New London council approves first readings of city, education budgets after heated public comments over school funding

New London—The New London City Council on April 23 gave first readings and approval to the city government and education budgets for fiscal 2025–26 and referred both to the Board of Finance after a large public turnout that pressed the council to add $2.5 million to the Board of Education budget.

The special council meeting followed a finance-committee session at 6 p.m. The evening featured more than two hours of public comment, much of it from students, teachers and nonprofit youth organizers who urged the council to increase school funding and warned that flat funding would force cuts to food services, special education and wellness supports.

The most repeated request came from members of the youth group Hearing Youth Voices and other speakers who asked the council to allocate $2,500,000 to New London Public Schools. “We need this increase of $2,500,000 for the board of education for New London today,” said Adriana Manzano, identifying herself as a Connecticut College student. “If we plan to increase the police department's budget by 8.4% and make no increase to the board of education budget, what are we saying to our students and their families?”

Several educators and school staff made similar appeals. Cheryl Potter, who said she is in her 28th year as a social worker in New London Public Schools, asked the council to use fund balance monies and transfers from departments with increases above 5% to avoid a tax increase while closing the schools’ shortfall. “This would also allow the budget to have a 0 tax increase, which is what the mayor proposed when presenting the city budget,” Potter said.

City officials defended the mayor’s budget and described the constraints they used to balance competing demands. Director of Finance McBride explained the administration’s approach to the fund balance policy and the risks of drawing it down. McBride said the council’s existing fund-balance policy—established in 2008—sets a goal of 16.67% of operating expenses (roughly two months of expenditures) and that New London’s fund balance as of June 30, 2024, stood at $19,628,753, or about 19.2% of the budget. “That fund balance policy is paramount,” McBride said, emphasizing the effect on bond ratings and borrowing costs if the balance were reduced.

Several council members argued the first reading is the appropriate place to debate increases and urged colleagues to decide now rather than later in the process. Councilor Hart said the first reading is the most important time for amendments because the Board of Finance rarely raises items above what the city council sends forward.

Council action and committee amendments

On the city-government budget (general fund $58,215,597 as read during the meeting), the finance committee moved the ordinance as a first reading and considered several line-item adjustments during the committee meeting. Committee members approved multiple small transfers and corrections, including: a decrease of $8,000 in the council’s Waterfront Park line and corresponding $8,000 increase to the Registrar of Voters/elections line; a correction reducing a Public Works solid-waste FICA line by $8,850 and adding the same amount to contingency; and a $30,031 correction to the Town Aid Road Fund appropriation to match the state allocation rather than an earlier roll-forward of fund balance. Committee members voted those amendments on the record and then forwarded the budget to the full council.

At the council’s special meeting, the council gave the city-government budget its first reading and adopted it by roll call (council vote 6–1). The council then gave the education budget a first reading (education appropriation $47,451,526 as read at the meeting) and referred that ordinance to the Board of Finance as well; the education first reading was also adopted by roll call (6–1).

Failed attempts to use fund balance for schools

Councilor John Sadi (identified earlier in the meeting as a member of the finance committee) moved an amendment to draw $2,500,000 from the city’s fund balance to add to the Board of Education budget. That motion was challenged procedurally at the special meeting as the session was noticed as a special meeting; the city attorney advised it was not in order to direct use of fund balance without prior public notice for that specific purpose. Councilor Sadi pressed the motion; the council also debated the merits and risks. The motion to draw $2.5 million from the fund balance failed on the council floor (vote recorded 1–6 against the amendment). A later motion to increase the education appropriation by $2.2 million from fund balance likewise failed (vote 2–5).

What’s next

Both the city-government and education budgets were referred to the Board of Finance for further review; the council will return for subsequent readings and final votes after that referral and after the public hearing process. Director McBride and members of the administration repeatedly told the council and public that the city must weigh fund-balance levels, bond ratings and projected state revenues when deciding whether and how much to draw on reserves.

Voices from the meeting

“We cannot do that if our class sizes are increasing and our other supplies and whatnot have decreased,” said longtime teacher Margaret Lewis, urging the council not to flat fund schools. “We are asking that you would not flat fund our budget, but give us that increase.”

“We work together in concert as wellness interventionists, with the social workers, the school psych, the teachers, school counselors, administrators, all as a line of defense for our kids,” said Dave Richardson, a former teacher and current wellness interventionist, telling councilors to keep students at the center of decisions.

Director McBride described the fund-balance policy and the administration’s budget choices: “That fund balance at that time was to establish a goal of 16.67%... The discussion now is that the 16.67%... is not really proper,” McBride said, adding that many municipalities target higher reserves to protect credit ratings and borrowing costs.

Ending

The council’s first readings and referrals complete the body’s initial approval step; both proposed budgets will be reviewed by the Board of Finance and then returned to the council for additional readings and final adoption. Public commenters and several councilors said they intend to continue pressing for more school funding in the coming weeks as the city moves through the remainder of the budget process.