Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears data showing Bridgeport’s special-education costs outpace per-pupil funding; staff warns of growing deficit
Summary
District staff presented multi-year analyses showing Bridgeport spends heavily on special education while receiving less per-pupil formula funding than some peers; projected multi-year deficits could reach tens of millions without structural changes.
District staff presented comparative spreadsheets showing Bridgeport’s special-education and per-pupil funding profile compared with New Haven and Waterbury, and warned the district faces a structural shortfall.
The presentation showed Bridgeport’s per-pupil spending at about $18,922 and cited special-education expenditures of roughly $96.6 million in 2024 with a projected $120 million for 2025. Staff said Bridgeport has a higher share of special-education and English-learner students and that those populations increase per-student costs.
Members discussed the state ECS funding formula and the Alliance supplemental grant. Several board members said state allocations favor some districts and leave Bridgeport reliant on supplemental Alliance dollars; staff acknowledged that Alliance funds have been used to backfill staffing when operating revenue fell short, but said the supplemental grants are intended for targeted classroom investments.
Staff presented a current-year gross deficit figure of about $23 million that, combined with projected expense increases and limited recurring revenue, could produce a starting deficit of roughly $37.6 million next fiscal year. The presentation included a breakdown of operational cuts used this year and the planned use of internal-service funds (insurance reserves) as a one-time offset; staff cautioned these are nonrecurring fixes.
Board members requested more detailed line-item backup for a $4.589 million attrition/operational-savings assumption and asked staff to return with more granular documentation. Several members discussed advocacy strategies to press the state for formula changes or supplemental, multiyear funding.
