South Windsor Board of Education reviews FY27 budget as special education and health-care costs drive proposed 7.91% increase

The South Windsor Board of Education convened a special budget workshop on Feb. 3 to review the proposed FY2026–27 budget. Superintendent Dr. Carter walked members through the budget book section by section, telling the board that fixed contractual obligations and special education costs are the largest immediate drivers of the district’s proposed 7.91% increase.

Dr. Carter said the district is facing limited flexibility because three categories alone — contractual salaries, medical and dental insurance, and special education — “get you to a 7.07% increase” before other requests are added. She told the board the budget attempts to preserve current services rather than add many new programs: “the 791 essentially represents these are the bills that we have to pay if we want to keep what our current level of service.”

The administration explained several staffing choices the board pressed on. At the high school, four content‑area teacher requests were made to handle growing enrollment; the administration moved forward with funding one English teacher this cycle based on class sizes and course offerings while deferring the others. On special education, Dr. Carter highlighted the volatility of that account and linked the increase to mandated services and outplacements: “in this budget there’s $4 million alone just for our outplacements,” she said, and described special education as “extremely volatile. It is student dependent. It is not a choice.”

Board members asked about distinctions among proposed roles. Dr. Szo clarified that a BCBA (board‑certified behavior analyst) is a certified, specialized position intended for higher‑complexity behavioral needs, while behavior specialists are non‑certified, lower‑cost staff who support tier‑1 and tier‑2 interventions. The budget includes a BCBA for next year; several board members pressed for additional classroom and specialist staff but were told many requests were deferred to avoid a larger budget increase.

Members also pursued fiscal‑policy details. The administration confirmed it again forewent a pension payment (a step used last year) to reduce the FY27 ask and noted that this is not a sustainable annual strategy. On reserves and insurance Dr. Carter said the budget does not include funds to rebuild the district’s health‑care reserve: “The reserve is at 20.68. There is no funding in here to increase that.” The proposed FY27 plan does, however, rely on a modest planned use of reserves ($107,000) while carrying over other FY26 reliance that created a larger fiscal cliff.

Several trustees raised school‑level staffing concerns. Pleasant Valley Elementary, the district’s largest elementary, was highlighted repeatedly: trustees asked for clearer reporting on total staff counts (including POP/preschool and special‑program staffing) because the October snapshot understates the adult supervision and specialist support the building requires. Dr. Carter agreed administrators could add clearer school‑level staff totals and noted principals and central office would continue to work together to allocate partial approvals (for example, recess monitors) where needs are greatest.

Facilities and capital needs were another focus. Administration explained the capital projects list is a prioritized wish list submitted to the town’s capital committee; this year the district is seeking funding for auditorium audio/lighting projects and classroom modifications at the high school to create additional instructional space. The facilities presentation also noted solar generation currently offsets roughly $100,000 of the district’s electricity costs, and a prior PV energy credit that reduced operating costs is phasing out.

Looking ahead, Dr. Carter told the board that Thursday’s follow‑up workshop will be for deliberation and to give the administration directional consensus; the formal budget vote is scheduled for the board’s regular February meeting. She also provided incremental examples so trustees could see impacts of modest changes: an added $100,000 would move the proposed increase from 7.91% to roughly 8.01%.

The workshop closed with trustees asking for additional scenarios and clearer school‑level staffing and cost displays to support deliberation. The board adjourned after agreeing to reconvene for the second workshop night and further review before the public hearings and final vote.

Provenance: Topics introduced by Dr. Carter and board members during the Feb. 3 workshop (topic intro: SEG 033; topic finish: SEG 3161).