Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hartford Public Schools officials cite $22 million FY2026 deficit, point to special‑education costs and falling enrollment
Summary
Superintendent Dr. Townsend and CFO Caitlin Richard told a Hartford City joint committee a roughly $22 million FY2026 shortfall is driven by a 1,400‑student enrollment decline, higher special‑education tuition/outplacement costs and the unbudgeted addition of about 60 paraprofessionals; officials outlined short‑term freezes and state funding priorities.
Hartford Public Schools faces a roughly $22,000,000 budget shortfall in the current fiscal year, district leaders told a joint committee of City Council members and city finance officials during a virtual meeting.
"For the current fiscal year ... we are facing a deficit. It's about $22,000,000 total," said Caitlin Richard, chief financial officer for Hartford Public Schools, as she summarized drivers behind the gap.
The district singled out four main contributors: an enrollment decline of about 1,400 students from the prior year; a lower vacancy assumption because the district filled many teaching positions (vacancy rate down from roughly 13% to about 3%, the presentation said); the unbudgeted addition of about 60 special‑education paraeducators needed this school year; and rising tuition and transportation costs when Hartford must pay outside operators for students placed in non‑Hartford settings.
"We had about 60 paraprofessionals across the district," Superintendent Dr. Townsend said, noting the hires were to meet legally mandated individualized education plans.
CFO Richard broke down tuition and special‑education spending: last year the district’s total tuition budget was about $115,000,000; roughly $97,000,000 of that was for special‑education tuition and related placements. She told the committee that special‑education private placements average roughly $130,000 per student in the most intensive category and that state reimbursement arrangements — including the excess‑cost grant — do not fully cover increases.
Richard said the district receives full per‑pupil Education Cost Sharing (ECS) funding for students placed in non‑Hartford magnet schools or private placements, half of the ECS per pupil for Hartford students who enroll in open‑choice suburban districts, and no ECS funding for charter attendees. She told members Connecticut is one of two states without a separate special‑education weight in its school‑funding formula and that a seed grant recently funded at a fraction of its intended level provided only a small portion of the needed relief.
Committee members pressed staff on near‑term mitigation. Richard listed measures already taken this year: pausing flexible non‑salary general‑fund expenditures, conducting staffing reviews (to avoid filling vacant positions that are no longer justified by enrollment in particular classrooms), and prioritizing hires that are legally required for students.
"We have paused any flexible non‑salary dollars," she said, adding that the city and district are working together on next year’s budget and seeking state support for structural changes.
Council members pressed whether closing schools is a realistic savings lever. Richard said the district is commissioning a feasibility study and noted many Hartford schools are magnet schools subject to state agreements, limiting options. She told the committee that closing a single school often yields far less savings than the public expects — on the order of about $500,000 per school in many cases, according to prior consulting experience the district cited.
Looking forward, district leaders outlined three state‑level priorities they said would substantially improve the next year’s outlook if enacted: an adjustment of the ECS foundation amount, automatic inflation indexing to that foundation amount, and either a phase‑out or state set rates for general‑education tuition payments and better state support for specialized transportation tied to open‑choice placements. Richard told members that if all three priorities were implemented as the district requests, they estimate roughly $70,000,000 of additional funding for next year and that would move the district from a deficit toward a surplus in the FY2027 projection.
The presentation closed with members of the committee offering city support for state advocacy and with a pledge to continue collaborative conversations about the district’s multi‑year structural challenges.
Next steps: the district said it will include the latest figures and assumptions in the city‑level budget documents and pursue the feasibility study and additional state funding requests.
