An Emotional BOF Meeting Explained

During an often tense and sometimes emotional Board of Finance (BOF) meeting, it took a teacher to change the tone in the room. On Monday, May 5, 2025, the BOF met at Staffordville School, and much of the agenda was taken up with Board of Education (BOE) business. Lately, the relationship between the two boards has been characterized by mistrust. All of this was wrapped up in a wide-ranging conversation about the schools’ current deficit, next year’s budget, and more. 

For some time, the BOE has been discussing conducting a forensic audit of its self-insurance fund. This suggests it thinks the funds in the account, run by the town, have been mishandled. That has led the BOF to suspect the schools may be hesitant to pay back $1.2 million the town says it infused into the school district’s self-insurance fund to ensure claims would be paid. The district has always maintained that when those transfers were made, it had money allocated for the fund and could have transferred its funds. However, it also seemed evident that the schools would eventually need the town to transfer some funds, which Superintendent Dr. Laura Norbut agreed with last night.  

More recently, the BOE has asked questions about the more than $180,000 set aside for a roof replacement at the Middle School, which it thinks should still be in its non-lapsing fund because the roof project came in under budget. It would like to use those funds to reduce its deficit, but the town says it may not be there. This is where things get confusing. The BOE says it must be there because the BOF suggested (and approved) using the non-lapsing fund to bring down the ‘24-’25 budget increase request. However, Stafford’s CFO, Yana Abramovich, says it was used for the roof project. Board Chair Steve Geryk is less sure and suggested that the school and town CFOs review the available information to figure out exactly where that money is or isn’t. *

Meanwhile, the BOF is upset that a grant to help cover the costs of the roof has not been applied for. According to Bill Hoff, who has been working as a contractor with the schools since last year, the district's last CFO applied for it. However, it was done wrong. Among other issues, the BOE had to vote to agree that the project was complete, which happened recently. That money would likely be more than $1 million and could go toward paying back the town the money it put toward the roof, though it doesn’t seem as if it will fully cover it. Hoff says the grant should be applied for before the end of the school year. 

Add to all of this, the recent decision by the BOE to use $490,000 of its ‘25-’26 budget formerly allocated to debt service for the solar panel project, to keep some of the positions identified to be cut after the first failed referendum. Predictably, that move did not go over well with the BOF, and though potential adjustments are on the May 7, 2025, BOE meeting agenda, the decision has not been officially reversed yet.

After hours of back and forth over these issues and more, it was clear that one side felt it still had unanswered questions while the other felt its answers simply were not being accepted.

And then the public was given the chance to speak.

Stafford Public Schools’ Director of Human Resources, Christine Marinelli, suggested the need to “work together in a respectful and kind manner.”

Geryk said, “The town wants us to work together,” but the threat of the forensic audit and the need to use attorneys over other matters had been difficult. “Either we trust each other or we don’t,” he said. 

It was teacher Donna Napolitano who really changed the tone of the meeting, though. She said she was speaking as a teacher and a citizen and felt “there’s a blame about the budget.” She called for more give and take, saying, “This was kind of ugly.”  

The tone took yet another turn when a woman, identified only as Felicia, talked about her experience volunteering in the schools which brought her to tears. She described teachers who helped children when they came to school in dirty clothes, combed their hair, and dealt with their emotional needs. She described elementary classrooms with 30 students and teachers who no longer have prep periods during which they can have lunch. She reiterated that there is nowhere left to cut, something we’ve heard many times throughout this budget season. 

So, where does this leave Stafford now? Here’s where some of the items on the agenda landed. 

The deficit

Interim Superintendent Dr. Laura Norbut told the BOF that the school district’s deficit was $85,730 but that the food service department, which stands separate from the school budget, was projected to be about $250,00. The total deficit as of Monday was $335,730. 

Dr. Norbut put forth three options for dealing with this. One involved those potentially non-existent roof funds. Another would use funds currently allocated for the controversial self-insurance fund. The cash position of this fund is currently over $1 million, but the goal is about $1.4 million, and a deficit is projected. Because of the budget freeze and the district’s inability to hire for open positions or replace staff who leave, Dr. Norbut says the district estimates it will need less than the $600,000 remaining in the benefits line to cover insurance costs for the rest of the year. Rather than put all of this toward the self-insurance fund, they could use it to pay down the deficit. The final option is to ask the BOF for a supplemental appropriation. 

There was some disagreement about how to proceed with this. BOF Chair Steve Geryk said that by state statute, the district cannot add a new line item to its budget. Dr. Norbut said the state had told the schools they would need to take on this deficit. After plenty of back and forth over this, it became clear that no one was sure the best way to address the food service deficit. Ultimately, the board voted to table the issue as there were still too many unknowns. Between trying to track down the roof funds and any potential further reductions in the outstanding deficit, the BOF postponed making a decision. 

The ‘25 - ‘26 budget

When the discussion finally came around to next year’s budget and the next referendum, Geryk said that First Selectman Bill Morrison has suggested flat-funding the budget. That would mean the town and schools do not get any increase in their budgets, but it wouldn’t mean that the mill rate won’t go up.

While the grand list has increased, there has been a decrease in revenue due to a property tax exemption for disabled veterans and changes to the way motor vehicle taxes are calculated which is hitting towns hard. This means that a .12 mill rate increase is necessary even if the budgets stay flat. Abramovich said that for the most expensive house in town, that would mean an increase of $39 per year.

While the board took no action on this, they mostly agreed that the voters had spoken and would not accept an increase. Dave Walsh, however, said that the BOF also had a responsibility to “make sure the budget is correctly funded.” He also pointed out that when a budget stays the same, it actually moves about 3% backward. 

The BOF will meet again on Thursday, May 8, 2025, after the BOE meets on May 7. 

*A clarification provided by CFO Yana Abramovich: "The funds were expended in accordance with the Town’s meeting approval, and audited financials support it. Mr. Geryk suggested that the Board of Finance might consider reappropriating the funds once the reimbursement for the roof project is received and the Town is fully reimbursed (due to the General Fund) and $300,000 Town match. If excess funds remain, the BOE Capital Fund might be reinstated."