Senator Doctor Jeff Gordon Works to Get Increased State Funding For Public Education

I am honored to represent the people of the 35th State Senate District: Ashford, Chapin, Coventry, Eastford, Ellington, Hampton, Stafford, Thompson, Tolland, Union, Vernon, Willington, and Woodstock.

Growing up, I benefited from public education in Worcester, MA. I strongly support public education. Before I was elected as a State Senator, I volunteered my time to support public education programs through the work I did as a Board member and then President of the Woodstock Education Foundation, as well as supporting Woodstock’s PTO and the Judy Nilan Foundation. As a State Senator, I have had the opportunity to broaden that support in other towns. Funding for K-12 public education is an important item I have continued to work on during my time in the State Senate.

Education is a foundational opportunity for kids to learn the knowledge and skills they need as they grow, enter the workforce, raise families, and are members of their communities. I sincerely appreciate the teachers, administrators, staff, parents, and town leaders who continue to do what they can to support public education.

One of the reasons I ran for state office after serving fifteen years as Chairman of Woodstock’s Planning & Zoning Commission is to further help public education. I have stated publicly for many years, including during my time as a State Senator, that Connecticut does not meet its obligations to fund K-12 public education. Some people may argue the facts or the details, but I think that reality shows this overall to be true. This is not something that the state government should be proud of.

That belief has guided my work in the State Senate. Part of that effort has been pushing back against state budget proposals that would further reduce public education funding. Overall, I was able to help prevent ~$7 million in cuts in the 35th District. That is a lot of money that otherwise would have been added to already increasing town property taxes. That is an important win.

Another part of the work I have accomplished has been to stop unnecessary changes to Alliance Districts, which would have compromised funding for the towns of Thompson and Vernon. That is an important win.

Last year, I worked collaboratively to increase funding for special education costs. This is important because our communities continue to feel these burdens as costs have skyrocketed. There is a public obligation to provide special education, but if towns cannot afford the costs, then boards of education budgets, by necessity, shift money from non-special education funding or seek higher property tax rates to cover the costs. I continue to advocate for special education funding by voting to increase state education funding both last fiscal year and in the current two-year state budget. That is an important win.

The work does not stop there, and more must be done. Connecticut is too unaffordable for too many hard-working people, their families, seniors, and job-creating small businesses. Residents cannot afford to pay more taxes while costs continue to increase. Through all this, public education remains a core government responsibility.

State government can and should do more. This year, I submitted ambitious bills to do just that, like:
• Senate Bill 34: An Act Concerning An Increase Of The Foundation Amount For The Purposes Of The Education Cost Sharing Grant.
• Senate Bill 35: An Act Concerning Full Reimbursement Of A School District’s Excess Cost For Special Education.
The Education Cost Sharing (ECS) grant starts with a base amount per pupil, and is currently set at $11,525. But this amount has not been updated since 2013. The real costs in 2026, just based upon inflationary changes, are $16,650. This $5,125 difference per student adds up and is a lot of money for each school district and town. We should fix this, and that is what my bill seeks to do.

I am pleased that the School + State Finance Project, CT Conference of Municipalities, Council of Small Towns, Connecticut Association of Boards of Education, Connecticut Association of School Superintendents, town leaders, and others agree. I am also pleased that the Legislature’s Education Committee agrees and that my bill is part of a bigger effort to increase state public education funding. The current Education Committee bill would phase in $1,000 per student increases in the ECS base amount, ending with $15,000 in Fiscal Year 2029, followed thereafter by inflation increases. Although this does not get to the real inflationary costs experienced by towns and has a slow phase in during expected times of continued inflation increases in costs, it is a starting point for further work and decision-making in the legislature.

At the same time, the Legislature needs to work on a process to change the overall ECS formula that favors cities over towns. A more equitable and fair calculation should be done. I cannot say that this herculean work can be done in one fell swoop during the Legislature’s “short session”; nevertheless, there is now enough need to start the work and carry it into next year’s “long session” and new two-year state budget creation.

My bill proposal would provide more state funding for special education costs. Currently, towns are responsible for covering special education costs. State government steps in with an Excess Cost Grant to pay for special care additional costs that exceed 4-1/2 times the school district’s average student expenditure. This still leaves towns to cover a huge expense. More state funding is needed. My bill would provide more funding. I am pleased that this has bipartisan support. To what degree more funding will be provided is still to be determined, but there is a continued momentum to move things forward.

The more that state government can do to increase K-12 public education funding and to cover the costs of special education, the more it lessens the reliance of towns on property taxes to pay for public education. This is the right thing to do and a way to help make our state more affordable (keep property taxes under control) for more people. I acknowledge that not all that I propose will be done, but I am optimistic that this year, something meaningful can be done and propel us forward. All these things can be done within the state’s statutorily required spending cap without an increase in state taxes or fees to pay for it. It is about how state government repurposes, realigns, and refocuses the taxpayer money it has when prioritizing spending decisions. To me, this is common sense.