Milford Board of Finance hears $115.3 million school budget; transportation and special education drive increase

Milford — Officials from Milford Public Schools presented a proposed education budget of $115,304,923 to the Milford Board of Finance, saying the plan represents a 4.87% increase over the current year and is intended as a “maintenance” budget rather than a package of new programs.

Dr. Patay, superintendent, told the board that "the proposed form of education budget before you is a total of $115,304,923, which, demonstrates a 4.87% increase," and described the plan as focused on sustaining current services and the district’s four instructional cornerstones.

The budget presentation and subsequent questioning identified three primary cost drivers: salaries and benefits, a renegotiated transportation contract, and increasing special-education expenses. District presenters said salaries and benefits make up roughly three-quarters of the budget — 76.58% — and that salary-and-benefit increases account for about 2.68 percentage points of the total 4.87% rise.

Transportation: contract renewal and route data

A new transportation contract is the single-largest discrete line-item increase called out by staff. District staff said the first-year cost for the renewed contract — covering both regular and special-education runs — is about $1,400,000. Staff explained the district’s prior agreement was negotiated in 2020 during the COVID period and described it as "artificially low," which contributed to a substantial increase on renewal.

On operational details, transportation staff said, "We have currently a hundred and 7 bus runs and 976 bus stops," and described multi-year efforts to audit and reduce stops and consolidate runs when safe and feasible. Board members asked for more granular data on ridership and route utilization; staff said 71 students had "opted in" to bus service last year when they lived within walking distance and that the district retains obligations for eligible students.

Special education and grants

Presenters flagged rising special-education tuition and contracted services as a statewide issue affecting Milford. They said entitlement grants have declined or failed to keep pace with costs; the district pointed to reduced reimbursement rates compared with roughly a decade ago and noted a state-level task force examining special-education funding. Staff said some special-education transportation and tuition obligations are outside local control and have contributed materially to the budget pressure.

Staffing, program shifts and efficiencies

The presentation listed a net decrease of about 6.5 FTEs in the proposed budget and multiple funding shifts where positions previously funded by grants would move to the operating budget if grant awards change. Dr. Patay said the district used a zero-based budgeting process and identified $645,000 in efficiencies and reductions. Board members pressed for detail on which positions are grant-funded versus locally funded; staff said some line items and the full FTE list are available in the executive summary and budget book.

Academy and alternative-education discussion

Board members questioned potential operational savings related to the district’s academy (an alternative/credit-recovery site). Staff said the academy’s square footage is about 13,243 and that enrollment can grow during the year; in one example staff noted a projection of 15 students that rose to about 49 during the year. Presenters cautioned that closing or reducing academy operations would not produce a direct, equivalent budgetary savings because students still require services and staff to deliver them.

Other cost categories

Presenters detailed rising costs in benefits (health, retiree, workers’ compensation), utilities, instructional materials and maintenance; they also described a lifecycle replacement schedule for security cameras and growing insurance costs tied to national trends. An efficiency slide and historical comparisons were used to show why some facility and grounds projects were paused or delayed in the proposed budget.

Follow-ups, transparency and risks

Board members requested additional breakdowns and documentation: a detailed transportation cost split (regular vs. special-education), route utilization and ridership statistics, the list of budgeted versus filled positions, and grant-eligibility timelines. Staff acknowledged federal and state grant entitlements remain fluid and said some funds are not confirmed until later in the fiscal cycle. On the prospect of federal funding cuts, staff called the scenario “extraordinary,” noting there is no established playbook for a complete loss of federal grant funds and that the district would need to pursue conversations with the city and other stakeholders.

No formal budget vote occurred during the session. The meeting recessed with a motion to reconvene on Thursday, March 6; the motion was seconded and the transcript does not record a roll-call tally or final outcome for that recess motion.

Ending: next steps

District staff said they will provide board members with requested supporting links and detailed breakdowns from the budget book and invited further questions during follow-up briefings. Several board members emphasized ongoing scrutiny of transportation options and special-education costs as staff refine the proposal ahead of future appropriation discussions.