Opinion: Harwood’s proposed school budget is too high

February 2, 2026  |  By Frank Provato

Our school board posted on Front Porch Forum that the proposed increase in the "per pupil" expense this year will be 4.8%. Actually, school board financial documents show that the overall school budget increase will be 5.4%. Why didn't the board just tell us that? As I've done in previous years, I will request that the school administrators justify to us what warrants an increase in the school budget that exceeds the anticipated 2-3% increase in the Consumer Price Index.

In their posting, the school board seems to imply that the substantial budget cuts in the past three years should be a reason to stop cutting and fund the system yet again at a rate higher than the CPI.

I disagree. 

If anything, those historic budget cuts suggest to me that the system, in the face of declining student numbers, was over-funded and can effectively operate on a leaner budget. We should continue the austerity approach, monitoring reliable objective data to help us determine when it is time to stop.

I do not accept the school board’s argument that the school system needs a larger budget due to increases in healthcare premiums, mandates, special education, and mental health services.  In most employer-sponsored health plans, when rising healthcare premiums exceed a reasonable limit, a significant portion of the additional premium – sometimes all of it – is passed on to employees so that the employer maintains competitiveness. And with private health insurance, as healthcare costs rise, the patient bears the entire premium increase. Why should it be different for the business of operating our school system? Perhaps it is because of the union contract?

As for special education and mandated programs, most of these are not new this year, so why should those expenses increase at a rate that exceeds the CPI?  And why are my taxpayer dollars being used to provide mental health services in the schools?  As a retired physician, I believe the school’s job is to EDUCATE. Please leave the mental health counseling to the professionals in the healthcare delivery system. Duplicating such services just further elevates overall healthcare costs.

With all due respect to our dedicated teachers and support staff who deserve a livable wage, I must ask: Why does it seem that we often end up with a union contract that appears more favorable to teachers and students than the taxpayers who support their salaries and benefit programs? Perhaps we need more taxpayer participation at the bargaining table.

Lastly, what truly concerned me about the board’s post was the statement that, “There is no sugar-coating that these [budget] cuts harm the quality of education we want to provide our children.” That unsubstantiated assertion is repeated year after year as an emotional appeal that they hope will override our rational financial judgment. Having resided in Waterbury for 26 years, I have never encountered any objective data to support their claim. In fact, based on my research (references available on request), the academic performance of our children on standardized testing does not align with the fact that we consistently rank among the first or second HIGHEST per-pupil expenditures in the nation.

The local school boards, the legislature, and the governor continue to procrastinate by forming new study groups and relying on cross-subsidies from other state accounts, but they fail to present any sustainable solutions for taxpayers. Each group blames the other for the problem. It appears that we can only break the logjam at the voting booths. 

If the taxpayers in all the school districts repeatedly vote “no” to their school budgets until July, under the law, the schools must operate on a REDUCED BUDGET in September. When that happens, I am certain that someone will step forward with a plan over the summer that meets the needs of all the parties to this problem.

Personally, I believe that taxes should never increase faster than income, or else we have a failed economic system. For the many individuals who rely solely on Social Security, the increase in their benefits for 2026 is 2.8%, not 5.44%.  What is such a person going to have to give up to pay their taxes? Groceries, medical care, utilities?

Frank Provato is retired and lives in Waterbury Center.