[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",5979179,"mediaKeyId","5798643-7a950a959c073b7b9596f21435d5729a","parentId",5798643,"title","Council of the Great City Schools outlines services and dues as Bridgeport reviews membership use","audioSeconds",859,"startMs",2548000,"endMs",3407000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5798643-7a950a959c073b7b9596f21435d5729a&start=2548&end=3407","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5798643-7a950a959c073b7b9596f21435d5729a/thumbnail_2548000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/5979179/Connecticut/Council-of-the-Great-City-Schools-outlines-services-and-dues-as-Bridgeport-reviews-membership-use","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5979179-c8b7a64553cacf6490c6efb8c045155c/orig.mp4?Expires=1775687389&Signature=QxzDZy5BHmzOHUUPyY8Daw~AVJWfAJ62iBZrohE~59i6avvelMKYshuVE3g4bE0I7D6URrZ6YSIiQv~GiRwgs~jb2SZBCPK67QEJWj9lUtibXK5xvc0OYiWQMSN97J~eRiGSIJ5EUc~xWTubFF90EiCdgzRiByEE5RnplDD1fcjkOwL3nGjpfH25qhQnlaRTMfHQwwOlPt62gS9QpXs-hl2lZWmg5nUOCnfjl7~xS-lAz4xaTVJEshw0l-FyG~z9teuNBuBoxxCSxzIihR-pzxXXcRg2kMlpETW4Fh~LL9yXA~CG-~teckDE9WU99bw80neroRYHqz3o2kCcnwiJXg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Bridgeport School District","date","2025-09-18T11:44:27Z","article","Ray Hart, executive director of the Council of the Great City Schools, gave the finance committee an overview of membership benefits and advocacy services the council offers to large urban districts. Hart said the council advocates for districts’ federal funding, provides peer-to-peer technical assistance, conducts reviews (such as finance, IT and special education), and organizes role-alike meetings for district staff and leaders.

Hart told the committee that last fiscal year the council’s targeted federal advocacy efforts produced roughly $3.9 million in funding directed to the member district; he said the council works with Congress, the U.S. Department of Education and the Office of Management and Budget on members’ behalf. He also said the council runs district reviews and specialty supports on request, and that role-alike conferences and in-district reviews are part of member services.

When asked about cost, Hart said dues are tiered by district size and range in the council’s membership between roughly $32,000 and $60,000 per year; he said Bridgeport’s dues last year were $38,940 and that the amount increases annually using a modest cost-of-living adjustment (he cited an estimate of $39,991 for the current year). Hart added: “For every dollar in dues you pay, the direct services we’ve been able to provide in terms of focused funding for you is about $104.”

Committee discussion noted that Bridgeport did not pay dues in the most recent year but remains a member under the council’s bylaws; several board members said they had not previously understood the range of services the council provides. Hart confirmed Bridgeport is the council’s only member district in Connecticut and offered to meet with district leadership to discuss tailored supports; no vote or spending decision was taken during the meeting.

Board members expressed interest in exploring how the council’s advocacy and technical assistance might be leveraged given the district’s budget pressures. Hart said the council could advocate at state and local levels on request and that its research team and network of peers can support local data-driven advocacy. Staff and board members agreed to further conversations about possible reengagement and practical supports short of full formal commitments during the current fiscal stress.

No formal action was taken; the presentation was informational and committee members asked staff to continue discussions about how the district might use council services going forward.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Virtual Meeting of the Finance Committee Wed 9/17/2025 6:00 PM","oneSentenceSummary","Ray Hart of the Council of the Great City Schools described advocacy, technical assistance and peer networks the council provides; Bridgeport’s dues were about $38,940 last year and staff discussed reengaging with council services while noting there was no action item.","taxTitle","Bridgeport School District, School Districts, Connecticut","taxId",12999,"location","Connecticut","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},5979184,"CFO warns of tighter budget, potential $24M–$30M gap and transportation funding uncertainty",1494,544000,2038000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5798643-7a950a959c073b7b9596f21435d5729a&start=544&end=2038","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5798643-7a950a959c073b7b9596f21435d5729a/thumbnail_544000.jpg","/articles/5979184/Connecticut/CFO-warns-of-tighter-budget-potential-24M30M-gap-and-transportation-funding-uncertainty","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5979184-ac680d0ae804bcb95427311d556ff521/orig.mp4?Expires=1775687389&Signature=Ymg1Dgrn3RGSrIJ3JyYdLkvKmz-AwfgLfFiGxbTvGHlzXIcfls2TYSQQth92vH2gMBD0cGXMoTDk0WTY0my8MPrWmA~InhiioFgqcTNB2j2zMh6J5jBaWMMzENsVaIytIuQ1I0XHPHHTKGcQljyoGlmIVMxp--Mp3Y7qZwKp0RC5L3~WfjMZZTcrmyBUwbFz9SPMo2vk3Ty93DRCAr-wRnSrIlAC4lRpZxjKgJNTLdZRwXM8xMpcLv39TIH7YVpHBh0MxAgvnHmO9LJugpyrOAP~CJ8uyEssNvqX~z5RItHsvWCMibsLYG3ZAucx4gEnLKJQlnMeO2ZKG6~DROzTGQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Bridgeport Board of Education chief financial officer told the finance committee that the district faces significant fiscal pressure for the coming year because previously budgeted attrition savings and one-time funds will not recur.

The update, presented at a virtual committee meeting, drew questions about staffing, special-education funding, and a state-negotiated transportation arrangement that staff said is being subsidized by one-time legislative funding.

Esther, the district’s chief financial officer, said the adopted budget included approximately $6.5 million in anticipated attrition savings — the result of regular attrition plus an assumed elimination of 20 teacher positions — but that many positions, including special-education posts, have since been filled. “The budget is tight,” Esther said, adding that the attrition savings “will not be there because most of the positions have been filled.”

Esther told the committee the district used $22 million of its internal-service fund balance last fiscal year rather than $26 million that had initially been contemplated; however, she said the board also used roughly $9.5 million of the remaining internal-service fund to balance the current year’s budget. Taken together with automatic recurring cost increases — including a projected roughly 4 percent transportation cost increase, an 11 percent rise in state health insurance, and salary and step increases estimated at about $17.5 million — Esther said the district could face a $24 million to $30 million budget shortfall in the next fiscal year if no new revenues or savings are identified.

The CFO also highlighted federal grants as a risk. She said the district faces a potential reduction of about $3.8 million across Title I, II, III and Title IV funding next year, and cited a $920,000 portion tied to a lighthouse program that would affect pre-K services if cut.

On transportation, staff and the superintendent described negotiations between the state and the city that, according to district leaders, have produced an agreement to restore original mileage and relieve the district and students from longer walk distances. Superintendent Dr. Avery said the state and city “told us they would take care of the cost” to revert mileage and that the district has communicated restored mileage to families. Nestor (district staff) and Dr. Avery cautioned the committee that the $5 million the state allocated to Bridgeport for transportation is nonrecurring and administered by the state commissioner; the district is not guaranteed recurring state support and would have to identify funding for continuation beginning in the following biennium.

Board members asked for a preliminary audited close of last fiscal year and additional detail on where expansion or seed grants were applied. Esther said the ledger has undergone a “hard close” and that audited figures are produced on the timeline required by the controller’s office and external auditors; unaudited preliminary numbers will become available at the standard reporting milestone in October. Staff said a finalized report will be provided to the board following the controller’s entries and auditors’ review.

Committee members repeatedly pressed for clarity about which positions were charged to which funding sources, whether special-education seed-development funds of about $2.6 million could be reallocated, and whether the restored transportation costs would reappear as a district expense in a future year. Staff responded that the $2.6 million seed-development grant was intended for development of new special-education programs and had already been applied in budget balancing through program redesign, and that the state legislature’s $5 million allocation for transportation is a one-time, nonrecurring amount that the district cannot rely on for future budgets.

No formal budget action was taken at the meeting; the presentation was informational and staff committed to supply more detailed, ledger-level reports and to follow up individually with board members as requested.","The district’s chief financial officer told the finance committee that earlier budgeted attrition savings are unlikely after hiring, federal Title grants face possible cuts of about $3.8 million, and one-time state transportation relief of $5 million is nonrecurring — creating a potential $24 million to $30 million funding gap for next year.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},5979189,"Finance committee refers selection of Shipton & Goodwin for district legal services to full board",103,209000,312000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5798643-7a950a959c073b7b9596f21435d5729a&start=209&end=312","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5798643-7a950a959c073b7b9596f21435d5729a/thumbnail_209000.jpg","/articles/5979189/Connecticut/Finance-committee-refers-selection-of-Shipton-Goodwin-for-district-legal-services-to-full-board","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5979189-32ae090b5f0908a45a788632e216eb66/orig.mp4?Expires=1775687389&Signature=RyQSjm4o3Jla14zzGLMiyPwcyVMLhVyiaDvHXRXY8rM3SHQurTaEcAMM5Vt3nyLk1n~R4bg-yNd5BfLP5KZRITbeNr1He0SRw1uuT-qjJfMgmT-Fwmk0QHLnBglZ97gRe74OwGa-cgM64UpECIwENF4lQUF9oKuLdbb1n20kOIOCe8KcEchSnwkQBsDBwFoz1UyEJaV1M6F8PZP9kNyGhFlY1fMNzM8qy7o0A4b~58~AMTRvNdWnHWfBpDUDC-kQGx6GTfz3PdAPfPT5usjS6Ii7lf7OO594ozuoha8KzNN7IdtwoREFVmfGP13kCh9Azmaj8jCUdRQ4KGSUGYhE6A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At a virtual meeting of the Bridgeport Board of Education finance committee, members voted to refer the committee’s recommended legal-services selection, Shipton & Goodwin, to the full board for contract negotiations. The recommendation follows a July request for proposals that drew three responses and an internal scoring and interview process.

The recommendation matters because the district must follow a two-step procurement path: the finance committee’s referral to the full board and a separate application to the Bridgeport Purchasing Board for approval as required by local ordinance. Staff said the purchasing-board review is a mandated step before the district may enter into contract negotiations with the selected firm.

Staff member Mr. Pierce, who presented the item, described the procurement steps and the committee’s evaluation. He said three firms responded to the RFP, that the evaluation committee scored and interviewed respondents, and that Shipton & Goodwin was the committee’s selected firm. Pierce told the committee the selected firm scored higher on nonprice criteria but had the highest price proposal; the firm’s proposal includes a section on alternative-fee arrangements that the district may negotiate (Pierce referenced “page 23” of the firm’s proposal).

Pierce said the next procedural steps are to file the purchasing-board application and then bring the matter to the full board to authorize contract negotiations. The committee then moved to refer the legal-services selection to the full board; members voted in favor with no objections or abstentions recorded.

This referral does not itself authorize a contract. The committee’s vote forwarded the recommended selection for the full board’s consideration and sign-off, and staff said the city purchasing-board approval is required before the district may finalize contract terms with the selected firm.

Committee members and staff signaled they expect to use the city attorney’s office where appropriate and to limit outside counsel to matters that justify outside expertise or capacity. Pierce and staff noted the vendor’s cost proposal can be negotiated under the firm’s alternative-fee proposal, and they advised the board to consider which matter types would be assigned to outside counsel.

No formal contract was approved at the meeting; the committee action was a referral for the full board and a note that staff will pursue the purchasing-board approval required by local ordinance. The full board will receive the committee recommendation and the purchasing-board response before any contract is executed.","The finance committee voted to refer the committee-selected law firm Shipton & Goodwin to the full Bridgeport Board of Education for contract negotiation after an RFP produced three responses; the process requires Bridgeport Purchasing Board review under local ordinance.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council of the Great City Schools outlines services and dues as Bridgeport reviews membership use

CFO warns of tighter budget, potential $24M–$30M gap and transportation funding uncertainty

Finance committee refers selection of Shipton & Goodwin for district legal services to full board