Hartford Board of Education adopts FY2026 budget with $6.7 million of high‑risk cuts, asks city and state for additional funding

The Hartford Board of Education on Tuesday presented and voted to adopt a balanced fiscal year 2026 budget that includes $22 million in reductions and a remaining $6.7 million funding gap the board asked the city and state to fill.

Superintendent Dr. Leslie Torres Rodriguez told the City Council’s Operations, Management and Budget and Government Accountability Committee that the district began the process projecting "a $30,000,000 deficit" driven by rising special education tuition, door‑to‑door special education transportation and new collective‑bargaining costs. She said the board and district trimmed $15.3 million in an initial round of cuts and added $6.7 million of higher‑risk reductions, bringing total mitigation to $22 million before the board voted to balance the budget.

The board’s adopted proposal sets the FY2026 operating total at about $452.1 million and seeks an additional $6.7 million to raise that to roughly $458.8 million. The superintendent and district chief financial officer said they already included a pledged $3 million contribution from the City of Hartford and used a $5 million placeholder for possible state assistance when calculating remaining needs. The board’s formal action amended the proposed budget to reflect the reductions and the request for additional local and state funding.

Why it matters: Hartford Public Schools officials said the district faces a persistent structural deficit that local spending choices cannot fix alone. Special education costs—across tuition, transportation and the staffing needed to serve students—were repeatedly cited as the largest drivers of the deficit. The board urged continued legislative action at the state level to change funding formulas and provide targeted grants.

Key numbers and drivers

- Projected baseline deficit at the start of the FY2026 process: $30,000,000 (district projection).

- Reductions adopted by the board: $22,000,000 total (15.3 million in an initial round; an additional 6.7 million in higher‑risk cuts that the board approved to balance the budget).

- City contribution already identified in the budget: $3,000,000 (district said the city told them this amount would be provided).

- State placeholder included in the district’s calculations: $5,000,000 (described by district staff as a conservative placeholder tied to ongoing legislative proposals).

- Adopted FY2026 operating baseline: approximately $452,100,000; board request to reach restored level: approximately $458,800,000 (the $6.7 million request).

- Staffing reductions included in the adopted mitigation: 58 central‑office positions (a 16% reduction at central office) and about 56 school‑side positions; district staff described the combined changes as a substantial reduction in roles that support schools and district operations.

Major cost drivers cited by district leaders

- Special education tuition: the CFO and superintendent said tuition for outplacements and other specialized placements is rising sharply; the CFO characterized tuition increases as the largest portion of a projected $15 million jump in ‘‘tuition’’ costs.

- Special education transportation: the district said ‘‘door to door’’ special education rides average about $13,000 per student; the CFO described setting a target to better monitor and assign that service rather than removing required rides spelled out in students’ individualized education programs.

- Salaries from recently settled contracts: next‑year costs tied to five labor agreements add roughly $8.8 million to the budget (district also noted a $6 million cost next year for the teacher contract with larger multi‑year costs thereafter).

What was cut or set as high‑risk reductions

District staff described two columns of mitigations. Initial reductions (the lower‑risk tranche) included cuts to floating district security positions, reductions in non‑certified central‑office roles and phased elimination of a historic magnet supplement. The higher‑risk reductions the board approved to reach balance included: reductions to student support programs for high school students (student success and support centers, Hope Academy, Opportunity Academy), cuts to some career pathway contracts and ninth‑grade supports, scaling back general‑funded community partnerships, eliminating assistant principal positions at the district’s five smallest schools (those with under 250 students), reductions to instructional coaches, reductions to some building maintenance non‑personnel budgets, and elimination of the district‑funded dental clinic (the district said health clinics funded by grants or insurance reimbursements would remain). District staff described the dental clinic reduction as about $1,000,000 that had been paid for from the general fund.

Board action and next steps

Board chair Jennifer Hagenholm told the council the Board of Education ‘‘brought you a balanced budget, which did not come together lightly.’’ She said the board remains active in state advocacy and expects to continue pushing for legislative relief on special education funding.

The board’s action adopted the FY2026 proposal with the reductions described above and formally requested that the city and state fill the remaining $6.7 million gap so the high‑risk cuts can be restored. The district emphasized that several of the adopted reductions would be the first items restored if additional revenue materializes.

Legislative advocacy and funding options discussed

District leaders listed several state legislative avenues they are pursuing to mitigate structural shortfalls:

- A proposed House bill the district identified as HB 7277 that would provide a 50 percent weight (in grant form) for special education costs. District staff characterized that proposal as one of the largest potential fixes but uncertain in passage and final size.

- Increased funding or full funding of the state excess‑cost grant, which district staff said currently is underfunded at roughly 78 percent of its intended amount; fully funding it could yield a multi‑million dollar increase for Hartford, district staff said.

- The district also cited the Alliance Grant (state money used to phase in additional ECS funding) and other federal and philanthropic grants that have helped offset costs in prior years.

Council questions and context raised at the hearing

Council members asked about enrollment trends, consolidation, and legal or policy responses to Connecticut’s interdistrict choice framework. Highlights from the council Q&A included:

- Enrollment: Dr. Torres Rodriguez said enrollment continues to decline and that demographic trends (birth rates and population movement), along with school choice and magnet opportunities, are ongoing drivers.

- Small schools: district staff confirmed five schools have under 250 students; the board has begun revising a school‑closure/consolidation policy but had not identified specific schools to close before the June 30 fiscal deadline.

- Choice litigation: council members asked whether the district would pursue legal action related to the statewide choice system. Dr. Torres Rodriguez said Hartford Public Schools is not a named party in the relevant litigation and that the district had not pursued filing suit or seeking an injunction; she encouraged continued advocacy at the state level instead.

- High‑cost outplacements: Councilman Gayle noted the district has about 304 outplaced students whose placements can exceed $100,000 per year; he summarized the arithmetic to illustrate how concentrated special‑education costs affect the local budget. District staff said the state provides only a portion of those costs and that regulating private provider billing and improving state grants are part of the legislative agenda.

District history and risk

District officials emphasized that the fiscal challenges are long‑standing. The superintendent and CFO said the district has reduced roughly $200 million and about 645 positions over the last 11 years; central office staffing has fallen by roughly one‑third over that period. Leaders described the current set of cuts as high‑risk because they directly affect programs and supports for students with the highest needs.

What the board asked from the city and state

- City of Hartford: district staff said $3 million from the city has already been identified and was included in the adopted budget calculations.

- State of Connecticut: the district included a conservative $5 million placeholder in its calculations tied to ongoing legislative proposals (HB 7277, excess‑cost changes and other measures). The board asked the council to support continued advocacy in Hartford’s legislative delegation for additional state assistance.

Ending

Board and district leaders told the council they intend to continue both local mitigation and legislative advocacy through the end of the fiscal year. The adopted budget includes the reductions described above; several program restorations are contingent on the city or state providing additional funds or on the district finding alternative grant support.

(For details on positions, line‑item amounts and the board resolution referenced at the hearing, district staff indicated additional documentation and slides are available upon request and that a fact sheet on special education costs has been shared with legislators and local advocates.)