Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents warn cuts tied to school referendum could shrink counseling and support positions
Summary
At a June 9 special meeting, residents pressed the Willington Board of Selectmen about the education budget: speakers said a $350,000 reduction from the Board of Education proposal and high-cost special‑education placements could force cuts to counseling and support staff, and one option under consideration would charge families for youth sports.
Residents raised alarm at a special Willington Board of Selectmen meeting on June 9 about cuts tied to the town’s education budget and the potential effects on classroom supports and student services.
Steph Summers said the Board of Education’s revised request is ‘‘a total of 350,000 reduced from the … BOE proposed budget’’ and attributed much of that gap to outplacement and high‑needs student costs, saying one placement ‘‘cost us to the tune of 200,000 each.’’ She warned those losses, together with rising health insurance costs, could force reductions ‘‘to positions … that augment the learning and the classroom teachers’’ including counseling and other supports.
The comments drew a mix of residents. A speaker identifying himself as Nick said the new proposed budget implies ‘‘the tax increase is about 4.68’’ and criticized what he called only a $50,000 reduction by the board of finance, urging Selectmen to consider sending the proposal back to the board of finance for deeper cuts rather than advancing it to town meeting. Dee Jones responded that an often‑cited ‘‘7:1’’ staff‑to‑student figure was misleading because it included paraprofessionals; Jones said classroom ratios are closer to ‘‘15 or so to one’’ and warned further cuts could push ratios ‘‘over 20’’ and jeopardize state‑mandated one‑to‑one paraprofessional coverage for some special‑needs students.
Emily Kennedy said she was ‘‘not opposed to an increase … especially if it’s going to the classroom teachers,’’ but called the current proposal ‘‘a little bit egregious’’ and asked for a more moderate increase.
Another resident noted the Board of Education is considering a ‘‘pay‑to‑play’’ approach that would charge families roughly $240 per sport per child; speakers said that fee could reduce participation and make it difficult for small districts to field teams.
The Board did not take policy action on these public comments during the special meeting; the discussion was recorded during the public comment portion of the agenda. The town’s next formal review of the education budget will occur at a called town meeting on June 16, when electors may consider the proposal.
