reviewed this possible new position, advocated by Energize Framingham, and became enthusiasts after initial skepticism. The position was approved, along with many other charter changes, by the City Council and then by the community.

It is the law of the land in Framingham.

Yet, the Mayor and the City Council Finance Subcommittee simply disregarded the new city charter directive.

This is lawless local government at its worst.

This territory was also covered by:

Will the Framingham Community Fight Deep Cuts to the Schools and the Disruption of Senior Services

Finally, it is notable that virtually all of the public comments, both in the set of budget review meetings and at the budget public hearings have been ignored by the ‘old guard’ on the Finance Subcommittee.

Low taxes are the only true priority of George King and his inner circle of Cannon, Stefanini, Ottaviani & Leombruno, and their enforcement of this, has buttressed 8 years of no planning, 8 years of city revenue erosion, 8 years of undermining the schools, 8 years of minimal environmental actions, and 8 years of infrastructure neglect.

We have a deeply entrenched culture of elected official opposition to improvement and elected official disconnection from the sound values of the Framingham community.

What Happens Next?

Will the Framingham community turn up on Tuesday, June 16^th at 7pm at City Hall to let the full City Council know what they think?

The agenda is here.

Notice that the City Council Chair, George King, has packed the agenda with a ton of other stuff, so that there will be as little time as possible for full City Council discussion of the budget.

This is intentional, and a central feature of the City Council leadership’s disconnection from the community

If we had a functional City Council, the entire meeting would have been devoted to the $400 million FY27 budget.

Will the full City Council simply rubber stamp this travesty of a budget and embrace:

• Real damage to the public school system

• Disruption of a soundly run senior services operation

• Violations of the charter on organizational changes and climate action

• ‘Old guard’ control of the way the entire city operates, with the real power centered in the Finance Subcommittee

Or will the City Council rebel and block all of this with simple actions, like:

• Adding $2 million back to the schools budget and forcing the tax levy increase back to 4.5%

• Or, achieving much the same by demanding options on moving the pension liability payoff date out to 2035 or 2040

• Or, demanding that Randy Ayslworth be reinstated as Director of Senior Services

• Or, demanding that the Mayor and the City Council obey the city charter by creating and funding the Chief Climate & Sustainability Officer.

The community needs to see the majority of the City Council fight much harder to make sure the city turns a page on this plethora of bad practices.

Major community values have been ignored and that cannot stand.

Every City Councilor should feel, correctly, that everything they say and do in the Tuesday meeting will go on record, and will be accounted for in full measure at the next city election.