Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Finance votes 6–1 to cut Board of Education budget by $350,000; sends $39.55M plan to referendum
Summary
After public comment on preschool and senior services, the East Hampton Board of Finance voted 6–1 on July 20 to submit a $39,550,937 Board of Education budget to voters, accepting an additional $350,000 in cuts. The superintendent warned the Smart Start preschool could lose a competitive $97,000 grant if it is not run this year.
The East Hampton Board of Finance voted 6–1 on July 20 to set the fiscal‑year 2026–27 Board of Education budget at $39,550,937 for submission to voters at the next referendum, accepting an additional $350,000 in reductions.
Board member (speaker 21) moved the measure and speaker 5 seconded; after brief debate the chair announced the motion passed on the floor by a 6–1 vote. Opponents in the room said the cut was excessive; one member (speaker 1) said, “Too much. Too much.”
The vote followed a public‑comment period in which multiple parents and local service providers urged the board to preserve programs. Haley Guy (speaker 7) said a family letter informed her that her child and others accepted into the town’s Smart Start preschool had “lost their place because of budget reductions,” and pointed to a petition with nearly 400 signatures asking the town to preserve the program.
Superintendent (speaker 20) told the board that while the district receives a competitive state Smart Start grant of roughly $97,000, operating the program costs about $204,000 in salary and benefits; adding a sliding‑scale fee could bring in an estimated $45,000 but a gap would remain. “If in the event that we do not move forward with the program this year, we will lose the grant,” he said, noting that the funding is competitive and not guaranteed if the program is discontinued.
Board members debating the motion pointed to competing priorities and differing views on transparency and recurring costs. Committee member (speaker 2) argued restoring the funds would amount to roughly 0.22 mills — about $5.50 a month on the example house cited during the meeting — and said modest increases could be affordable for taxpayers. Others urged caution about adding recurring costs that might require future tax increases.
The motion directs the $39,550,937 figure to appear on the next referendum ballot; the board did not reverse the superintendent’s or BOE staff’s program decisions at the meeting. Next steps are submission to the town clerk for referendum scheduling and, if approved by voters, implementation according to the BOE’s operational timeline.
