Bridgeport officials warn of deep shortfall as board sends 2025–26 budget request to city

The Bridgeport Board of Education on March 10 voted to submit its 2025–26 budget request to the city, asking for $25 million while finance committee leaders warned the district still faces a structural shortfall that could top tens of millions of dollars next year.

Board members and district staff said the district has closed some of the gap for the current fiscal year using one‑time reserves and other savings but must still address an estimated remaining shortfall for 2025–26. Finance Committee chair Mr. Sikalovic told the board the committee expects to confront “an anticipated budget gap of $23,000,000 give or take a few million dollars” once final state numbers arrive.

The request the board approved is a necessary step to meet the city’s calendar: it authorizes the superintendent to submit the proposed total operating request for the 2025–26 school year. The board’s action does not finalize cuts; it establishes the amount the district will ask the City of Bridgeport to fund while staff and committees continue work to close remaining gaps.

District and committee leaders described how a mix of factors widened the budget pressure: increases in special education tuition and out‑of‑district placements, higher health‑insurance and retirement costs, rising utilities and transportation expenses, and wage step increases across multiple bargaining units. Interim Superintendent Dr. Avery provided additional context, reporting enrollment of 19,722 students, including roughly 3,900 students receiving special‑education services and about 6,200 English‑language learners. “About 50 percent of those 19,722 students are both combined, special education and English language learners,” Avery said, noting those student needs materially affect costs and service delivery.

The board’s finance presentation broke the problem into three parts: (1) measures already approved that rely in part on one‑time reserves, (2) additional proposed cuts or program changes that would require board approval, and (3) contingent options that depend on state or city action (for example, the special‑education supplemental dollars currently under discussion in Hartford). The administration told the board it has identified validated savings of roughly $26 million, including internal service‑fund draws and negotiated reductions, but that a substantial gap would remain unless the city and state provide additional support.

Board members pressed for more detail on specific line items and sought external assistance. Several commissioners asked the state technical assistance team — which is already meeting with district staff — to brief the board on budget‑closing options and strategies. Dr. Avery said she had scheduled a follow‑up with the state’s lead technical assistance representative and would request the team attend a future finance committee meeting to advise the board.

The board approved the request to the city after debate and a motion by Mr. Traver, seconded by Mr. Benahan. The vote followed committee reports that the district will continue to pursue personnel attrition savings, contract efficiencies and other reductions, but finance staff cautioned that larger structural changes may be necessary if additional state or city revenue is not secured.

Votes at a glance

- Motion to approve the 2025–26 school year budget request to the City of Bridgeport (motion: move to approve the 25–26 school year budget request). Moved: Mr. Traver; Second: Mr. Benahan. Outcome: approved by the board. (Recording: board discussion and vote occurred in open session.)

Why it matters

Board members and the administration emphasized the request is an interim step — required to meet municipal deadlines — and does not by itself close the projected shortfall. If the state and city do not provide additional funds, district leaders said they will return with more specific personnel and program reductions for board consideration. Several members urged a parallel advocacy push with the mayor and the local legislative delegation to seek more state funds and higher reimbursement for special education costs.

Looking ahead

The finance committee scheduled follow‑ups and additional meetings to refine cuts and to present more detailed scenarios for how the remaining gap could be closed. Dr. Avery said the technical assistance team from the state is in active consultation with district staff and that she would ask the team to brief the finance committee on options for closing the gap.