'This Is Not Going To Get Easy': Ridgefield Leaders Wrangle Over Budget Cut Demands

RIDGEFIELD, CT — The Ridgefield Board of Education on April 13 postponed a final vote on its fiscal year 2027 operating budget after hours of discussion over how to implement more than $1.5 million in reductions ordered by the Board of Finance, highlighting divisions over staffing cuts and program priorities.

The meeting, held at the district offices on East Ridge Road, centered on the impact of the Board of Finance’s March 31 decision to reduce the Board of Education’s adopted budget to $123.8 million — a decrease of $1,524,800.

Cuts newly-proposed by Superintendent Susie Da Silva included the elimination of a full-time teaching position in the Academically and Intellectually Gifted (AIG) program.

Budget vote delayed after lengthy debate

After extended discussion, the board voted unanimously to table the budget vote to a future meeting.

Related: Ridgefield Selectpersons Advance FY27 Budget, Set May Town Meeting

The delay reflects ongoing disagreement over how to absorb the reductions, particularly the extent to which staffing cuts — measured in full-time equivalent (FTE) positions — should be used.

Superintendent outlines reduction strategy

Da Silva said the administration developed its recommended reductions through a collaborative process involving central office staff, school leaders and program experts.

“All reductions… involve the central office team, our building leaders and our program leaders,” Da Silva said.

She said the district prioritized maintaining core academic programming, student supports and class sizes while seeking to minimize the impact on students.

“We looked at the least amount of student impact… though, as we know, those impacts cannot be fully avoided,” she said.

See Also: Are the current Ridgefield Fire and Police HQs "two museums that are held together by rubber bands, staples and bubble gum"?

Da Silva described the process as difficult and constrained by the size of the required cuts.

“The process feels a little bit like Sophie’s Choice… shaving a bit here and shaving a bit there is not going to get you to nearly $1.6 million,” she said.

She emphasized that the reductions do not reflect a shift in the district’s educational priorities.

“These decisions reflect fiscal restraints, not necessarily a change in our educational values or priorities,” she said.

Board members question reliance on staffing cuts

Several board members raised concerns about the proportion of savings coming from FTE reductions.

BoE member Jon Paradiso said more than $681,000 of the cuts — nearly half of the total — would come from staffing reductions.

“That’s far too high a percentage… and we need to find other places to do it,” Paradiso said.

Related: Ridgefield BOE Budget Committee Reviews Reporting Changes, Flags Special Ed Cost Increases

Paradiso specifically questioned the proposed elimination of an Academically and Intellectually Gifted (AIG) teaching position while related consulting services appeared to remain in the budget.

"If we have to make a choice between keeping our AIG teacher and not having our AIG consultant, obviously we have to let the consultant go," Paradiso said. "I don't understand why I'm not seeing that (in the proposed cuts)."

Citing the programs of "reference group peers" Darien, New Canaan, Westport and Wilton, BoE member Kathryn Graf said, "Ridgefield cannot claim to be a top district, while taking away these AIG services. This position impacts far more than the handful of students that are currently identified as an AIG student.

Da Sillva responded that personnel costs dominate the budget, limiting alternatives.

“When you have 78 percent of your budget that’s built on FTE… at some point… it’s there,” Da Silva said, referring to salaries and benefits.

She noted that achieving the required reductions required “structural decisions,” rather than incremental adjustments.

"I will not support the reduction of a teacher, the AIG position, anything that touches the classroom," Board Secretary Chrstine More said.

Public comment urges support for original budget

During public comment, two of the district's principals made their pitch for as little fiscal bloodletting as possible.

Tim Salem, head of Scotts Ridge Middle School, said, "The culture of support is why talented educators choose Ridgefield, despite perhaps lower pay compared to some neighboring districts." But he warned that "the current tenor and tone of recent budget discussions may impact our status as a district of choice."

Branchville Elementary Principal Keith Margolis warned the packed room that Ridgefield schools, routinely ranked among the best in the state, might be one bad budget away from mediocrity.

"We fear, if the board is not careful, we will not only cut core positions, but also undermine the structures, and we will no longer be a district of choice. Our strongest attribute, our culture, will be impacted, and we will no longer strive to be great. We will settle for good," Margolis said.

Some board members argued that the heartache over the cuts could have been prevented had they heeded advice given at the tri-board meeting in November.

"I would like to remind us: We are in this situation because we did not follow recommendations put forth by our town," BoE member Rachel Marino said. "We are here making these hard decisions, doing this because we were tasked with a job and an opportunity back then to do something we should have been doing all along."

Other agenda items advance

While the budget dominated discussion, the board addressed several other items on its agenda, which included a vote on a new U.S. history textbook, policy updates and a financial report.

The board also conducted a first reading of multiple policy changes tied to Connecticut Public Act 25-1, including updates related to school security and interactions with federal immigration authorities.

One policy update would remove language governing board member visits to schools from an existing policy and relocate it to board bylaws. Another would establish a new policy on school security and safety to replace an older version.

“These policies… reflect our current practices… so there should be no operational changes,” Paradiso said.

Next steps

The board is expected to revisit the budget at a future meeting after additional review and potential revisions to the proposed reductions.

Officials said the administration’s recommendations aim to balance fiscal constraints with maintaining educational quality, but acknowledged that further adjustments may be needed as discussions continue.

"This is not going to get easy," Chair Tina Malhotra warned the board.

The board’s final budget decision will determine the education spending proposal that goes before voters at the referendum scheduled for May 12.