Seymour residents press officials over 4.7% Board of Education budget request; officials cite contractual costs and grants

At a public hearing in Seymour that ran from 6:34 p.m. to 8:10 p.m., residents pressed town and education officials over a proposed 4.7% increase in the Board of Education budget, pressing for clearer breakdowns of where additional dollars would go and warning about the tax impact on seniors and other residents.

Chair Richard Demko opened the hearing and asked speakers to state their names and addresses for the record. "We will have about 2 to 2 and a half minute time limit," he said, and directed questions to department heads and board members.

Several residents asked for more accessible, plain-English budget summaries. "I feel like there could be extra transparency," said Josh Beaupre of Maple Street, asking for an online synopsis that explains whether increases will reach classrooms or town services. Laura Wilkins urged the district to seek long-term cost reductions and to consider modest activity fees for extracurriculars to help offset growing requests.

Board of Education members defended the request as student-focused. "Our board of ed budget centers around the students, and we have to pay the teachers because that's who teaches our students," a Board of Education representative said, and Kristen Bruno, identified as chair of the Board of Education, described multiple budget workshops and said the district had "moved forward" required items and found offsets for new programs. Bruno and other board members emphasized that roughly 79% of the school budget goes to salaries and benefits and that increases in health insurance and contractual wages drive much of the change.

Residents pressed for clarity on specific line items. Mike Grama asked what the technology line covers and whether funds are for students or primarily for teacher salaries; board members said the 53-page budget packet and backup detail (posted on the district website) contain line-item descriptions and invited residents to follow up by email or at meetings.

Officials also answered questions about other fiscal items. Assessor Kevin Morawski said the town’s removal of 100% veteran tax-exempt assessments totaled about $6.7 million in assessed value and estimated the revenue impact at the current mill rate to be about $187,000. Town finance staff said a $4,300 request for substance-abuse work will be paid from an opioid grant in a special revenue account and "won't impact the mill rate at all." Finance staff also clarified that a previously split clerk/inspector salary (reported at about $11,000) has been reclassified so the position is now 100% under the fire marshal's line, not a new hire.

Health insurance renewal drew detailed explanation. Town staff described the municipality's participation in the Connecticut Partnership health plan, noting a history of adverse loss ratios that made market quotes more expensive; staff said partnering across communities and a broker's annual market shopping produced a renewal close to 9.9%. "The broker goes out and actively shops the market," the staff member said, and the partnership has a multi-year commitment window.

Several residents framed the budget issue as a revenue problem rather than a pure spending problem. Andy, a newer Board of Finance member, said roughly $3 million of the town's annual increase is contractual (salaries and health care) and urged the community to support economic development and growth to broaden the tax base. "We have a revenue problem in this town," he said, adding that many increases are built into contracts and difficult to cut without affecting services.

The hearing recorded sharp exchanges over equity and priorities. Lori Pratt criticized the framing that government is "not a business," said some contract provisions need rethinking, and warned that steep budget increases would harm elderly residents and others on fixed incomes. Board members and finance officials responded that state mandates, contractual obligations and rising health-care costs limit options and stressed the role of the referendum: "We leave it up to the people as a whole, the voter electorate as a whole, to come out and say, okay," Chair Demko said.

No motions or votes took place at the hearing. Public comment was closed after repeated calls for final remarks, and the chair thanked attendees; the hearing concluded at 8:10 p.m.

The budget process will continue through further deliberations and a referendum; officials urged residents to use the posted budget documents and attend meetings for more detail.