Superintendent’s budget asks for a 4.95% operating increase as special‑education costs bite

The Stamford School District presented a proposed operating budget of just over $347,000,000 for the next fiscal year — a 4.95% increase over the current operating budget — with administrators telling the board that higher special‑education costs, transportation and wages are the primary drivers.

Superintendent Dr. Lucero and Ryan, the district budget presenter, framed the request as a “status quo” budget with no new major programs and some net staffing reductions, but they said special‑education increases and health‑care premiums forced the larger‑than‑planned ask. Ryan said nearly $5 million of the district’s $16 million total requested increase is attributable to out‑of‑district special‑education tuition and associated services and transportation, and he said statutory excess‑cost reimbursements from the state are being funded well below the 85% statutory target, leaving Stamford’s reimbursement below about 60% this year — a local gap of roughly $3 million.

"The difference between the 85% statutory rate and the 59% actual rate is $3,000,000," Ryan said, calling it a material local burden unless state funding changes.

The presentation explained other adjustments in the request: a return to a 3‑hour summer‑school day with one fewer site, a net reduction of about 12 full‑time‑equivalent positions, and the decision to remove universal free breakfast and lunch (community eligibility) from the operating ask to avoid budgeting an estimated $1,000,000 annual shortfall in the lunch fund. Ryan said $250,000 remains in the budget for anticipated lunch debt, but the additional roughly $1,000,000 that would be required to continue universal free meals was omitted from the request.

Transportation costs were highlighted as another major pressure. Ryan reported transportation spending is expected to exceed $30,000,000 in fiscal 2026 (about 9% of operating spending) and said Stamford’s lack of a city‑owned bus depot constrains competitive bidding for services. He said district staff are working with the city to identify potential depot parcels but cautioned any long‑term savings are uncertain and would depend on attracting additional bidders and depot proximity.

Board members pressed staff for clarifications. Committee member Michael asked about the district’s health‑plan options; Ryan said the district isn’t mandated to stay in the state partnership plan and that consultants estimate leaving the plan would increase costs by $2–3 million. Versha asked how many students would be affected if community eligibility ends; Ryan said the administration prepared estimates using census income data and would circulate that analysis to committee members.

Administrators noted some grant funding (for example an Alliance Grant exceeding $13 million next year) supports positions now but lacks automatic increases beyond next year, creating a projected starting deficit of about $0.5 million on expiration. The district also signaled it will continue to press the state delegation for better excess‑cost funding.

Next steps and schedule: the board will hold a budget workshop on Feb. 4 to review staffing by school, a public hearing is scheduled for Feb. 6, and the full board is expected to vote on the budget on Feb. 18 before submission to the mayor and city budget bodies.

The finance committee moved to place the superintendent’s request and related contracts/grants on the consent agenda for the upcoming board meeting; formal final approval will occur at the full‑board vote in February.