Lexington resident Jeanne DeSanto is calling for greater public scrutiny of Superintendent Julie Hackett’s six-year contract, questioning its length, compensation and the process leading to its approval.

In a letter published Oct. 13 by The Lexington Observer, DeSanto described the agreement as “extraordinarily rich in terms of dollars and duration” and argued that it warranted broader community discussion.

“For something this out of step with other districts, I would have expected more discussion, more transparency, and more community input before it was finalized,” she wrote.

DeSanto acknowledged that a six-year agreement is legally permissible. Massachusetts law allows school committees to award superintendent contracts lasting up to six years under Chapter 71, Section 41.

Her letter did not provide compensation figures or comparisons with other districts. Its descriptions of the contract’s generosity and the town’s financial liability represent her assessment.

The criticism follows a difficult budget season for Lexington Public Schools. In March, the district announced plans to eliminate the equivalent of about 65 full-time positions and issue nonrenewal notices to 160 staff members, according to The Lexington Observer.

Those notices did not necessarily result in permanent departures. A May 29 follow-up reported that rehiring had reduced the net teacher loss to 11, citing Hackett. The district continued working to place affected employees.

Town Meeting also approved an additional $625,000 for schools in April, partly to preserve five one-year instructional positions, the Observer reported.

The town and district have disagreed over aspects of the schools’ financial outlook. In an April 24 memo, Town Manager Steve Bartha estimated the district’s FY2026 structural deficit at approximately $7 million and questioned the use of one-time funds for recurring expenses.

DeSanto framed her concerns around accountability as Lexington approaches another budget cycle.

“As we face difficult budget seasons ahead, it’s important that decisions of this magnitude be subject to thorough public engagement,” she wrote.

The School Committee’s Oct. 13 agenda included discussion and a possible vote on FY2028 budget guidelines and the budget calendar.