Boards Discuss Ramifications of BOE Decision Before Budget Vote

It was only a matter of time until the Board of Selectmen (BOS) and Board of Finance (BOF) responded to the Board of Education’s (BOE) vote to use $400,000 allocated for debt service – a portion of its typical $490,000 contribution to the town’s payments for the solar project – to keep positions that would have otherwise been eliminated from the budget. Frankly, those positions may still be lost. What the BOE did not discuss during its meeting was the potential ramifications of its decision to essentially go back on a decade long agreement to pay its share for the energy project. On Monday, April 28, 2025, it became a bit clearer what those ramifications would be as the BOS and BOF held a joint meeting to talk about next steps.

Whether the BOE contributes its share or not, the solar payments need to be made. By voting to use the funds elsewhere, the BOE effectively shifted the burden entirely to the town, which left the BOS with one main question of its own: Where do we go from here?

Before we get into the nitty-gritty of the joint meeting, let’s spell out the possible options:

1. The budget passes and the BOE reconsiders its decision, makes the cuts it identified at the last meeting, and everything goes back to normal.

2. The budget passes, the BOE sticks to its plan and the town does not give solar credits to the schools and they instead have to pay utility bills that could exceed the $490,000 budgeted for the solar payments.

3. The budget does not pass and the BOF takes $490,000 out of the BOE budget and puts it directly in the town’s budget to pay for the solar program and ends up making more cuts to the budget on both sides.

4. The budget does not pass, the BOF, BOS, and BOE get a signed agreement to govern this process going forward and more cuts are made.

While no official action was taken, statements made during the BOE meeting that took place later in the evening make it seem unlikely that all the board members that previously voted to use the debt service line to offset its budget would continue to do so. 

These issues are complicated, so I urge you to seek out the recordings and watch them for yourselves. You can find BOS and BOF recordings here, and the BOE meeting here. 

The BOS and BOF meeting

First Selectmen Bill Morrison said the budget detail associated with the April 29, 2025, budget referendum referenced the $490,000 coming from the BOE. In light of this, he wanted to get together to figure out how to proceed. In a statement, BOF Chair Steve Geryk said the BOE voted to approve cuts that “did not meet the spirit of budget adjustments as voted by the Board of Finance” and shifted costs to the BOS, ultimately not cutting the overall budget by the mandated amount.

Geryk also indicated that he thought the BOE should vote (at a meeting scheduled for later the same evening) to fully reinstate the $490,000, and to pay it to the town within the first 30 days of the fiscal year. He said that at the last BOE meeting, the board discussed whether or not it could have used this same line item to reduce its current deficit if it had not already paid the funds to the town. In other words, he’s worried that even if the BOE reinstates the debt service line item, the town may never receive it if it’s not transferred promptly.

But the real question at hand was whether the town could proceed with the April 29 referendum, and what the options were if the budget passes or if it fails. 

If the budget were to pass, Geryk said the town’s main recourse would be to not allow the solar credits to go to the BOE. This would mean the BOE could keep the $490,000 but would have to increase the electricity line item. According to a document provided to me by Stafford’s Director of Finance, Yana Abramovich, the BOE’s electricity line item in 2013-2014 when the solar project was planned, was more than $518,000 so it’s not hard to imagine that paying for electricity at today’s rates could cost more than $490,000. The town could use some of the credits to pay more of its electric bills and potentially sell unused credits, though that would likely not cover the full $490,000. An unsigned Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is at the heart of this entire issue. The BOE used this as a way to say it did not have to pay the money while Geryk said it would have protected the BOE, ensuring it was a recipient of the solar credits. 

Ultimately, BOE Chair Sara Kelley said the board would not be voting on this matter at it’s meeting because it was a special meeting and nothing could be added to the agenda. Soon thereafter, she left along with other members of the board to go to the 6:30 p.m. BOE meeting. 

The discussion among the BOF and BOS went on for quite some time. The BOF’s possible recourse (the options listed above) and what this all meant for the referendum were key among the questions to be answered. Selectman John Whetton said that money had already been spent on the referendum and that it would have to move forward but that voters have to go into the polls understanding that “we don’t know where we’re going to find this money.” 

Selectman Rick Hartenstein expressed concern saying, “I don’t know if it’s fair to the taxpayers not to know where that $400,000 is coming from.” 

“The services that we’re offering with this current budget could change, “ he added later. Throughout the meeting, BOF member Dave Walsh said he thought that with a few more days, and a few more meetings, the issue could be worked out. He added, “I still think that if you want to get to ‘yes’ we may have to treat each other differently.” 

Ultimately, the boards took no action. This means the referendum will proceed and depending on the outcome, action will be taken at the BOF meeting scheduled for 8:45 p.m. at Town Hall on April 29. 

The BOE meeting  

The joint BOS/BOF meeting began at 6 p.m. 

At 6:30 p.m., the BOE meeting began across town. 

Chair Kelley read a statement saying, “some misinformation has unfortunately been circulating” and then recounted the events of the last meeting, and the communications between the BOE and Abramovich. She described receiving an “ultimatum” for the BOE to make a decision by the end of day last Thursday, and said the board would not make any decisions outside of a public meeting. 

Kelley also said that board has not contributed $490,000 every year to the solar payments, which was brought up at the joint BOS/BOF meeting. Geryk described the BOE asking past finance directors if they could send less than initially budgeted when they overspent in other items. The unsigned MOU actually called for the BOE to increase its utility budget by 1%-3% each year and that whatever was left over at the end of the year would be returned to the town to go toward solar payments. That has not happened, and the line item has decreased instead (likely as a result of failed referendums and budget cuts). The town estimates that the utility fund would be $2.5 million better off if the BOE had followed the procedure outlined in the unsigned MOU. 

Kelley went on to say that Geryk indicated all further cuts to the budget would come from the schools. “Our district serves more than 1,200 children every day, making it the most visible and impactful resource in our town,” she said. "Though they are not taxpayers, the children of our community are our most valuable asset. They are not bargaining tools and the Board of Education will continue to advocate fiercely on their behalf.”

She went on to say, “As a school district and a town, we are actively addressing challenges that stem from decisions made by individuals who are no longer in these roles. It is time to move past assigning blame and instead focus on finding solutions and building a stronger future together. As a town we must act with collective responsibility ensuring that decisions are made in the best interest of the entire community.”

As Kelley attempted to move on to the first agenda item, BOE member Erica Bushior asked to make her own statement, which she said was on behalf of herself and BOE member Aaron Hoffman. She said they disagree with the statement made by Kelley and the decision made by the BOE “...has the potential to completely sever our relationship with the Board of Selectmen and Board of Finance. This relationship is vital to the functioning of our district and our town.” Bushior voted in favor of the change, and Hoffman was absent from the last meeting. 

Bushior continued, “While holding the town accountable and having appropriates checks and balances is essential to functioning government, the hasty decision last week does not reflect that transparency and collaboration that community trust is built upon. There has been no transparency or collaboration within the board regarding communications between town officials and the chairperson.” She said that communications sent to the First Selectman were not discussed with the board before being sent, nor were subsequent communications. 

“This continues a pattern of rogue actions by the board chair without full disclosure with the board as a whole,” Bushior said. According to her statement, the board was prepared to vote on budget cuts that had been previously shared, but did not know about the potential of using the debt service line to reduce the number of reductions. After digging through the minutes of past meetings, Bushior said she had come to understand the BOE’s history of payment to the town for the solar program, and though she kept referring to a $40,000 payment (it’s actually a total of $490,000), she said it could “not be walked away from.” She added, “This [$490,000] payment must be paid by the town regardless of what this board votes. Taxpayers are paying for it either way.”

Ultimately, Bushior said the town is well within its rights to provide an ultimatum, which she described as “reinstate the funds to the BOE budget or withdraw from the solar panel program without fully knowing the financial consequences to the budget moving forward.”

Kelley disputed some of Bushior's assertions. Still, no action was taken because, as Kelley said during the joint BOS/BOF meeting, new items cannot be added to a special meeting agenda.