We Know The Education Solution, It Has Been Ignored By Governors For 13 years.

Commentary by Joe Sokolovic, vice chair of the Board of Education:

In 2013, the state of Connecticut took a significant step by pausing to study how education is funded. A task force composed of experts, educators, and policymakers was assembled to examine the education cost-sharing formula, with a particular focus on special education. They listened to families and school districts across the state to understand the challenges and needs.

The task force found that achieving equity in education requires the state to shoulder a greater share of the financial responsibility. Funding must be predictable, consistent, and aligned with actual needs. They warned that failure to act on these principles would force districts to struggle, not due to lack of commitment, but because they would be compelled to do more with less every year.

More than a decade later, the state has not acted on these findings. In Bridgeport, this issue is not theoretical but a daily reality. Children with special needs arrive at schools carrying challenges that require additional support, specialized instruction, and sometimes intensive services to access the education they deserve.

These children are not a burden; they are a moral and legal responsibility. Connecticut law guarantees every child a free and appropriate public education, without exception. Districts across the state honor this commitment by building programs, staffing classrooms, and providing necessary services.

However, this is being done without the level of state support promised.

The SEED grant is intended to distribute approximately $190 million statewide based on need. Currently, it is funded at only about $30 million, roughly 16% of the intended amount.

In Bridgeport, the expected funding is approximately $16.8 million.

Actual funding received is about $2.6 million.

This results in a loss of more than $14 million annually.

This shortfall means less support for students with disabilities, fewer resources for teachers and therapists, and increased financial strain on the district and taxpayers. This problem is widespread across Connecticut.

The excess cost grant is designed to reimburse districts for high-cost special education cases. However, the system requires districts to absorb a large portion of costs before state reimbursement begins.

For example, a student with significant needs costing $150,000 per year might receive only about $40,000 from the state, leaving the district to cover over $100,000. This is by design, with a very high threshold (4.5 times per pupil spending) before reimbursement starts, and even then, the state covers only part of the remaining costs.

When multiplied across many students, this places an overwhelming financial burden on districts like Bridgeport.

Behind every dollar discussed is a child who depends on the system. These children did not choose their challenges and deserve dignity, support, and opportunity. Districts have not shirked their responsibility; they have stretched resources to meet these needs.

However, the state must meet districts in this commitment by fully funding special education based on need.

The solutions are not new; they are grounded in the 2013 study and include:

Fully funding the seed grant:

Funding must match the level of need, not partial or symbolic amounts.

Removing unnecessary restrictions:

Trust districts to allocate resources effectively to support their students.

Reforming the excess cost system: Lower the reimbursement threshold from 4.5 times to a more realistic 3.5 or 3.0 times per pupil spending, especially for high-need districts.

Introducing a fixed dollar starting point: For example, state participation could begin at around $50,000 per student, with stronger support beyond $100,000.

Creating a tiered reimbursement approach: Higher-cost students would receive greater state participation, ensuring extreme cases are not primarily funded by local districts.

Moving toward a true partnership: Aim for a 50/50 minimum cost-sharing responsibility between the state and local districts for educating high-need students.

Aligning funding with mandates: If the state requires certain services, it must fully fund them consistently and predictably.

Connecticut has already built the framework to fund special education fairly. The question now is whether the state will honor its own findings, formulas, and, most importantly, its responsibility to children.

This is not just about budgets; it is about ensuring that no child is left behind simply because their needs are greater. The time to act is now, to fulfill the moral and legal mandate to provide every child with a free and appropriate public education.

Bridgeport and districts across Connecticut are ready to partner with the state to make this a reality.

https://suno.com/s/9UKMcOWMl2FRmvfz

Narrative a you tube summary generated by ai based on my submission to the majority of or the blue ribbon panel. Let’s hope the next Governors implement this study and tax the rich if need be.

Opinions are my own

The facts belong to everyone.