Want the board to hear you? Email all nine members at boemembers@fairfieldschools.org or show up to any meeting for public comment. Meeting schedule & agendas

The capital plan and the 2027-28 project book both come back for a vote on Tuesday, September 8. That is the last stop before the ask goes to the town. If any of these buildings are your kid’s building, that is the meeting.

If Someone Asks You...

“The board closed out last year with about $2.3 million left over and voted 4-2 to put it in a new savings account instead of spending it now. The two who voted no said most of that money came from positions that went unfilled, and that the district already has a list of needs. Then they got a first look at next year’s building ask, which is $62.7 million, and $54 million of that is fixing the heating, cooling, and ventilation at Warde. Nothing on the money is final. They vote September 8.”

60-Second Version

• Only six of nine members were there. Aysseh, O’Neill, and Rinaldi were absent. The three biggest votes all passed 4-2, with Jacobsen and Flynn on the losing side each time. (Video: ~4:35)

• Last year closed with a $2,257,563 surplus, and it is going into savings. That is 0.97% of a $233 million budget. The board approved the new policy governing the account 4-2, then approved the transfer itself 4-2. (Video: ~2:58:03)

• About 73% of that surplus came from staffing lines. The transfer pulls $1,047,738 from Personnel and $608,449 from Fixed Charges (benefits), plus $601,376 from Pupil Personnel. That was the core of the objection. (Video: ~2:47:49)

• Next year’s building ask is $62.7 million. Four projects: Warde air quality ($54.1M), Jennings design money ($4.9M), the Ludlowe turf field ($2.9M), and Stratfield HVAC controls ($783K). First read only. Vote is September 8. (Video: ~1:12:00)

• Warde’s HVAC project got moved up four years. The building committee and its approved vendors would otherwise sit idle for 18 months. Warde is the simpler of the two high school jobs, so it goes first. (Video: ~1:13:12)

• The visiting bleachers at Ludlowe have been condemned. They failed inspection last month. The superintendent wants them taken down before the first home game rather than left taped off. (Video: ~1:15:22)

• Curriculum changes passed 4-2. Elementary science, library media, elementary math, and middle school language arts, all in one motion. Jacobsen wanted them split and voted no when they weren’t. (Video: ~24:07)

• No grace period on phones this year. Pouches go out on day one, September 1. The new e-bike and e-scooter restriction on school property also starts then. (Video: ~3:10:15)

• Tomlinson has air conditioning. The HVAC project there is done and running for the first day of school, though it will take a couple of months to balance. (Video: ~3:14:21)

  Subscribe now

What’s Coming Up

• Mon, Aug 31, 5 PM -- Policy Committee, Superintendent’s Conference Room. The Leaves and Vacations policy goes back for changes after the new HR director flagged a gap in it from the podium.

• Mon, Aug 31 -- 6th and 9th grade orientation.

• Tue, Sep 1 -- First day of school. Phone pouches are handed out that morning. The e-bike and e-scooter restriction is in effect.

• Mon, Sep 7 -- The governor’s K-12 Blue Ribbon Commission on school funding and accountability meets again, per Mrs. Jacobsen’s liaison report.

• Tue, Sep 8, 7 PM -- Next BOE Regular Meeting, CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East. Votes on the capital waterfall and the 2027-28 capital book. The class size cap question postponed from June is also due back.

The Big Story: A New Savings Account, and Where the Money Came From

Fairfield Public Schools finished the 2025-26 year with $2,257,563 it did not spend, out of a $233,040,386 budget. That is 0.97%, which the finance office put in perspective this way: on a $100,000 budget, it would be about $1,000 left over.

The board voted Tuesday to put all of it into a non-lapsing account. A non-lapsing account is a savings account Connecticut lets a district keep under state statute 10-248a. Money in it does not get returned to the town at the end of the year, and it can be carried forward and spent later on educational purposes with board approval. Fairfield created its account in June. Tuesday’s job was to adopt the policy that governs it and then make the first deposit.

Both passed 4-2. On the policy vote the chair named Bardenwerper, Li, Maxon Kennelly, and Krasnoff in favor, with Jacobsen and Flynn opposed. (Video: ~2:58:03) The transfer of the money split the same way a few minutes later. (Video: ~3:01:16)

What the policy actually says

Policy 3170.1 caps the account at $5 million total. State law separately caps annual deposits at 2% of the prior year’s budget. Every withdrawal has to be voted by the board, and the district has to report the balance and activity to the state each year and to the board each quarter.

The whole argument came down to one sentence in the policy itself, and it is worth reading in full:

Except in the event of an unanticipated budget shortfall or other fiscal emergency, funds from the nonlapsing account shall not be used to support new and ongoing recurring operating expenditures, new and ongoing staffing costs, or other expenditures that would create a continuing financial obligation beyond the fiscal year in which such funds are expended.

In plainer terms: the money is for one-time things, a boiler or a roof, not for hiring. That sentence is Fairfield’s own language. The state statute says only that deposits stay under 2%, that the money be spent for educational purposes, and that the board authorize each expenditure. It says nothing about staffing.

Chair Maxon Kennelly said that restriction is deliberate and protective. The Board of Finance signaled it wanted the district to have this account, she said, and its main guidance was not to create cliffs, meaning do not fund a recurring cost out of a one-time pot and then have to find that money again next year. She also said the language is what keeps the balance from becoming a target in budget season: “I’m not going to believe that this money doesn’t have a target on it until it does not come up in our 2027 budget discussions.” (Video: ~2:50:06)

The finance office gave examples of what would qualify: an emergency boiler, capital equipment, building improvements, technology infrastructure, one-time software startup costs, a snow removal overrun the operating budget could not absorb. (Video: ~2:42:15)

The objection

Mrs. Jacobsen’s argument was about where the money came from. The transfer document shows it: $1,047,738 out of Personnel, $608,449 out of Fixed Charges, which is mostly health insurance and payroll taxes, and $601,376 out of Pupil Personnel. Personnel and benefits together are about 73% of the total.

The district’s own quarterly memo says the personnel surplus was driven by a reduction in full-time positions, vacancy savings through the year, and lower substitute costs. The benefits surplus came from the same place: fewer people on the payroll means lower health insurance and FICA.

“A vast majority of this money is from staff and benefits, but we’re paying it for snow,” Jacobsen said. She argued the district has a documented list of unmet needs and a very large bonding request coming, and that money taxpayers approved to educate students this year should be spent addressing those needs rather than parked for an unspecified date. (Video: ~2:47:49)

The chair pushed back on the framing directly. The FTE savings were not a case of skipping a needed teacher to pay for shoveling, she said: “we weren’t filling certain positions that didn’t need to be filled.” (Video: ~2:49:08)

Mrs. Flynn’s objection was about that restriction. The board spends a month every winter going line by line through the operating budget, she said, down to how much is spent on cell phone pouches and intramurals, and the vast majority of that budget is people. Moving millions out of the staffing lines into an account where, as she reads it, it largely cannot be spent on people, without an aim for what it is for, is what she could not get past. (Video: ~2:37:52)

The chair’s answer: any staffing need is a January operating budget argument, and this account does not change that. Superintendent Testani said flatly that nothing in the policy handcuffs him. If a child moves in tomorrow with needs the district is not staffed for, he said, “we do that and then we make adjustments later on.” He also cautioned against assuming the balance will keep growing, since the district opened additional elementary sections this year and those cost teachers, supplies, and roughly $10,000 per classroom in curricular materials. (Video: ~2:55:33)

Mr. Krasnoff, who sits in on the finance meetings, read the Board of Finance’s interest as a vote of confidence: they thought the surplus was small for a budget this size and saw the account as good faith toward a district that has been running lean. (Video: ~2:50:38)

The public comment

Greg Bosch of 470 Jackman was the only member of the public to speak on it. He laid out the statute, noted that the local policy adds a restriction Connecticut does not require, and asked the board for three things: make it a first read rather than adopting it in one night, remove the restriction on recurring expenditures and staffing, and preserve the flexibility state law gives them.

His point was not that the money should go to teachers. It was that the board should keep the option. “Sometimes the greatest, most acute need may be a teacher,” he said, pointing to the paraprofessionals and sections the board itself added after the budget passed in response to its own class size vote in June. He also noted that three members were absent, the policy had been through committee once, the public had no first read to react to, and people are still on summer break. (Video: ~2:51:48)

The board voted that night anyway. It had been noticed as a one-and-done item.

Worth knowing: the policy does contain an exception clause for unanticipated shortfalls, and the board can amend the policy at any time. Mrs. Jacobsen said as much in her closing comment, and the chair said the same.

Your Move: Policy 3170.1 is adopted, but it is a policy, not a statute, and the board can change it. The Policy Committee meets Monday, August 31 at 5 PM in the Superintendent’s Conference Room, and the full board meets September 8. If you have a view on whether this money should be usable for staff, boemembers@fairfieldschools.org reaches all nine.

The $62.7 Million Ask, and the Buildings Behind It

The board got its first read of two related documents Tuesday: the capital waterfall through 2041, which is the long-range list of every project and what year it lands in, and the 2027-28 capital and non-recurring projects book, which is next year’s actual ask. Neither was voted on. Both come back September 8.

Next year’s ask is $62,704,581 across four projects.

Fairfield Warde High School indoor air quality, $54,071,154. This is the headline number and the biggest change in the plan. It was scheduled for later; the HVAC building committee asked to pull it forward. Their reasoning, relayed by the superintendent and by facilities chair Jason Li: the committee and its already-approved vendors would otherwise sit idle for roughly 18 months, Warde is a simpler job than Ludlowe, and it can be done in sections around students over about two years without pushing Ludlowe back. (Video: ~1:13:12)

The cost is also up sharply. Mrs. Jacobsen put last year’s figure at about $46 million, which makes the new number roughly $8 million higher, and she noted the project is being pulled forward four years, which she would have expected to lower it, not raise it. Nobody in the room could explain the increase. The chair and the superintendent had both asked the HVAC committee chair and a representative from the owner’s rep firm to attend, and neither came. “I’m a little disappointed that we didn’t find out until the meeting that no one was coming,” Testani said. (Video: ~2:21:46) The project book itself does contain a partial answer: the $54.1 million figure is based on the completed design development phase, a later and more precise stage than the earlier estimate.

Mrs. Jacobsen’s counter-argument was about priority order. She pointed to Jennings, which has no mechanical fresh air at all, and to long-standing complaints about the third floor at Ludlowe, and asked whether the facilities committee had gone back to the district’s published commissioning reports and air quality results for Walter Fitzgerald, Jennings, Warde, and Ludlowe as part of deciding what goes first. Mr. Li said they had not. (Video: ~1:59:12)

Mrs. Flynn framed it as a scope-of-view problem rather than a fault: the HVAC committee is optimizing correctly for its own charge, but it does not look at Jennings, and the nine members of the board are the ones responsible for weighing all of it together. (Video: ~2:01:20)

Jennings Elementary design money, $4,904,488. This is seed funding, the money that pays architects and engineers to turn a concept into real design documents and a real number before the town is asked for construction dollars. The full Jennings renovation and addition is carried at $49,044,878 in the waterfall, with construction landing in 2028-29.

This was the most contested line of the night, on two grounds. First, the amount. Jacobsen said no previous seed request has run at 10% of project cost, and that the town already spent 446 contracted hours on Jennings, so some of the work described in the request has already been done. Mr. Krasnoff relayed that the number was built off Dwight’s comparable costs plus 3%. The board asked for a line-item breakdown. (Video: ~1:30:16)

Second, whether the paperwork is ready. Jacobsen walked through what happened in January 2018, when the board asked the Board of Selectmen for $1.5 million in seed money for Mill Hill without an educational specification and was sent home unanimously. The district wrote the ed spec in about three weeks and came back with it. Her point: the same thing could happen here, and the board would be voting September 8 without one. Krasnoff said the committee planned to write the ed spec after the board approved the seed request, because that is what the operations director asked for, and estimated it would take a day or two given the work already done for Dwight. Flynn’s objection was scope: deciding educational impact and which scenarios to pursue is the board’s job, not a building committee’s. (Video: ~2:13:12)

There is also a gap in the schedule. Jennings has seed money in 2026-27 and construction in 2028-29, with nothing in between. Mr. Li said that is because narrowing the gap would put three major school construction projects in the field at once, alongside Dwight and Warde. Jacobsen called that concerning if the reason is cash flow, given that Jennings is the building without mechanical ventilation. (Video: ~1:35:12)

Fairfield Ludlowe High School turf field, $2,945,346. The written description covers replacing the crumb rubber turf with an environmentally responsible infill system, adding storage for athletic equipment, upgrading the restrooms, and bringing the visitor seating into accessibility and building-code compliance. The seating piece got more urgent between the time the book was written on August 19 and the meeting: the visiting-side bleachers failed inspection last month and have been condemned.

The superintendent said they are taped off and blocked, and that he would rather remove them entirely than leave them standing. “I just am worried about possible liability,” he said, adding that he is looking for money in the maintenance budget to take them down before the first game. (Video: ~1:15:22)

Mr. Krasnoff flagged that the field scope changed from a repair to a full replacement, which is why the cost is higher. Testani added that the track is being fully replaced as well, since patching it each season has gotten expensive, with some reconfiguration of the pits at the track coaches’ request. Jacobsen asked for the source of each estimate. (Video: ~1:17:48) He also said the plan is to make the rebuilt visitor bleachers larger, since the current ones are small enough that visiting fans often end up on the home side. (Video: ~1:20:48)

Stratfield Elementary HVAC controls, $783,593. The one non-recurring project in next year’s book. It replaces the building management system that runs Stratfield’s heating and cooling, scheduled for summer 2027. Not eligible for state reimbursement.

Numbers the board wants before it votes

The board sent a long list of follow-ups back to the administration, due to the chair by Monday:

• A cash flow schedule for the whole waterfall. Jacobsen made the point that the waterfall is the less important of the two documents to the town; the cash flow is what actually governs what fits under the bonding cap.

• Updated numbers for Ludlowe and Walter Fitzgerald HVAC, which were never re-quoted this cycle, so it is not known whether they carry the same kind of increase Warde did.

• Recalculated state reimbursement for Jennings and Osborn Hill. Projects starting after July 1, 2026 are now subject to a cost-per-square-foot cap that was not in place when last year’s numbers were built, which should lower the reimbursement and raise the town’s share.

• A line-item breakdown of the Jennings $4.9 million and of the Ludlowe field estimate.

• Confirmation of the escalation factor being used. The superintendent said 8%; several numbers in the plan do not appear to move at that rate.

Jacobsen also suggested, and the chair agreed to consider, holding a special workshop meeting on the capital plan between now and the vote, the way the board did last year.

Your Move: This is the plan that becomes Fairfield’s school construction ask to the Board of Selectmen, Board of Finance, and RTM. The board votes September 8 at 7 PM in the CO Board Room. Public comment is taken before votes on each item. If your school is on this list, that is the meeting to be at.

Curriculum Passed 4-2, and Jacobsen Wanted It Split

The curriculum changes held over from June came back for a vote: elementary science, elementary library media, elementary math, and middle school language arts. Chief Academic Officer James Zavodjancik said the June documents were largely intact, with technical edits, a written question-and-answer document responding to board feedback, and a revision separating the middle school language arts book lists into grade-level and challenging-text columns.

The background is the elementary schedule change. With STEAM no longer taught as a standalone class, some science standards went back into the science curriculum and the coding standards went into library media. Zavodjancik was candid that the library team did not ask for this: they would have been happy leaving their curriculum as approved, but the district heard the public’s concern that things would be lost when STEAM was folded in, and put those pieces where they fit. (Video: ~15:53)

That opened a second question. Mrs. Flynn noted that coding is a strange thing to lock into a ten-year curriculum cycle when the ground is moving month to month. Mrs. Jacobsen went further: library media is now heavily technology and digital citizenship, and she said she could not imagine that curriculum standing for ten years. The superintendent suggested revisiting the review cycle across all subject areas, and getting feedback from the elementary library media liaison in late spring on how the year actually went. (Video: ~18:08)

The vote failed to satisfy Jacobsen for a procedural reason. All four curricula were in one motion. She asked whether they could be voted separately so she could support some and not others. The chair said the mechanism would be to move an amendment restricting the motion, and Jacobsen declined to do that on the spot. The chair apologized and said she would have brought it separated if she had known in advance. (Video: ~23:12)

It passed 4-2, with Jacobsen and Flynn opposed. (Video: ~24:07)

The Technology Plan Turned Out Not to Be the One People Expected

The district technology plan came up for discussion, and the most useful thing that happened was a definition.

Director of Information Technology Marco Taddei explained that Connecticut stopped requiring a technology plan around 2018, that the district kept writing one internally for purchasing purposes, and that this version is being published because the public should be able to see it. It is a three-year plan organized around four domains: Learning, Teaching, Leadership, and Infrastructure.

What it is not is a plan about how much screen time kids get. Both the chair and Mrs. Jacobsen said they had been reading it as something else. “Once you explain, no, no, no, this is the financial piece, this is the hardware, software, completely changed all of the questions I had on most of the pages,” the chair said. (Video: ~1:08:38)

Flynn asked directly whether screen time was discussed in building the plan. Taddei said it was not, and that device usage is a separate conversation from what his department buys and supports. (Video: ~47:02)

Two things did land. Jacobsen pointed out that the cover memo promises measurable outcomes and the document does not contain any, and asked how the district connects millions of dollars in hardware and software to student achievement. Krasnoff made the narrower version of the same point: add the word “analyze” to each domain, since the department is going to do the analysis anyway. Taddei and the superintendent both agreed the return-on-investment question is a real one worth having. (Video: ~1:04:13)

On AI, Taddei said the district holds hard limits at the Google Workspace level, so when Google turns a Gemini feature on by default it does not automatically reach students, and the district’s new content filter can shut features down at a finer level. He also confirmed there is no public district guidance document on academic integrity and generative AI beyond the policy itself, which Jacobsen flagged after parents raised concerns last year about students being accused of AI use. (Video: ~44:48)

Later in the discussion, Taddei noted his department published an internet-use-at-home guide covering router and provider controls, and has walked individual parents through setting it up. The chair suggested pushing it out again on social media at the start of the school year. (Video: ~53:40)

Quick Hits

A new HR director, and he immediately found a problem. Eric Amado Jr. was introduced as the new Executive Director of Human Resources. Later in the night, reviewing a first read of the Leaves and Vacations policy, he told the board that the part-time hourly paid-time-off section summarizes what the statute allows but does not say that unused time is not paid out at separation, and that the board would want to add that language. The chair put it on the August 31 Policy Committee agenda on the spot. (Video: ~3:06:36)

The military leave policy passed unanimously, with an amendment. Mrs. Jacobsen caught that the rewritten policy dropped the salary provision Fairfield has had since 2004, which guarantees an employee returning from military service comes back at the salary level they would have reached had they never left. She confirmed with board counsel that the draft eliminated it, wrote an amendment restoring the sentence, and it passed unanimously, as did the policy. Amado confirmed from the podium that under federal law the expectation is that the employee is made whole, including step and cost-of-living progression. (Video: ~25:14)

Year-end budget transfers passed 4-1, with Flynn the only no and Jacobsen out of the room. These are the routine closeout moves. The one worth knowing about: the district covered year-end safety-related projects in schools and bought new cafeteria tables, after the old ones raised safety concerns because of their age and condition. (Video: ~2:59:18)

The surplus was almost $600,000 bigger than forecast. The third-quarter projection was about $1.7 million; the final unaudited number came in at $2,257,563. The finance office said it will keep refining its forecasting. (Video: ~2:24:31)

Special education spending helped drive the surplus. Pupil Personnel came in $430,645 under, mostly from lower settlement and outplacement costs, partly offset by a transportation deficit. The district’s own explanation: more capacity to serve students in district rather than sending them out. The state reimburses 67% through the excess cost grant.

Snow cost more than budgeted, again. Maintenance, Operations and Transportation ran a $753,895 deficit, with snow removal the primary driver, covered in part by a $446,401 transfer the board approved in May.

Tomlinson is air conditioned. Mr. Li reported the HVAC project there is done and operating for the first day of school. It will take a couple of months to balance the system, so if a classroom runs hot, tell the teacher. Fire alarm systems at Fairfield Woods and Roger Ludlowe Middle also passed inspection, as did the Ludlowe High sprinkler system, and the Woods parking lot paving was finished the day of the meeting. (Video: ~3:14:21)

No runway on the phone ban. Last year the district phased the cell phone policy in over about a month. This year principals hand out pouches on the first day. (Video: ~3:10:15)

E-bikes and e-scooters are restricted on school property unless the rider holds a valid Connecticut driver’s license. The superintendent said the response has been almost entirely positive, with one parent objecting that it should be handled case by case. The stated concern is the arrival and dismissal window, when school traffic, buses, and now two colleges back in session all overlap. (Video: ~3:10:50)

The chair floated a letter to the town on e-bikes. She asked whether the board would support sending a letter encouraging the town to pursue an ordinance on e-bike age and speed guidelines. Flynn and Bardenwerper backed it enthusiastically. Mr. Li supported it on the grounds that student safety does not stop at the property line. Mr. Krasnoff dissented on jurisdiction: he does not like e-bikes either, but he is not sure a letter about conduct off school grounds is the board’s purview and thinks the police should lead. It would come back as an agenda item September 8. (Video: ~3:16:11)

A state commission is rewriting how Connecticut funds schools. Mrs. Jacobsen reported that the governor’s K-12 Blue Ribbon Commission, created last legislative session, has met five times since June and is studying school funding and accountability, including how other states allocate dollars and what accountability policies attach to them. Recordings, minutes, and presentations are all posted. Its report is due January 15, 2027, in time for the next legislative session. (Video: ~3:12:50)

Convocation opened the year. The superintendent thanked the organizers, the Fairfield Ludlowe High School Singers, who introduced themselves by naming the Fairfield teacher who had been their hero, and keynote speaker Kendrick Moore. A Fairfield Education Association representative closed public comment by calling the keynote motivational and inspirational, and the superintendent congratulated him on receiving his 25-year pin that morning. The chair’s own message to staff was a phrase she said she keeps coming back to: created by culture. (Video: ~3:09:21)

What to Watch Next

• September 8 is the money meeting. Both capital documents get voted, and whatever passes becomes the district’s ask to the town. Watch whether the follow-up numbers actually arrive, particularly the cash flow schedule and updated Ludlowe and Walter Fitzgerald HVAC estimates. If those come in like Warde’s did, the picture changes.

• Whether Jennings gets an educational specification before the vote. The board asked for a $4.9 million design appropriation without one. Jacobsen’s Mill Hill precedent is the thing to watch: the Board of Selectmen rejected that request in 2018 on exactly those grounds.

• Whether anyone from the HVAC committee shows up. Two invitations, no attendance, and an $8 million increase nobody in the room could explain. The chair said she would ask again.

• Class size. The cap question was postponed in June to September 8, with the facilities committee tasked to analyze all three reduction options against building capacity. Mr. Krasnoff previewed that space is tighter than some board members think, and floated expanding Jennings to a larger school. The chair cut that off as premature. Expect it back.

• Whether the non-lapsing account becomes a target. The chair said openly she will not believe the money is safe until it survives the 2027 budget discussions. That is the test of whether the restrictive language did what it was written to do.

• The Leaves and Vacations policy. Back at Policy Committee August 31 with the HR director’s changes, then to the board.

Meeting Details

Date: Tuesday, August 25, 2026, 7:00 PM

Location: 501 Kings Highway East, CO Board Room

Format: In person, with FairTV livestream and audio-only Zoom. No call-in public comment.

Watch the replay: FairTV on YouTube

Full agenda and enclosures: boe.fairfieldschools.org

Present: Bardenwerper, Flynn, Jacobsen, Krasnoff, Li, Maxon Kennelly. Absent: Aysseh, O’Neill, Rinaldi.

Next meeting: Tuesday, September 8, 2026, 7:00 PM, CO Board Room

Vote tallies in this issue are drawn from the meeting recording. The official minutes have not been published yet. If any tally changes when they are, we will correct it.

Want the board to hear you? Email all nine members at boemembers@fairfieldschools.org or show up to any meeting for public comment. Meeting schedule & agendas

The class size cap question is now scheduled for Tuesday, September 8. The board’s next regular meeting is August 25. If class size matters to you, those are the dates to watch.

If Someone Asks You...

“The board finally took up class size, and the room was packed with parents and teachers asking them to lower the caps. They did pass one fix: starting this year, if an elementary grade is within two students of the limit three weeks before school, the district automatically opens another section. But the bigger move, actually lowering the caps, failed. The order of the votes most likely affected the results. They voted the small fix first, and several members argued that stacking the bigger cuts on top of it could have pushed the cost and space past what they were willing to do, so all three of those failed. The members behind the cuts disagreed, saying their numbers already accounted for it. The board pushed the real decision to September 8, aiming for the 2027-28 year, and put the facilities committee, led by Mr. Li, to work over the summer figuring out whether the buildings have the space.”

60-Second Version

• A room full of parents and teachers asked for lower caps. Public comment ran nearly an hour and was almost entirely parents, PTA leaders, and teachers urging the board to vote for the lowest class size on the table. (Video: ~15:59)

• One fix passed, 6-2-1. Mr. Krasnoff’s amendment auto-adds a section three weeks before school when any elementary grade is within two students of its cap. It takes effect now, for 2026-27. (Video: ~1:58:41)

• The three cap cuts all failed. Flynn’s minus-one and minus-two lost 3-6; the Jacobsen/Flynn hybrid lost 3-5-1. The same three members (Jacobsen, Flynn, O’Neill) were in favor each time. (Video: ~2:32:59)

• The voting order likely affected the results. Because Krasnoff’s auto-split passed first, lowering the cap on top of it compounds. He said it himself: minus-one becomes “almost two,” minus-two becomes “almost three.” (Video: ~2:15:07)

• The bigger fix is alive, set for September 8. A motion to adopt the hybrid cap for 2027-28 was postponed 5-4, with the facilities committee tasked to study all three options against building space. (Video: ~3:57:22)

• 11 PM hard stop. Board meetings end at 11 unless someone moves to extend. No one did, so the meeting was force-adjourned mid-discussion. (Video: ~4:02:46)

• Half the agenda never happened. The military leave policy approval, the district technology plan, summer projects, and a vote to fund the non-lapsing (savings) account were all bumped. (Video: ~2:56:10)

• Curriculum got a first read. Changes to elementary science, library media, elementary math, and middle school language arts were presented. No vote; that comes at the first meeting back. (Video: ~45:20)

Subscribe now

What’s Coming Up

• Mon, Jul 6 and Mon, Aug 3, 10 AM -- Curriculum Committee meetings. The chair flagged these as the venue for any board member with curriculum concerns before the August vote.

• Tue, Aug 25, 7 PM -- Next BOE Regular Meeting, CO Board Room. Expect the curriculum vote, and likely the agenda items that got bumped June 23 (military leave policy, technology plan, summer projects, the non-lapsing account vote).

• Tue, Sep 8 -- The class size cap question returns, with the facilities committee’s analysis of all three reduction options. This is the meeting to watch if you want lower caps.

The Big Story: How the Order of the Votes Decided Class Size

This was the meeting class size advocates had waited two years for. The room was full, public comment ran nearly an hour, and four different proposals were on the table. By the end, the board had passed a modest fix, rejected every version of the bigger one, and pushed the real decision to the fall. Why the bigger cuts failed is open to interpretation. Most members said they support smaller classes, and the ones who voted no pointed to cost and building space. The order of the votes likely played a role too: taking up the smaller fix first changed the math on everything that came after it.

Here is how it unfolded.

What the parents and teachers said

Speaker after speaker, almost all parents, PTA leaders, and teachers, asked the board to vote for the lowest class size on the table. The current caps are 23 students in kindergarten through grade 2 and 25 in grades 3 through 5 (21 and 23 at McKinley).

A Stratfield parent marking her daughter’s seventh birthday asked the board to make the lower cap the child’s birthday present. (Video: ~17:45) A parent of twin kindergartners urged the board not to wait for a “budget neutral unicorn of an amendment,” and closed with a line that drew applause: “Make cool heads and small classes win the night.” (Video: ~20:16) A veteran kindergarten teacher, a 20-year Stratfield PTA president, and a parent who described her child cycling through three teachers in nine weeks one fall all made the same ask: lower the number.

A recurring theme: this is not a one-school problem. Stratfield has been the loudest because its sections are the most crowded right now, but speakers from across the district and the PTA Council framed it as a town-wide policy issue.

The four proposals

Two board members brought competing approaches, and one brought a blend.

Mr. Krasnoff’s amendment keeps the caps where they are but adds an automatic trigger: three weeks before school each year, if any grade at any elementary school is within two students of its cap, the district automatically opens another section. It is meant to stop classes from landing at or over the cap and then scrambling. By his count, against the latest June 18 enrollment, it adds about four sections now, taking the district to roughly 204, with two to three new teachers.

Mrs. Flynn’s two amendments actually lower the caps: Amendment 1 by one student (to 22 in K-2 and 24 in grades 3-5), and Amendment 2 by two (to 21 and 23). The Flynn/Jacobsen package put the cost of the bigger version at roughly $1 million to $1.6 million and up to 14 new teachers, with a building-by-building analysis showing it fits.

Mrs. Jacobsen’s hybrid splits the difference: two less in K-2 (to 21) and one less in grades 3-5 (to 24).

Why the order mattered

The board voted Krasnoff’s amendment first. It passed 6-2-1 (in favor: Mrs. Bardenwerper, Mr. Li, Mrs. Maxon Kennelly, Mr. Aysseh, Mrs. Rinaldi, Mr. Krasnoff; opposed: Mrs. Jacobsen and Miss O’Neill; Mrs. Flynn abstained). (Video: ~1:58:41)

Then the math changed under everyone’s feet. Krasnoff’s amendment auto-splits a grade when it is within two of the cap. So once you also lower the cap, that trigger fires more often and at a lower number, and the two stack. Krasnoff spelled it out: with his amendment now in place, lowering the cap by one “in essence we’re now lowering it by almost two, because as of three weeks the sections will split.” (Video: ~2:15:07) On the minus-two version he went further: “with the two and my amendment, it becomes almost three in some cases, which I know for a fact will not fit.” (Video: ~2:34:49)

The chair made the same point about cost. The Flynn/Jacobsen backup had priced the bigger cut at “an eight FTE increase,” but, she said, “in fact, it would be more because now Mr. Krasnoff’s amendment would be coupled with this.” She also objected that the proposed offsets to pay for it were never run past district staff.

So the cap cuts failed: Flynn’s minus-one and minus-two each 3-6, and the hybrid for this year 3-5-1 (the chair abstained). Jacobsen, Flynn, and O’Neill were the three in favor each time. (Video: ~2:32:59)

The two sides

Those voting no mostly said they were for smaller classes. Their stated reasons for voting no: Krasnoff’s amendment had already addressed the immediate crowding (potentially up to ten sections); the chair argued that, once his amendment was coupled in, the real cost would run higher than the Flynn/Jacobsen backup showed, and that the proposed offsets had not been run past district staff; and several schools they called “tight” (Mill Hill, Sherman, Holland Hill, Osborn Hill, Riverfield) might not physically fit more homerooms without displacing services like occupational therapy, gifted, or orchestra. Mr. Li repeatedly warned that lowering caps would not stop “art on a cart” or therapy in a hallway. The chair warned that a real cap cut might eventually require redistricting, “a very different public comment session.”

Those voting yes pushed back on each point. Mrs. Jacobsen said the cost was not unknown at all: she and Mrs. Flynn had submitted a full budget-adjustment package and a building-by-building space analysis, and the new teachers would only bring staffing back to what was already budgeted (the district is running about 15 FTE under budget this year). She added that the district has 290 full-size classrooms plus about 150 small spaces and ran more than 230 sections a decade ago. Miss O’Neill called class size “the problem that everyone keeps coming to us to solve.” Mrs. Flynn said the space concerns are real but solvable, and that the analysis on paper shows every option fits.

The public noticed how the order affected the results and spoke up

Several speakers in the public comment that followed the votes called out the order directly. One parent said "the community has some concerns with the order in which things were presented... I'm not sure that that was fair." Another said the order "changed the whole entire conversation." (Video: ~3:00:14) Earlier in the night, before the votes, Stratfield Elementary parent Greg Bosch raised a separate complaint: he could not find the June 18 enrollment handout posted for the public anywhere, and argued that certain communities were "gambling" on whether the change would actually deliver them relief. (Video: ~1:55:54)

The chair addressed it head-on near the end. There was nothing on the agenda dictating the order, she said: “I looked down, I read the item, I looked up, the only hand up was Mr. Krasnoff. That’s how the order was determined.” But she did not dismiss the impact. “I absolutely hear the public that that had an impact. I agree it did have an impact... If I go back in hindsight, maybe it should have been done differently.” (Video: ~3:06:25)

The tone in the room was tense

Multiple speakers and several pointed exchanges between board members made for a contentious night. One parent told the board the conflict was “translating on the live feed.” It got heated enough that parents stepped in to cool it down. One, watching the board spar, said she was seeing “two sides working against each other at the sacrifice of our kids.” Moments later, Greg Bosch used part of his two-minute public comment to have the entire room pause in silence, telling the board that “sometimes taking a pause just lets the temperature come down” before asking them to read the PTA Council’s compromise statement and find a way to agree. (Video: ~2:37:55)

Where it landed

After the three cuts failed, Mrs. Jacobsen moved the hybrid again, this time effective the 2027-28 school year, so the cost could be built into a future budget. The board postponed that motion to September 8 by a 5-4 vote, and directed the facilities committee to analyze all three reduction options against actual building capacity over the summer. (Video: ~3:57:22) The chair committed, repeatedly, that “this conversation is not done.”

Your Move: The class size cap question returns Tuesday, September 8, with the facilities committee’s space analysis of all three reduction options. Public comment is taken at the start. If you want the board to hear you before that vote, email boemembers@fairfieldschools.org or show up. The board’s next meeting is August 25.

The 11 PM Hard Stop, and the Agenda That Vanished

Fairfield BOE meetings automatically adjourn at 11 PM unless the board votes to extend. On June 9, the board extended to midnight. This time, with the class size debate still going, no one moved to extend. At 11:00 the chair called it: “That is a forced adjournment.” (Video: ~4:02:46)

That left a large chunk of the agenda untouched. Bumped to a future meeting: approval of the rewritten Military Leave policy, the District Technology Plan, the summer maintenance and unbudgeted projects report, a first read of the Leaves and Vacations policy, the superintendent’s report, and committee reports.

It also bumped a vote that drew its own public comment: approval of Policy 3170.1, which would formally fund the district’s non-lapsing account. A non-lapsing account is a savings account a Connecticut district is allowed to keep, holding up to 2% of its budget (per state statute 10-248a) for future educational use. Greg Bosch tied it directly to the class size fight, calling it “very concerning” that the board would move surplus into savings on the same night it told parents there was no room in the budget for more teachers. (Video: ~2:56:10) That vote did not happen, and will return.

Quick Hits

Two PTA awards opened the night. The Alice B. McGrath Friend of Education Award went to Meghan O’Connor, a Stratfield first grade educator. The Deanna O. Kiernan Award went to Ellie Fatehi, who founded the PTA Council’s Digital Wellness Committee and helped drive the high schools’ cellphone-free initiative. (Video: ~10:27)

Curriculum changes got a first read. Chief Academic Officer James Zavodjancik and his team presented changes to four curricula: elementary science and library media (folding back units that had lived in the now-retired elementary STEAM block, including a coding unit), elementary math (realigned to the district’s Bridges resource), and middle school language arts (adding about 250 trade-book titles, already owned, to book-club and independent-reading lists). It returns for a vote at the first meeting back. Mrs. Jacobsen questioned whether the board needs to approve book lists at all and signaled she will move to add Invention Convention to the fifth grade. The full proposal is posted in the meeting enclosures for anyone who wants the detail. (Video: ~45:20)

The consent calendar passed unanimously. That covered the June 9 special and regular meeting minutes and final approval of the School Wellness policy (6142.101). (Video: ~1:32:33)

A device-and-tech-plan comment. During public comment, a parent who advocates on student screen time urged the board to make its forthcoming technology plan “tech intentional,” with hard screen-time limits by grade and a default to paper and pencil for core subjects. The technology plan itself was one of the items bumped by the 11 PM stop. (Video: ~42:56)

The tone in the room was tense. Multiple speakers and several pointed exchanges between board members made for a contentious night. One parent told the board the conflict and body language were “translating on the live feed.” Another, watching the board spar, said she was seeing “two sides working against each other at the sacrifice of our kids.”

What to Watch Next

• September 8 is the real class size vote. The facilities committee will bring a building-by-building analysis of all three cap-reduction options (minus-one, minus-two, and the hybrid), aimed at the 2027-28 school year. Watch whether the space question gets resolved, and whether the board can find a majority once the numbers are on paper.

• The bumped agenda returns, probably August 25. Military leave policy, the technology plan, summer projects, and the non-lapsing account vote all still need to happen.

• Krasnoff’s trigger is live now. For 2026-27, watch whether the new “within two of cap, add a section” rule actually prevents the start-of-year crowding it was designed to stop. The first test comes about three weeks before school.

• Curriculum votes in August. Including any amendment to restore Invention Convention.

Meeting Details

• Date: Tuesday, June 23, 2026, 7:00 PM

• Location: CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East, Fairfield, CT

• Length: Force-adjourned at 11:00 PM with agenda items remaining (the board did not vote to extend)

• Watch the replay: FairTV Education Channel on YouTube or Cablevision Channel 78

• Full agenda and enclosures: Fairfield Public Schools Board of Education page

• Next meeting: Tuesday, August 25, 2026, 7:00 PM, CO Board Room

This is the meeting where the board is expected to take up the elementary class size amendments from the last recap. A vote is likely, though the board could still defer it if members want more cost and space data first.

Public comment comes at the very start (but also again later in the meeting). Can’t make it in person? It streams live on FairTV (YouTube or Cablevision Channel 78).

Need a refresher on the two amendments and where the board stood? The full recap is here.

Want the board to hear you? Email all nine members at boemembers@fairfieldschools.org or show up to any meeting for public comment. Meeting schedule & agendas

The class size vote is expected at the next meeting, Tuesday, June 23 at 7 PM in the CO Board Room. If you have a view on elementary class sizes, that is the window.

If Someone Asks You...

“A whole crowd of parents and some students showed up Tuesday night to ask the school board to make elementary classes smaller. Kindergarten and first grade rooms are running 22 to 23 kids, and one mom said her son’s teacher literally uses a microphone to teach. The board didn’t vote yet, but two board members put forward competing fixes, and there’s supposed to be a real vote on June 23. Same night, the board renewed the superintendent to a new three-year contract, though three members voted no.”

60-Second Version

• Class size was the story of the night. More than a dozen parents and students used public comment to push for smaller elementary classes. The board did not vote, but it teed up a real decision for June 23. (Video: ~27:00)

• Two competing amendments are on the table. Mr. Krasnoff proposed an automatic trigger: if a grade is within two students of its cap on August 1, the school adds a section. Mrs. Flynn proposed actually lowering the caps, by one student or by two. (Video: ~3:14:57)

• Superintendent Testani got a new three-year contract, 6-3. The deal runs July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029. Mrs. Jacobsen, Mrs. Flynn, and Miss O’Neill voted no. (Video: ~3:09:37)

• The board cleared the way to hire board members’ own kids. A motion lets the district employ board members’ children as unpaid interns or summer paraprofessionals next year, with the affected members recusing. Mr. Li and Mrs. Maxon Kennelly abstained. (Video: ~3:10:52)

• First district-wide look at student screen time. Students average 76 minutes a day on district devices over the full year. The number dropped sharply in the second half, and a new web filter (Lightspeed) replaced the old one over April break. (Video: ~1:09:40)

• The cell phone ban is working, per staff. In a survey of 207 staff, about 89% said students comply in class and noticed a clear drop in phone use all day. Discipline infractions fell from about 9 a day in October to 2 to 3 by spring. (Video: ~2:22:12)

• Three policies passed, three reads continued. Student Activity Funds and two compensation policies passed unanimously. Military Leave and School Wellness got first reads and return June 23. (Video: ~3:08:04)

• Food service is in the black. The school lunch fund is projected to finish the year about $212,000 in surplus, and no meal price increase is planned for next year. (Video: ~4:31:38)

  Subscribe now

What’s Coming Up

• Mon, Jun 15 -- Policy Committee meeting. Note: the chair confirmed the class size amendments will NOT go through Policy first, because there is no clear board consensus yet. They go straight to the full board.

• Tue, Jun 23 -- Next BOE Regular Meeting, 7 PM, CO Board Room. Expected: the class size vote, the district’s first technology plan discussion, and second reads of the Military Leave and School Wellness policies. A 5 PM Special/Executive Session precedes it.

• Tue, Jun 23 -- The Board of Selectmen is expected to take up vestibule project contract approvals (meeting reportedly pushed to that date).

A Room Full of Parents, and a Class Size Vote Pushed to June 23

This was the meeting where elementary class size went from a recurring complaint to a decision the board now has to make. Public comment ran long and was almost entirely on one topic. Then, hours later, two board members laid competing amendments on the table. No vote happened Monday. The chair set up a vote for June 23.

Here is how it played out.

What the parents said

One after another, parents and a few students stepped to the microphone to ask the board to lower elementary class sizes. The through-line was not test scores. It was the daily experience of a room that is too full.

A Stratfield parent described how her daughter’s first grade went from three sections of about 17 last year to two sections of 23 this year, taught by a veteran teacher who told her class size was “the biggest issue facing her today.” (Video: ~27:00)

Another Stratfield mother of twin kindergartners put it bluntly: “My son’s teacher has to use a microphone to teach kindergarten, so here I am.” She described 23 kindergartners in a small room where, in her words, “all anyone can do is put out the fires.” (Video: ~39:01)

Several speakers were educators themselves: a Staples High School teacher, a college professor, and elementary teachers from other districts who said they see the difference between a class of 17 and a class of 24 firsthand. Students spoke too. A Fairfield Warde junior described being one of 26 in an honors pre-calculus class and needing constant after-school help to keep up. (Video: ~43:13)

One important clarification from the chair: several speakers came prepared to oppose an increase in class size. Mrs. Maxon Kennelly said plainly that raising the cap “has never been part of our discussion.” The debate is whether to lower it, and how.

The two amendments

Right now the elementary caps are 23 students in kindergarten through grade 2 (21 at McKinley) and 25 in grades 3 through 5 (23 at McKinley). Two board members proposed very different ways to change that.

Mr. Krasnoff’s amendment does not touch the caps. Instead, it adds an automatic trigger: on August 1 each year, if any grade at any elementary school is within two students of its cap, the district automatically adds a section for that year. He walked through it school by school. Against current projections it would add four sections district-wide (moving from 196 to 200 sections, against the 199 the board already budgeted), with the biggest change at Stratfield, where every grade would become three sections. (Video: ~3:14:57)

Krasnoff said he chose this approach as a “stopgap” to keep classes off the cap without committing to a permanent cap reduction the buildings might not have room for once big construction projects come online. He met with Superintendent Testani and finance staff in advance; they said the change fits within the approved budget with no net cost (worst case, about $340,000 if every section required a brand-new hire at roughly $85,000, but they expect to absorb it through normal staffing shifts).

Mrs. Flynn’s amendment lowers the caps outright. Her first version drops them by one student (to 22 in K-2 and 24 in grades 3-5), which she said adds about 10 sections at a cost of roughly $1 million. Her second version drops them by two (to 21 and 23, removing the separate McKinley numbers), adding about 16 sections. She framed it as the more durable, “holistic” fix and said she would bring it back June 23 with full building-by-building backup. (Video: ~3:56:28)

Where the board split

The disagreement was less about whether to act and more about how, and on how much homework should come first.

Mrs. Jacobsen pushed hardest to just vote. She called Krasnoff’s August 1 trigger “inequitable,” because whether a family gets a smaller class would depend on the calendar date their grade happened to be near the cap. She argued the district has plenty of room (Fairfield once had 237 homerooms and now runs about 199) and that it is time to “put some money just back into our teachers and our K-5 classrooms.” (Video: ~3:37:35)

Mr. Aysseh repeatedly said he supports taking action on June 23 but would not vote without full data in hand: the FTE cost and a building-by-building classroom inventory showing where the space actually is. That demand led to a tense back-and-forth with Mrs. Flynn over whether that homework should have been done before the meeting. (Video: ~4:05:13)

Mrs. Bardenwerper said she liked Krasnoff’s approach but suggested extending the window from August 1 through the first day of school. Miss O’Neill said she would “support class sizes going as low as possible.” Mr. Li raised special education space, warning he did not want to hear about a child receiving services “in the hallway.”

The chair pushed back on the idea that the board had ignored class size, noting the board debated and voted on the current policy as recently as 2024. She also set a hard expectation for whoever brings an amendment: show where the money comes from. “What I do not want to hear is, I trust staff to do the work... that statement is lazy and irresponsible,” she said, noting the board already approved this budget and defended it to the town’s finance bodies. (Video: ~4:12:34)

Superintendent Testani said he could make any version work financially, but asked the board to commit to its choice and then let the administration execute without second-guessing where the trade-offs land. “Make the decision, create the policy, and please allow us then to make it work so that it benefits students and not benefits adults.” (Video: ~4:23:51)

What happens next

No vote Monday. Because there is no clear board consensus, the chair said the amendments will skip the Policy Committee and come straight to the full board on June 23, written as voting items so they require only a majority. Members were asked to share any new amendment language with the full board before the meeting so it lands in the public packet.

Your Move: The class size vote is set for the next meeting, Tuesday, June 23 at 7 PM in the CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East. Public comment is taken at the start. If you want the board to hear you before the vote, show up or email boemembers@fairfieldschools.org.

Testani Renewed for Three Years, 6-3

The board voted to re-elect Michael Testani as superintendent for a three-year term, July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029, contingent on his signing within a week. The vote was 6-3. (Video: ~3:09:37)

In favor: Mrs. Bardenwerper, Mr. Li, Mrs. Maxon Kennelly, Mr. Aysseh, Mrs. Rinaldi, and Mr. Krasnoff. Opposed: Mrs. Jacobsen, Mrs. Flynn, and Miss O’Neill.

The board does not take public comment on personnel matters, so there was no public discussion before the vote. It followed a 5 PM executive session on the superintendent’s evaluation. In open comment afterward, the chair congratulated Testani and said the board looked forward to working with him on the technology, policy, and improvement plans ahead. Testani called it “a pleasure” and “an honor.” (Video: ~4:36:01)

A First Look at How Much Students Are on Their Devices

(The full device report is here).

IT Director Marco Taddei presented the district’s first comprehensive look at student device usage, built from raw data rather than a vendor’s pre-packaged report. (Video: ~1:09:40)

The headline numbers: students averaged 76 minutes a day on district-issued devices across the full year, 93 minutes in the first half and 60 in the second. Google Docs and Google Classroom dominate usage. Elementary out-of-school use fell from 12 minutes a day to 3 between halves, and the youngest grades (K-2) barely register at 5 to 6 minutes.

Taddei explained the tracking uses a Lightspeed “heartbeat” that checks what is active on screen every few seconds (five seconds in the fall, three in the spring). He also walked through the switch from the old iBoss web filter to Lightspeed’s filter, completed over April break, which he said has nearly eliminated the game sites and proxy workarounds students used to find. YouTube now only plays teacher-linked videos, with comments, ads, and the suggested-video sidebar stripped out.

The board engaged hard. Mrs. Flynn asked for the raw data and a breakdown of how much student work is done on screens versus paper, citing research on the downsides of note-taking on devices. Mr. Aysseh and Mr. Krasnoff cautioned against using the data to dictate classroom methods to teachers. Mrs. Jacobsen pressed on what the district actually gets for all that screen time. A district technology plan is due for a first discussion June 23.

Some of that scrutiny is parent-driven. Elly Fatehi, who has pressed the district on student device use for two years, used public comment to frame the report as a product of that advocacy and to put specific asks on the table for the coming technology plan: cap Chromebook and Google Classroom use at no more than half of any secondary class period, teach skills like typing and coding deliberately rather than incidentally, and sharply limit screens in the elementary grades. She cited outside research on the harms of heavy device use. Two other speakers pushed the board to treat the report’s favorable numbers with caution, including one, a self-described professional researcher, who asked the board to “take it down until it could be contextualized.” The district presented the data as a starting point, not a finished study. (Video: ~50:01)

The Cell Phone Ban, One Year In

Fairfield Ludlowe principal Dr. Greg Hatzis and Fairfield Warde’s principal presented a follow-up staff survey on the cell-phone-free initiative the high schools launched October 6. (Video: ~2:16:55)

Of 207 staff who responded (about 85% of certified staff), roughly 89% said students follow the policy during class, 89% noticed a clear reduction in phone use across the whole day, 88% said it improved instruction, and 84% said it improved student interaction. The discipline structure (warning, then Saturday detention, then suspension) was rated effective by about 78%.

The infraction data backed it up. Daily average violations at Ludlowe fell from about 9.3 in October to roughly 2 to 3 by late winter, with a small spring uptick the principals attributed partly to students turning to phones once the new web filter blocked more sites, and partly to kids finding new workarounds. Of 1,327 students at Ludlowe, 365 had a first offense, 115 a second, 36 a third. (Video: ~2:22:12)

The principals credited the phone pouches for making enforcement clear: if a phone is visible, it is a violation, which removes the daily argument. The chair asked whether the warning step should be dropped next year, since “anyone using it at this point in time knows exactly what they’re doing.” One lighter takeaway: students have rediscovered hacky sack.

Quick Hits

The board cleared the way to hire board members’ children. A motion permits the district, for the 2026-27 year, to employ the children of board members as unpaid interns or summer paraprofessionals, on two conditions: the affected member recuses from any related vote, and receives no personal benefit. It passed with Mr. Li and Mrs. Maxon Kennelly, the two members with children affected, abstaining. The board confirmed the motion does not cover coaching positions. (Video: ~3:10:52)

Three policies passed unanimously. Policy 3453 (Student Activity Funds) and two staff compensation policies (4140-4240 and 4144-4244) all passed without dissent, with no public comment. These were the second reads of policies introduced May 26. (Video: ~3:08:04)

Military leave policy back for another first read. Policy 4151.9-4251.9 returned rewritten. The new language drops the earlier “professional employee certified by the State of Connecticut” phrasing that Mrs. Flynn had flagged in May for excluding non-certified staff, replacing it with broad language covering every employee eligible under the federal USERRA law. Mrs. Jacobsen asked the committee to confirm that the rewrite does not strip any protection staff already have, including reinstatement at the salary level they would have reached. The chair will get Attorney Cedar’s answer. It returns for a second read. (Video: ~4:25:15)

School wellness policy got a first read, presented by an eighth grader. The chair moved this item up so an eighth-grade student representative on the district Wellness Advisory Council, who helped present, would not have to wait through the long meeting. The updated Policy 6142.101 came out of a triennial self-study and adds items like food-free elementary celebrations, daily recess, and 20 minutes of “seat time” for lunch. Mrs. Flynn thanked the committee for the inclusions. It returns June 23. (Video: ~1:03:18)

Food service finished the year healthy. Per a memo from Finance and Business director Frank Magneri, the school lunch fund is projected to end the year about $212,000 in the black, and no meal price increase is planned for 2026-27. Surplus reserves above the federal limit are being reinvested in the program, including new serving-line equipment at six schools this summer. The Finance Committee pre-vetted it; no vote was needed. (Video: ~4:31:38)

District Improvement Plan update. Deputy Superintendent Dr. Zakia Parrish walked through progress on the 2022-27 plan. State assessment (SBAC) data is still embargoed, so the full data picture comes in the fall. Among the indicators shared: 84% of second graders finished the year reading at or above grade level. The district is rolling out the Wayfinder social-emotional platform (replacing Dessa) and expanding its Literacy Academy to grade 8 next year. (Video: ~2:35:54)

A big night for spring athletics. The board recognized the Fairfield Ludlowe girls outdoor track team, which won both the FCIAC and, for the first time in school history, the state championship. Warde distance runners and a Fairfield girls rugby co-op team that won a state 7s title were also honored. (Video: ~13:43)

Superintendent’s report. A Roger Ludlowe Middle School sixth grader published a fantasy novel; Warde and Ludlowe seniors completed a senior experience with the Fairfield Fire Department; a McKinley language arts specialist completed a state curriculum fellowship; and the district named Nikki Callahan, currently an assistant principal at Sherman, as Stratfield’s new principal. (Video: ~4:35:01)

A recurring voice on class size returned. A parent who has pressed the board on class size for years thanked it for the discussion, urged a June 23 vote to lower class sizes, and said he favored Mrs. Flynn’s approach as a “durable fix.” The chair repeatedly asked him not to direct comments at individual board members. (Video: ~4:38:07)

What to Watch Next

• June 23 is the class size vote. Both amendments are expected back as voting items. Watch whether the board lands on Krasnoff’s August 1 trigger, one of Flynn’s cap reductions, some blend, or punts again. The deciding factor on the floor will likely be whether the FTE cost and classroom-space backup satisfy Mr. Aysseh and the chair.

• The district technology plan gets its first discussion June 23. Expect the device-usage debate (screen time, paper versus laptop, what counts as intentional use) to continue there.

• Two policies return for second reads. The Military Leave rewrite will not move until Attorney Cedar confirms it removes no existing protections, and the School Wellness policy returns with any board questions answered.

• A new Stratfield principal starts. Nikki Callahan will be introduced to staff and families before the school year.

Meeting Details

• Date: Tuesday, June 9, 2026, 7:00 PM (preceded by a 5:00 PM Special Meeting / Executive Session on the superintendent’s evaluation)

• Location: CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East, Fairfield, CT

• Length: The meeting ran late; the board voted to extend past 11 PM to midnight to finish the agenda.

• Watch the replay: FairTV Education Channel on YouTube or Cablevision Channel 78

• Full agenda and enclosures: Fairfield Public Schools Board of Education page

• Next meeting: Tuesday, June 23, 2026, 7:00 PM, CO Board Room

Want the board to hear you? Email all nine members at boemembers@fairfieldschools.org or show up to any meeting for public comment. Meeting schedule & agendas

The next BOE meeting is Tuesday, June 9 at 7 PM in the CO Board Room. Class size policy is on the radar for that meeting.

If Someone Asks You...

“The board voted 5-3-1 to cut eleven STEAM and gifted positions from next year’s elementary budget. No teacher loses their job, the district says, because they get shifted into classroom and math support roles. Many parents and students showed up to urge a delay. One board member, Mr. Krasnoff, tried to amend the budget on the spot to add two new elementary teachers for smaller class sizes, but no one seconded the motion. Class size comes back as a real discussion on June 9. Also, the district is about to enroll 14 schools in a power-grid program that’s projected to bring in around $43,000 a summer for doing nothing during peak heat waves.”

60-Second Version

• The STEAM cut passed 5-3-1. The board approved the 2026-27 budget amendments per enclosure three. The amendments eliminate 11 STEAM and gifted positions, shift 4 of those staff into gifted roles, shift 3 into Math Resource Teacher roles at Stratfield, McKinley, and Holland Hill, and place 4 back into elementary classrooms. The district says no teacher lost a job. (Video: ~2:44:58)

• The RTM passed the town budget unanimously about an hour before the BOE vote, with the $2 million reduction holding. That set the dollar amount the BOE had to reconcile in tonight’s amendments. (Video: ~1:31:38)

• A surprise motion to add 2 elementary FTE died without a second. Mr. Krasnoff moved to reallocate textbook pre-purchase money to add two new elementary classroom teachers, citing his plan to amend the class size policy at the next meeting. No board member seconded. (Video: ~2:29:33)

• Invention Convention is moving to an after-school program. The district plans a 22-week, once-a-week, 60-to-90-minute after-school program for rising fifth graders. Two board members signaled they want it written into the regular fifth grade science curriculum instead. (Video: ~1:53:52)

• A new revenue source: Demand Response. The district is enrolling 14 schools in a United Illuminating program through Enel North America. Projected revenue: roughly $43,000 per summer. Schools can opt out of any individual event with no penalty. No vote tonight, just an information presentation. (Video: ~49:50)

• Five policies got first reads. Student Activity Funds (3453), three on staff compensation and benefits (4140-4240, 4144-4244, 4150-4250), and Military Leave (4151.9-4251.9). Mrs. Flynn flagged the military leave language for excluding non-certified staff. (Video: ~1:26:46)

• 84 students made the CMEA Western Regionals. Two more than last year. Nine of them also made All-State. About 20 attended in person. (Video: ~45:11)

• Class size returns June 9. The chair confirmed the board will reopen the class size policy at the next meeting, one year after the original adoption per the board’s own commitment.

  Subscribe now

What’s Coming Up

• Wed, May 27 -- Pequot Library’s 52nd annual Student Art Show, 5 to 8 PM.

• Sun, Jun 1 (midnight) -- Deadline to submit input to the Bylaw Advisory Committee on each article of the BOE bylaws.

• Mon, Jun 8 -- Curriculum Committee meeting, reviewing the science curriculum questions and feedback so far.

• Tue, Jun 9 -- Next BOE Regular Meeting, 7 PM. Class size policy discussion expected. 5:30 PM Special/Executive Session precedes it.

• Thu, Jun 11 -- Next Bylaw Advisory Committee meeting.

The Big Story: STEAM, the Vote, and the Class Size Surprise

This was the meeting where the elementary STEAM elimination got formally voted on, after months of curriculum-committee work, parent town halls, and a tense May 12 cliffhanger where the same motion went unfinished. It was also the meeting where, ten minutes from the final vote, a board member tried to bolt a class size amendment onto the budget package. That motion died. The class size fight is moving to June 9.

Here’s how it played out.

What the budget amendments actually do

The motion was to approve the 2026-27 BOE operating budget adjustments per enclosure three. The chair walked through it line by line for the record. (Video: ~1:45:13)

On the STEAM and gifted side:

• Eliminate 11 STEAM and gifted positions as currently configured.

• Shift 4 to gifted roles.

• Shift 3 into Math Resource Teacher (MRT) positions at Stratfield, McKinley, and Holland Hill.

• Eliminate the remaining 4 from the staffing line. Per Superintendent Mike Testani, those four educators are being placed into open elementary classroom positions for next year. (Video: ~1:46:11)

• Add 1 Math Resource Teacher at the three schools referenced above (this is captured separately in the line-item breakdown).

The district’s stated reason for choosing those three elementary schools for additional math support: the number of students in tiered intervention and accelerated math, not raw enrollment. (Video: ~1:50:02)

On the rest of the enclosure:

• Add $8,500 in music stipends. Mrs. Jacobsen proposed this and staff identified the offset. The two stipends are $5,000 for instrument management and $3,500 for the music library. Both posted, applied for, and selected by Music Program Director Robert Hughes already. (Video: ~1:49:24)

• Align health insurance with updated state partnership rates.

• Align the pension contribution line with actuarial reports.

• Reduce a category to reflect the pre-purchase of textbooks.

• Reduce appropriations to reflect DRIP funding (state grant) for security projects at North Stratfield, Osborn Hill, and Roger Sherman.

• Increase appropriations from the general fund for security projects at Roger Ludlowe Middle School and McKinley Elementary.

• Reduce capital outlay to reflect the Chromebook pre-purchase and the truck/mail van pre-purchase the board already approved on May 12.

The whole package was constrained to a hard $2 million reduction. Any addition required an equal offset somewhere else.

“No one has lost their job”

Superintendent Testani made the point twice and was emphatic about it: (Video: ~1:46:11)

“There is not one teacher because of the reduction in steam that is losing their position. Four are retained for gifted. Three are being shifted to MRTs at schools that need additional math resource help. And four have all been placed in elementary classrooms because of their certification. So no one has lost their job due to the 11.”

He also walked back a public misconception that STEAM teachers were science specialists: (Video: ~1:56:13)

“None of the Steam teachers are science experts. Let’s be very clear. They’re all elementary teachers, no different than the classroom teacher. So they don’t have any specialized training. They don’t have no science content training. They’re not 7-12 like our middle and high school teachers in the area of science, biology, chemistry. There is no STEAM certification.”

His framing of the cut: this is not about adding more math and reading at the expense of STEAM. It is about giving science and social studies the dedicated time they have been losing in the elementary schedule. Science kits are already shipped to every classroom and, he said, are “vastly returned across the district, untouched because there is not enough time in many of the classrooms.”

Invention Convention’s new life

The piece of STEAM that has no clear replacement in the new schedule is Invention Convention. Multiple parents named it specifically in public comment. Mr. Testani described the district’s plan: (Video: ~1:53:52)

A 22-week after-school program for rising fifth graders, once a week, 60 to 90 minutes per session, planned by the program director for K-12 science and STEAM. A letter goes out to rising fifth grade families before the end of the school year so they can plan.

Mrs. Jacobsen pushed back on the after-school model, calling out the equity problem: a beloved in-school opportunity available to 100% of students should not be moved to an after-school window that requires “the luxury of staying after school for 22 weeks.” She said directly that when the science curriculum comes before the board, she intends to move an amendment putting Invention Convention into the fifth grade curriculum. Mrs. Bardenwerper, a curriculum committee member, said she would fully support that. (Video: ~2:01:13)

The class size motion that almost was

This is the part that genuinely surprised the room.

After the line-item discussion wound down, Mr. Krasnoff said he would like to add two FTE (full-time equivalent positions) to elementary staffing in this budget. He framed it as a way to begin lowering class size before his proposed amendment to the class size policy gets discussed on June 9. (Video: ~2:03:00)

After a five-minute pause to work out numbers with staff, he formalized it: (Video: ~2:28:44)

He moved to amend line 7 (payroll, health insurance) from a reduction of $588,275 to a reduction of $539,983, and to add a new line 17 increasing the elementary salary budget by $322,558 to cover two FTE.

The chair called for a second. Silence.

The motion died for lack of a second. (Video: ~2:29:33)

Why no second, in three exchanges:

• Mr. Aysseh said the timing did not make sense. He noted past board conversations had been around nine FTE for a meaningful class size reduction, not two, and that even if the board passed a class size policy change at the June 9 meeting, the implementation logistics like classroom space and section counts would not be ready by July 1. “I don’t see where we’re going to have the money next year, and I don’t know if we’re going to have the space.” He later apologized for an earlier outburst during the same exchange. (Video: ~2:35:15)

• Mr. Li said the same thing more bluntly. “We can’t even go through a first read about the wording on how we treat our reserve coming back to work. So what makes you think that we can approve something for class sizes in less than the month? I don’t understand that part.” (Video: ~2:24:12)

• Mrs. Flynn said she supports lowering class sizes but not in this way: she did not want to “conflate these two things at the moment without noticing the public and having a full, robust conversation.”

Mrs. O’Neill floated the alternative: postpone the entire budget vote to the June 23 meeting, after the class size discussion. Mr. Aysseh shut that down: “I think to answer her question, postponing the vote is a bad move.” (Video: ~2:30:25)

The chair backed Aysseh, noting that the board had explicitly committed at the original class size vote to wait a full year before reconsidering the policy. That year is now, and the policy committee is bringing it forward at the next meeting on schedule.

What public comment said

Public comment ran nearly an hour. The chair acknowledged she had forgotten to call it before the music presentation and went back to take it. Almost every speaker was a parent or student urging the board to vote no on the STEAM elimination, or at minimum to delay the vote.

A sampling of what came up:

• Several parents said they only learned about the STEAM elimination through Facebook groups and emails to board members, not from any public communication out of the district.

• Two parents pointed out that engineering, as a discrete subject, will not have a home in the new schedule. Multiple parents named Invention Convention specifically as something their child loved.

• A parent of a McKinley first grader pushed back on the framing that test scores are the issue worth optimizing for. “I’m not really anxious about the test scores. If the test scores are a little bit lower and my kid is a little more curious, I’m going to see that as a positive trade off.” (Video: ~29:03)

• A high schooler from the Fairfield Warde debate team was the one public commenter explicitly in favor of the change, framing it as fiscal responsibility and arguing students will still get science, technology, engineering, and arts as core subjects without a separate STEAM block. (Video: ~31:37)

• Several speakers asked the board to consider repurposing STEAM teachers as elementary science specialists, citing neighboring districts that use that model. Mr. Testani said that would cost approximately another $1.5 million on top of the $2 million reduction, since it would mean 11 new science teachers (one per elementary school).

Greg Bosch, a parent at 70 Jackman Avenue, came back late in the meeting after the failed Krasnoff motion and went directly at the policy committee. (Video: ~2:40:36)

“The real issue in this discussion, to be very clear, is that it was not adequately considered and incorporated into the budget at the beginning, and it’s the policy committee that prevented that from happening. And it’s this board that prevented that from happening. It should have been part of the original ask. And then we could have had a great debate in this town among the Board of Finance and the RTM, and there would be money available.”

He pointed to the $844,000 restoration ask that the board took to the BOF and argued it was less money than Mr. Krasnoff’s amendment would have cost: smaller class sizes, in his view, could have been funded in the original budget if the board had asked.

The chair pushed back hard at the end of public comment. (Video: ~2:44:21)

"When this board voted on the class size policy, we as a group agreed to a year before it was reconsidered. The policy committee did not fail in its job. This board did not fail in its advocacy. This board asked for a year's worth of data before we reconsidered that policy. What we noticed the public of our intention of doing is precisely what we are doing."

She also addressed the parents who had argued the board was “powerless” on STEAM. Her framing: at every turn she had asked the board for an alternative subject to cut so STEAM could stay, and no member had ever offered one. (Video: ~2:05:50) She named the options out loud, by her account: cut art, music, Spanish, science, social studies, ELA, math, or recess enough to keep STEAM. No member offered any of them. As she put it, “no one offered that. We recognized. That doesn’t mean we were all loving what we were doing.”

The final vote

Approval of the 2026-27 BoE Operating Budget Adjustments per enclosure three. Roll call from the transcript: (Video: ~2:44:58)

• In favor (5): Mrs. Bardenwerper, Mr. Li, Mrs. Maxon Kennelly, Mr. Aysseh, Mrs. Rinaldi.

• Opposed (3): Mrs. Jacobsen, Mrs. Flynn, Miss O’Neill.

• Abstain (1): Mr. Krasnoff.

Motion passes 5-3-1.

Your Move: If you want the board to hear you on class size before the June 9 discussion, the comment window is now. Email boemembers@fairfieldschools.org. The class size policy is expected to be on the June 9 agenda, with public comment available at the start of the meeting. Show up at 7 PM at the CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East.

Demand Response: A New Revenue Source, No New Bill

The second presentation of the night was from Ryan Doherty of Enel North America. The pitch: enroll the district’s 14 largest schools in United Illuminating’s demand response program, get paid when the schools voluntarily reduce HVAC load during summer grid peaks, no cost to the district. (Video: ~49:50)

The numbers:

• 14 schools qualified.

• Roughly $43,000 in projected total revenue per summer.

• Payment rate is $35 per kilowatt of reduction, against an aggregate target of about 1.2 megawatts across the 14 sites.

• Five-year program enrollment.

• Six to eight events per year, all of them in summer in the last two years.

• 100% of recent events fell between 5 and 7 PM. Program window is 3 to 7 PM.

• Day-ahead warning before any event.

How it works in practice: when the regional grid faces an emergency situation (often a multi-day stretch of 95-degree-plus heat), the utility notifies enrolled customers, and the customers reduce HVAC load for the event window. Schools tend to fit well because they are largely unoccupied in summer evenings but still carrying significant air-conditioning load.

The control question, asked by Mrs. Jacobsen, Mrs. Flynn, and Mr. Aysseh in different forms: can the district decline to participate in any single event? (Video: ~58:40)

Yes. Schools can opt out of any individual event or any specific building for any reason (a community event, an Extended School Year program, a construction project) with no penalty. The district simply does not get paid for that event.

What happens if the district wants out entirely? Mr. Doherty clarified: there is no termination-for-convenience clause within the five-year term. But because there are no penalties for non-performance, a school can effectively stop participating by dropping its nomination to zero. (Video: ~1:07:14)

A few items the facilities committee already pre-vetted:

• The program coordinates with the district’s existing Cenergistic energy work. Cenergistic and Enel are partners on this plan.

• The district’s Executive Director of Operations confirmed that the playground camps run during the day and would not conflict with the typical 5-to-7 PM event window.

• The 14-school designation is based on building size and likely participation, not on every district building.

This was an informational presentation only. No vote was required. The board signaled clear support. The chair: “This seems a no brainer. It’s a chance to be a good partner. We have the capability to say no at any time. There is no cost to us.” (Video: ~1:06:28)

One open item Mrs. Jacobsen flagged: she would like a future presentation that maps the demand response program against the broader Cenergistic plan, building management systems, and solar, so the board can see how the energy programs all interact in one place. (Video: ~1:00:14)

Five Policies, One Real Concern

Five policies hit the board for first reads tonight. Four were straightforward administrative cleanup. One drew real pushback.

The first reads

• Policy 3453, Student Activity Funds. Brought back as part of the audit follow-up on 2004-era policies that had never been revisited. The new version cites Connecticut General Statute 10-237 and designates the finance director or designee as treasurer. The district has hundreds of student activity accounts across the elementary, middle, and high schools, with widely varying balances. Finance staff plan to circulate a spreadsheet asking each school to confirm custodian, intended use, and balance for each fund before any cleanup or transfers happen. (Video: ~1:11:34)

• Policy 4140-4240, Compensation and Related Benefits. Already approved in September 2024 but brought back to slot in language about issuing contracts to central office employees who currently do not have them. Mrs. Jacobsen asked whether the audit’s recommendation for a standardized eight-page benefits summary (the format the town uses) had been implemented for BOE staff. The answer: no. (Video: ~1:21:01)

• Policy 4144-4244, Compensation and Related Benefits - Insurance. No questions from the board.

• Policy 4150-4250, Leaves and Vacations. Mrs. Jacobsen flagged what appears to be a drafting conflict: the policy says full-time and part-time employees “shall be entitled to paid vacation and holidays” up front, then says in a later section that only full-time employees receive paid holidays. She asked for it to be reconciled before the second read. (Video: ~1:24:42)

The military leave concern

The fifth first read drew the strongest reaction. Policy 4151.9-4251.9, Absences and Leaves - Military. The proposed language changed the original reference from “employees” to “professional employee certified by the state of Connecticut.” (Video: ~1:26:46)

Mrs. Flynn flagged it immediately: (Video: ~1:27:18)

"To me, that phrasing says that only our certified teaching staff would be entitled to this, and I find that to be incredibly out of line with my values. Incredibly. Less than a day after Memorial Day, the idea that any of our staff would not be welcomed back with their exact same schedule, whether they are part time, full time, certified, I don't care if they work for the Fairfield Public Schools. I would like to be honored when they come home."

Mrs. Bardenwerper, speaking as a policy committee member, said the language came from the attorney and that any exclusion was unintentional. The policy committee will go back to the district attorney for clarification before second read.

Mrs. Jacobsen added a second concern: the original policy specified that a returning service member would be reinstated at the salary level they would have reached had their employment not been interrupted. That language is missing from the redraft. She also asked whether the new language conflicts with any existing collective bargaining agreement language. (Video: ~1:29:30)

The chair committed to getting Attorney Steve Sedor’s input as soon as possible and circling back at the next meeting.

None of the five policies were voted on tonight. All five return for a second read at a future meeting.

Quick Hits

Authorized Signatures Change Form, ED-099, passed unanimously. The form updates the signer on the agreement for Child Nutrition Programs from the interim director to a permanent finance staff member, who explained the change keeps the district’s state portal access working without interruption. (Video: ~1:10:59)

May 12 meeting minutes approved. Moved by Mr. Li, seconded by Mrs. Rinaldi. Miss O’Neill abstained. All other members in favor. (Video: ~1:09:45)

The board waited for the RTM before voting on amendments. The chair asked for unanimous consent to defer item 6.A (the budget amendments) until after the Representative Town Meeting voted on the town budget. About an hour later, Mr. Aysseh reported the RTM had unanimously approved the town budget, holding the $2 million reduction. That was the moment the BOE took up the amendments. (Video: ~1:31:38)

Regional and All-State musicians recognized. Music program director Robert Hughes presented. 84 Fairfield high schoolers were selected to the Connecticut Music Educators Association (CMEA) Western Regional Festival this year, two more than last year. Nine of those students also made All-State. About 20 of the 84 attended the meeting; many of the rest were at the Halo Awards at the Palace Theater in Waterbury the same night. (Video: ~45:11)

Bylaw Advisory Committee. First meeting has happened. Mrs. Jacobsen chairs; Mr. Aysseh and Mrs. Maxon Kennelly are the other two members. Every board member has received a spreadsheet with a tab per article of the BOE bylaws and can submit input by midnight on June 1. Next committee meeting: June 11. Non-committee board members are welcome to attend. (Video: ~2:45:31)

An SES leadership departure. Mr. Krasnoff reported from the SES Committee that a member of the Special Education Services leadership team has announced they are moving on to a role in the legal field. The announcement was made roughly a week ago. The person will stay another six to nine months. (Video: ~2:56:27)

Tomlinson HVAC work starts the day after school ends. All equipment is in. The project is on schedule per the HVAC Indoor Air Quality Committee report. (Video: ~2:52:34)

Dwight building project moving forward. Architect and construction management company have both been selected. Mr. Li offered one clarification for the public: the Dwight Building Committee is run by the Board of Selectmen, not the BOE. Any state reimbursement for the project flows to the town, not the school district. Reimbursement is 70% of what the state deems eligible (and only that), and turf field reimbursements piggybacking on a school project come at roughly half of the town’s average school-project rate, so closer to 13% net. (Video: ~2:53:28)

Vestibule project also moving. Mrs. Jacobsen reported the architect and engineer have been selected. On track. (Video: ~2:55:46)

Fairfield Ludlowe girls outdoor track won the championship. Announced as breaking news mid-meeting by the superintendent. (Video: ~2:55:32)

Superintendent’s report highlights. (Video: ~2:48:36)

• The Pequot Library hosts the 52nd annual Student Art Show on Wednesday, May 27, from 5 to 8 PM.

• Jennings Elementary held Community Helper Day on Friday with First Selectwoman Christine Batcho, Governor Ned Lamont, Fairfield PD, Fairfield Fire, EMS, dentists, and local doctors.

• Riverfield Elementary held its annual Patriotic Day celebration ahead of Memorial Day.

• Fairfield Ludlowe’s Future Business Leaders of America (FBLA) chapter earned gold-level national recognition; Warde’s chapter earned silver.

• The Riverfield and Mill Hill Green Teams wrote to state legislators on electric buses, composting, pollution, and endangered animal protection. They visited the State Capitol to deliver their letters in person.

• The Warde Wood Show is coming up on a Saturday in June. The superintendent said he is gathering more details from the Warde staff who run it.

Grading and GPA committee structure. The two non-board committees announced on May 12 are taking shape. The GPA committee has Miss O’Neill, Mr. Krasnoff, and Mrs. Bardenwerper as board members and meets this Thursday. The grading regulations committee includes Mrs. Jacobsen and is targeted for the first full week of June. (Video: ~2:59:51)

What to Watch Next

• June 9 BOE meeting. Class size policy reopens for discussion. Mr. Krasnoff has signaled he will bring a formal amendment, and the chair invited him to include it in the meeting packet so other members can review it ahead of time. Multiple board members signaled openness to the conversation; multiple also flagged the risk of moving too fast for next school year’s implementation.

• The five first-read policies all return for a second read at a future meeting. The military leave policy in particular will not move forward until Attorney Steve Sedor weighs in on whether the “professional employee certified by the State of Connecticut” language was intentional or a drafting error.

• The Invention Convention question has two paths forward. The district plans the after-school program for rising fifth graders this fall. At least two board members will push to write Invention Convention into the regular fifth grade science curriculum when the curriculum proposal comes for a vote.

• The bylaw rewrite process is open through June 1 for board input. The committee will produce a working draft for review at subsequent meetings throughout the summer.

• Demand response enrollment is moving forward with no further board vote required. Fairfield’s 14 largest schools will likely be enrolled in time for this summer’s peak season.

Meeting Details

• Date: Tuesday, May 26, 2026, 7:00 PM (call to order at approximately 7:48 PM, after a delayed start)

• Location: CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East, Fairfield, CT

• Format: Regular Meeting (preceded by a 5:00 PM Special Meeting / Executive Session on Superintendent Evaluation)

• Watch the replay: FairTV on YouTube or Cablevision Channel 78

• Full agenda and enclosures: Fairfield Public Schools Board of Education page

• Next meeting: Tuesday, June 9, 2026, 7:00 PM, CO Board Room

Want the board to hear you? Email all nine members at boemembers@fairfieldschools.org or show up to any meeting for public comment. Meeting schedule & agendas

The science department is collecting public feedback on the proposed three-year required science sequence until Friday, May 29. The link to the feedback form is inside the science curriculum presentation on the BOE agenda page.

If Someone Asks You...

“The board voted 6-0-1 to approve Fairfield’s first formal AI policy and tightened it with two amendments. The four-page policy itself is now public, so parents can read exactly what’s in it. A couple of parents spoke against, mostly because the policy doesn’t say what happens when a teacher accuses a student of using AI. The chair reiterated that the K-8 prohibition on generative AI for critical thinking lives in the companion regulations, not the policy. Same night, the science department pitched a required three-year science sequence for high school that got real pushback. And the board narrowly approved a new non-lapsing account 5-2, which is basically a savings account for any surplus dollars at year end.”

60-Second Version

• The AI policy passed. Policy 6141.3273, Use of Artificial Intelligence, was approved 6-0-1. Mrs. Rinaldi abstained. Two amendments from Mrs. Jacobsen passed 7-0 before the main vote, tightening the vendor evaluation and ongoing monitoring sections. Read the four-page policy yourself: PDF.

• The K-8 prohibition holds. The chair reiterated on the record that there is no generative AI use for classroom instruction, problem solving, or critical thinking in grades K-8, and that high school use requires teacher permission. That limit is in the companion Administrative Regulations, not in the policy text itself.

• Two parents spoke against. A parent at 98 Flora Boulevard cited Brookings Institution and Fair Play research and asked for a moratorium on student-facing AI until the technology has been deemed safe and effective. A second parent, Jean Sherman of 22 North Benson Road, said the policy reads like “a lot of words saying not a lot of things” and that there are still no protections for students falsely accused of using AI.

• The science department proposed a required three-year core sequence: biology in ninth grade, chemistry in tenth, physics in eleventh. AP biology in ninth grade would also become an option. Mrs. Jacobsen, Mrs. Flynn, and Mr. Li all flagged concerns about how the proposal interacts with math sequencing and elective access. The department is collecting feedback through May 29.

• The non-lapsing account passed 5-2 without the companion policy in place yet. Mrs. Jacobsen and Mrs. Flynn voted no, citing timing and the absence of guardrails. The companion policy is expected at the June 23 meeting.

• DRIP funds approved 7-0 for security projects at North Stratfield, Osborn Hill, and Roger Sherman elementary schools, using state grant dollars that have to be spent by fiscal year end.

• Budget transfers approved 6-0-1, with Mrs. Flynn abstaining. The transfers include a $250,000 pre-purchase of Chromebooks for incoming sixth and ninth graders, which saved the district about $130,000 against quoted price increases.

• The board ran out of clock with the STEAM teacher budget adjustment question unresolved. Adjourned at 11:10 PM.

Subscribe now

What’s Coming Up

• Fri, May 29 -- Deadline for public feedback on the proposed science curriculum changes (form linked inside the presentation on the BOE agenda page).

• Tue, May 26 -- Next BOE Regular Meeting (7 PM, CO Board Room).

• Fri, June 12 -- Finance Committee meeting where the non-lapsing account companion policy will be drafted.

• Tue, June 23 -- Expected vote on the non-lapsing account policy and additional budget items.

• Graduation -- Tuesday, June 16, both Ludlowe and Warde.

The Big Story: What’s Actually in the New AI Policy

The board approved Policy 6141.3273, Use of Artificial Intelligence, on a 6-0-1 vote. Mrs. Rinaldi abstained. (Video: ~3:03:51)

The full text is four pages. Read it for yourself: Policy 6141.3273, Use of Artificial Intelligence (PDF). This is what’s now in effect for every Fairfield school.

What it actually says, section by section:

I. Definitions. The policy draws an explicit line between two kinds of AI. Non-generative AI is a system that analyzes, classifies, or processes data without creating new content (think Google search ranking, a calculator, your phone’s autocomplete). Generative AI is a system that learns patterns from data and creates new content like text, images, audio, or video when prompted (think ChatGPT, Gemini, Magic School). The policy regulates the second category. It does not regulate the first.

II. General Provisions. Four sub-sections set the educational framework:

• Educational Purpose: Staff are required to set clear expectations for AI use in their classes “in accordance with the Administrative Regulations (6141.3273 AR), ensuring that AI does not replace student learning or become the sole-source of teacher feedback and/or grading.”

• Responsible and Ethical Use: Six principles: mitigating bias and misinformation, avoiding plagiarism, ensuring academic integrity, maintaining student privacy, promoting transparency, and ensuring appropriate educational use.

• Educational Philosophy: “AI tools should not replace the effort students put into learning. AI may be used to facilitate learning, not to complete tasks in place of developing essential knowledge and skills.”

• Prohibited Use: Three explicit prohibitions. Students and staff cannot enter personal, confidential, or proprietary information into AI tools. AI-generated content cannot be submitted as a student’s own work without teacher permission and proper citation. AI cannot be used to create or modify content in an inappropriate or harmful manner.

III. Privacy, Security, and Vendor Evaluation. The most operationally consequential section, and the one the amendments touched.

• Federal and state compliance: AI tools must comply with FERPA, COPPA, and the Connecticut Student Data Privacy Act (C.G.S. § 10-234aa et seq.). Student personally identifiable information cannot be entered into any AI tool that has not been formally approved by the district.

• Vendor approval: No AI tool that processes, stores, or has access to student or staff data can be deployed without prior review by the Director of Information Technology, Marco Taddei, or his designee. Vendors must execute data privacy agreements and document encryption, breach notification, data retention/deletion policies, and confirm that student data won’t be sold, used for targeted advertising, or used to train AI models.

• Bias and fairness mitigation: Vendors must disclose how they identify and mitigate biases. AI tools cannot produce outputs that discriminate based on race, gender, disability, socioeconomic status, or other protected characteristics. Educators and administrators have to be given a mechanism to flag and report potential bias or inequitable outcomes.

• Ongoing monitoring: Approved vendors are subject to periodic review. Vendors must notify the district of material changes, and the district reserves the right to revoke approval and discontinue use of any tool that falls out of compliance.

IV. Board Commitment. A closing statement that the board will leverage AI to support student learning while keeping the rest of the policy in place.

The two amendments

Both proposed by Mrs. Jacobsen. Both passed 7-0. (Video: ~2:44:06)

Amendment 1 modified Section III.B (Vendor Evaluation and Approval). The original draft required confirmation that student data would not be “sold, used for targeted advertising, or used to train AI models without explicit written District authorization.” The amendment struck the trailing phrase “without explicit written District authorization.” Mrs. Jacobsen explained the original wording risked reading as if the district could authorize an exception to law (which it cannot), and Marco Taddei agreed the cleaner version captures the intent.

Amendment 2 modified Section III.D (Ongoing Monitoring). The original said vendors must notify the district of material changes to their “product, terms of service or data handling practices.” The amendment added “policies” as a separate trigger with proper commas, so the sentence now reads “product, terms of service, policies, or data handling practices.” A vendor’s published policies are distinct from its terms of service, and the original missed that. (Video: ~2:46:16)

Where’s the K-8 prohibition you’ve been hearing about?

It’s not in this policy. It’s in the companion Administrative Regulations (6141.3273 AR), a separate document set by the administration. The policy is the framework. The regulations are the operational rules.

The chair emphasized the K-8 limit on the record at the April 28 first read: “There is no generative AI use for classroom instruction, problem solving, critical thinking for K through 8, period. And in our high school, it is with teacher permission.” That quote describes what the regulations say, not what the four-page policy text says. The Magic School and Google Gemini approvals at the high school level live in the regulations too.

The room around the policy, in three exchanges

Mr. Li argued the district cannot retreat from AI and voted yes with caution: “AI is here to stay. Whether we like it or not, it’s here to stay. We have to have an understanding on how to use it, not run away for it, not hide it.” (Video: ~2:47:02)

Mrs. Flynn supported the policy but warned the board against driving decisions by anecdote: “There is a ton of anecdotal being spouted off about AI by a lot of people that are making a lot of money off of it. So I am very hesitant to drive our board policy by anecdotal.” (Video: ~2:55:55)

The chair re-emphasized that this policy is the framework, not the end of the story. Mrs. Jacobsen signaled the policy will likely need amendments soon because of state legislation on AI and student data privacy that passed this Connecticut session. (Video: ~2:52:38)

The gap parents keep flagging

Three public commenters across the April 28 and May 12 meetings have raised the same concern: the policy is silent on what happens when a teacher accuses a student of using AI. There’s no defined process for the student to defend their work, no defined burden of proof, no defined opportunity to appeal a grade change made on AI suspicion. Jean Sherman of 22 North Benson Road put it directly on May 12: the policy reads like “a lot of words saying not a lot of things” when it comes to that scenario. (Video: ~2:57:14)

The board acknowledged the gap. That work is expected to continue in the AI steering committee and via future amendments.

Your Move: Read the policy yourself (PDF). If you have concerns about how teachers handle suspicion of AI use, or want to push for a written protocol that protects students who are doing honest work, email boemembers@fairfieldschools.org. The chair said directly that this policy is not the end of the story.

The Three-Year Science Plan Lands With a Thud

The other major story of the night was a proposal that has not happened yet but could change graduation pathways for every Fairfield high schooler.

The program director of K-12 science and STEAM presented a status update for the science curriculum revision currently underway. The headline of the proposal: a required three-year core science sequence for high school. Biology in ninth grade, chemistry in tenth, physics in eleventh. AP biology would also become available as a ninth-grade option for students who want to accelerate. (Video: ~0:27:30)

The rationale comes from the Next Generation Science Standards. The framework explicitly aims at “scientific literacy for all students,” and the standards are written so that comprehensive coverage requires biology, chemistry, and physics. Fairfield’s data backed the case: 74.5% of students who took the biology-chemistry-physics sequence met or exceeded proficiency on the state assessment in 2025, versus 61.3% for students who took biology, chemistry, and an elective in place of physics. (Video: ~0:39:14)

The department also wants to merge the current chemistry and environmental chemistry courses into a single chemistry course, anchored in phenomena-driven units. Existing electives would continue (dangerous planet, cosmos, marine science, anatomy, nutritional chemistry, and others), but as senior-year choices on top of the core.

The proposal got pushback fast.

Mrs. Jacobsen flagged the math interaction. Every physics course at Fairfield Ludlowe currently has a math prerequisite. CP physics needs algebra 1, honors needs algebra 1 plus geometry, AP physics needs algebra 1 plus geometry plus algebra 2 (or concurrent), and AP physics C requires AP calc. Requiring physics in eleventh grade closes the door for any student who is not on the algebra-1-in-eighth-grade track. “I’m just saying, like all of these classes are really dependent on what math you’re in,” she said. (Video: ~1:19:47)

Mr. Li made the case for the electives the proposal would push aside. He said the existing electives like dangerous planet help students who do not see themselves going into a STEM field stay engaged with science while protecting their GPA. “I think when you when you make a kid who’s not able to with the math component and possibly a physics component when they’re in high school and they don’t do well in that class, what’s going to show up on their transcript is that they perform poorly in a science class that brings the overall GPA down, that they have no intention to go to an engineering-bearing school.” (Video: ~1:09:21)

Mrs. Jacobsen raised the structural problem. Fairfield is, by the program director’s own research, the only district in the area that would impose a required three-year science sequence. Most surrounding districts use prerequisites and elective gating to guide student paths without locking them in. “Safe to say that there is no district that has this required. We would be the only one to do this to students.” (Video: ~1:03:50)

The chair flagged AP biology in ninth grade as a separate concern. AP biology is a college-level course and AP Human Geography (already offered to ninth graders) is, in her view, already a stretch for that grade level. She is worried about families pushing children into AP biology too early purely to build a college resume. (Video: ~1:25:23)

The department’s response across the discussion was consistent: the redesigned CP courses are accessible, not math-heavy at the introductory level, and built around real-world phenomena. The science teacher liaison from Fairfield Warde gave the example of using a microwave to teach electromagnetic waves, with every student in the class able to model what was happening. (Video: ~1:12:15)

Where it goes next: The department asked the public and the board to submit feedback through a Google Doc linked in the presentation by Friday, May 29. The full curriculum revision is targeted for board review and approval in fall 2027, with implementation following on roughly the same timeline (the chair confirmed “18 months out” as the total horizon).

Your Move: If you have thoughts on whether a required three-year science sequence is right for Fairfield, the feedback form inside the science presentation is open until May 29. The curriculum committee and staff will explicitly read these comments. The presentation itself is enclosure 1 / 1a on the May 12 BOE agenda page.

The Non-Lapsing Account: Passed 5-2 Without Its Policy

Item 8.C on the agenda was the creation of a non-lapsing account for FY 25-26. Under Connecticut General Statutes 10-248a, a school district can carry up to 2% of its annual budget into a non-lapsing account at fiscal year end, where it can be used in future years for educational purposes with board approval. (Video: ~3:47:13)

The district’s CFO explained the case. Right now, the third-quarter financial report projects a surplus of roughly $1.7 million, up from $900,000 in Q2. Some of that surplus is at risk from real exposures in transportation and special education tuition. A non-lapsing account would let the board carry that surplus into next year as a buffer for those specific risks, instead of returning it to the town. The Finance Committee discussion targeted special education and transportation as the two intended uses. (Video: ~3:47:24)

The objection from two board members was about sequencing.

Mrs. Flynn flagged that approving the account before the companion policy gave her pause. The Finance Committee plans to draft policy language on June 12, and the policy would be up for a one-and-done vote at the June 23 meeting. Mrs. Flynn asked the table whether the account and policy votes could be coupled at the same meeting. (Video: ~4:00:59)

Mrs. Jacobsen supported postponement for three reasons: the budget for next year has not yet been finalized at the RTM level, the policy framework does not exist, and the unencumbered balance on the Q3 report is unusually high ($22 million versus $6.6 million same time last year), suggesting the district might still be spending down dollars that were budgeted for the current school year. (Video: ~3:55:24)

Mr. Krasnoff said he was comfortable creating the account but wanted the policy to be “very specific and carefully crafted.” His specific concern: if the fund’s intended use is named too narrowly (like “transportation”), the Board of Finance could cut that line item in next year’s budget by the same amount, knowing the district has the reserve to absorb it. The chair separately invoked the “slush fund” framing in the same exchange, agreeing the policy needs guardrails to keep it from being treated as one. (Video: ~3:51:05)

The chair’s view: creating the account does nothing on its own. It just makes the vehicle exist. No money moves in without a separate vote. The policy can come in June.

The vote was 5-2. In favor: Mrs. Bardenwerper, Mr. Li, Mr. Krasnoff, Mrs. Rinaldi, and Mrs. Maxon Kennelly. Against: Mrs. Jacobsen, Mrs. Flynn. (Video: ~4:01:53)

The companion policy is expected at the June 23 meeting.

Quick Hits

The grading policy got a teaching session. Item 8.F was moved up in the agenda so staff could leave at a reasonable hour. The Ludlowe principal presented a 30-minute primer on how Fairfield calculates GPA: the base scale for college-prep classes, a 0.33 step up for honors and another for AP, and an elective scale that mirrors honors for grades down to C and college-prep for grades below that. No motion. No vote. The policy committee is forming two committees, one on the grade weighting/GPA scale and one on the grading regulations, with a goal of bringing comprehensive recommendations back to the board. Members can submit ideas in a shared sheet. (Video: ~1:33:34)

DRIP Funds approved 7-0. Item 8.B authorized the use of District Repair and Improvement Project (DRIP) state grant funds for security capital improvement projects at North Stratfield, Osborn Hill, and Roger Sherman elementary schools. The mechanic of the move: these three projects were already in the FY 26-27 approved budget, so moving them into DRIP funding frees up the equivalent next-year budget dollars for additional security projects further down the priority list. (Video: ~3:42:02)

Q3 Financial Report: Projected surplus increased from $900,000 (Q2) to $1.7 million (Q3). Most of the swing comes from pupil personnel services where settlement and outplacement assumptions were adjusted, and from wage and benefit reserve coming in under budget. Snow removal was a $446,401 overage, close to the $469,000 projected. Transportation remains a risk in Q4. (Video: ~3:07:15)

Budget Transfers approved 6-0-1, with Mrs. Flynn abstaining. The transfers covered the $250,000 Chromebook pre-purchase (to avoid an expected $130,000 price increase that vendors flagged for July), the snow removal overage, a pre-purchase of math textbooks, a truck replacement plus a new mail van, and a routing of general-business legal funds into special-education legal. (Video: ~4:02:14)

Chromebook details: The pre-purchase covers next year’s incoming sixth and ninth graders. Ninth graders are getting larger 14-inch screens, with the explicit goal that students use the district Chromebook as their sole device instead of bringing their own. (Video: ~4:05:51)

Survey of Students policy passed 7-0. Policy 6162.51, with the blue-text changes the board had asked for at the April 28 first read, was approved unanimously without a second first read. (Video: ~3:05:11)

Policies 3310 Purchasing and 3323 Bids and Quotations passed 7-0 with no questions from the board. (Video: ~2:42:00)

Odyssey of the Mind champions recognized. Three Fairfield teams qualified for the world competition in Iowa. The teams represented Tomlinson, Roger Ludlowe, Fairfield Woods, and an elementary team. The chair, who herself coached a winning Odyssey team in 2010-11, noted that the program is “almost biblical level of seriousness” about parents being hands-off. Every script, costume, and prop is built by the students. (Video: ~0:15:12)

NG911 ASL Award. Rhett Sylvan, president of the ASL Club at Fairfield Ludlowe, accepted the NG911 Institute Citizen Action Award in Washington for her work training Fairfield Police on basic ASL for emergency communication with deaf community members. Hayden West and Erica Flynn were also recognized as ASL Club leaders. (Video: ~0:21:48)

Student reports. The Ludlowe reps (Rikuto Draper and Naisha Maheshwari) flagged the Students Against Drunk Driving prom presentation on May 13 (Grim Reaper visits, EMS reads obituaries to senior classes) and the Love Like Casey Walk at Taft Field on May 16 in memory of Casey Sopa. Warde reps shared graduation prep details. Both schools graduate June 16. (Video: ~0:06:06)

Clock ran out. The meeting hit its 11:10 PM hard stop with the STEAM and gifted teacher budget adjustment question barely opened. Mrs. Jacobsen flagged that the proposed motion would “reduce 4 STEAM and gifted teachers” while the district has 11 budgeted, and the language of the motion did not match what the administration actually intended. That detail rolls into the next meeting on May 26.

What to Watch Next

• The science curriculum feedback form closes May 29. The board explicitly said it will read every comment submitted. This is the comment window before the curriculum committee starts writing the formal proposal in the summer.

• The non-lapsing account companion policy is being drafted at the June 12 Finance Committee meeting and will be up for a one-and-done vote at the June 23 BOE meeting.

• The STEAM and gifted teacher budget adjustment will return on May 26. The current motion language and the actual intended reduction do not match, per Mrs. Jacobsen.

• The AI policy will likely come back. State legislation on AI and online data security passed this session. Mrs. Jacobsen signaled the district may need to amend the policy soon.

• Teacher protocols for AI accusations remain undefined. Two parents in two consecutive meetings have asked for written protections for students who are accused of using AI. The committee’s work is expected to continue.

• The two grading policy committees start work. One on grade weighting and GPA. One on grading regulations. Recommendations expected at a future board meeting.

Meeting Details

• Date: Tuesday, May 12, 2026, 7:00 PM

• Location: CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East, Fairfield, CT

• Format: Regular Meeting

• Watch the replay: FairTV on YouTube or Cablevision Channel 78

• Full agenda and enclosures: Fairfield Public Schools Board of Education page

• Next meeting: May 26, 2026, 7:00 PM, CO Board Room

Want the board to hear you? Email all nine members at boemembers@fairfieldschools.org or show up to any meeting for public comment. Meeting schedule & agendas

The vote on the district’s first AI policy is expected at the next BOE meeting on May 12. If you have thoughts on what it should and shouldn’t say, this is your comment window.

If Someone Asks You...

“The school board took the first reading of its first-ever AI policy at last night’s meeting, and on the same night Max Stossel was a few miles away at Fairfield Ludlowe talking to a packed house of parents about kids and tech. There was no vote on the AI policy yet, that comes May 12. Some parents were upset they couldn’t be in two places at once. The board chair addressed it head-on. Same night, the district also picked up a state award for its cellphone-free schools initiative. Three things, one growing movement around tech and our kids.”

60-Second Version

• The board took up the first reading of Policy 6141.3273, Use of Artificial Intelligence, the district’s first formal AI policy. No vote was taken. The vote is expected at the next BOE meeting on May 12.

• The policy distinguishes traditional AI from generative AI. For grades K-8, students will not use generative AI as a substitute for the creative, critical-thinking, and problem-solving work of the classroom, with narrow exceptions for embedded AI in tools the district can’t easily separate from (state assessments, Encyclopedia Britannica search, Pebble Go). For 9-12, generative AI can be leveraged for instructional use, not to replace critical thinking.

• A district AI Steering Committee of 15 members (teachers across grade levels, administrators, the IT director, parents, and two board members) drafted this between January and April, ahead of schedule. Multiple board members called the process a model for how future tech conversations should be handled.

• Same night, the district picked up the CABE Bonnie B. Carney Award of Excellence for its “Bell to Bell - Cellphone Free Initiative” Special Project, plus three other communications awards.

• Same night, a few miles away at Fairfield Ludlowe, Max Stossel was speaking to a packed parent audience hosted by Fairfield CARES with Fairfield Public Schools, the PTA Council, OK to Delay, Digital Wellness Fairfield, and Wait Until 8th. Stossel is a national voice on kids and tech and helped start the team that became the Center for Humane Technology.

• Some parents were frustrated about the conflict between these two tech focused events. The board chair addressed it on the record: she said that she had thought the agenda would run longer, so anyone who went to Stossel would have time to come back. She said she misjudged. She also emphasized this is a first read with a full public comment window before any vote.

  Subscribe now

What’s Coming Up

• Mon, May 4 -- RTM votes on the full town budget (7 PM, CO Board Room).

• Wed, May 6 -- Connecticut state legislative session closes at midnight. Several pending bills affect district policy on kindergarten admissions, possibly cell phones, and home schooling.

• Tue, May 12 -- Next BOE Regular Meeting (7 PM, CO Board Room). Expected vote on Policy 6141.3273, Use of Artificial Intelligence.

• Teacher (and Staff) Appreciation Week -- next week.

The Big Story: A Big Night for a Growing Movement

April 28 was always going to be a bigger night than its agenda suggested.

At 7:00 PM, the Board of Education gaveled in at 501 Kings Highway East to take the first reading of Policy 6141.3273, Use of Artificial Intelligence. It was the district’s first-ever formal step on AI. (Video: ~40:56)

At the same hour, a few miles away at Fairfield Ludlowe High School, Max Stossel was opening a community talk on social media and kids. Stossel helped start the team that became the Center for Humane Technology, the organization featured in The Social Dilemma on Netflix, and has spent the last decade speaking with students, parents, and educators about kids and tech. The Tuesday event was hosted by Fairfield CARES with Fairfield Public Schools, the PTA Council, OK to Delay, Digital Wellness Fairfield, and Wait Until 8th.

Some parents flagged the conflict ahead of time. They wanted to be in both rooms and could not. The chair addressed it directly on the record before the AI policy presentation began:

“I will also say to any members of the public who are watching this on tape or who had hoped to come tonight, I did sincerely think it was going to take us longer to get to this on the agenda. I had emailed a few people saying they would have time to go to Max Stossel and if they wanted to come back in time for this, that they would have time. I did misjudge the time. However, again, this is a first read only, and there is plenty of time still for email comment as well as public comment at the next meeting, should we move ahead with a vote.” (Video: ~40:56)

This is not a story about deliberate scheduling. The chair owned the timing miscalculation. The point is what was happening across the two rooms at once.

In the board room, the district was taking its first formal position on what AI is and isn’t allowed to do in classrooms. In the Ludlowe auditorium, a packed audience of parents was getting a framework: the apps and games kids use are designed like slot machines, the people building them are sophisticated about how they hold attention, and the most useful posture for parents is side-by-side with their kids, not tug-of-war. And in between, on the same agenda as the AI policy, the district was being recognized by the state for its “Bell to Bell - Cellphone Free Initiative.”

Three different rooms, three different conversations, one underlying question. That’s a movement, and it showed up in Fairfield on Tuesday night.

Your Move: The AI policy comes back for a vote on May 12. The board explicitly said this is the public comment window. If you have thoughts on what it should and shouldn’t say, email boemembers@fairfieldschools.org before then.

Inside the AI Policy: What’s In It, What’s Out, What’s Next

This policy didn’t exist before. There was no formal district position on AI, generative or otherwise. Tuesday night was the first read of the document that, if approved on May 12, becomes that position.

The work has a backstory. An earlier internal draft came before the board months ago and prompted enough public hesitation that the superintendent recommended a pause. He charged Deputy Superintendent Zakia Parrish with leading a broader committee. The result was a 15-person AI Steering Committee made up of teachers across multiple grade levels (including media specialists and science and English teachers), administrators, the IT director, parents (one with decades of tech-industry experience), and two board members. They started in January and brought a recommendation to the policy committee in April. Ahead of deadline. (Video: ~41:30)

Traditional AI vs. generative AI. The policy draws an explicit line between the two. Traditional AI is the kind embedded in tools the district already uses, like the search bar in Encyclopedia Britannica or Pebble Go, or the adaptive features in some assessments. Generative AI is the tools that produce new content (text, images, code, and so on). The policy treats them differently because the risks and use cases are different.

For K-8. The regulations open with explicit language: Fairfield Public Schools staff will not permit students in kindergarten through grade eight to use generative AI as a substitute for the creative, critical thinking, and problem solving work of the classroom. (Video: ~53:28)

The narrow exception is the embedded AI the district can’t cleanly remove: certain state assessments (some of which adapt based on student responses), Encyclopedia Britannica’s search function, and Pebble Go. The policy is honest about that rather than pretending those tools can be switched off.

For 9-12. Generative AI can be leveraged for instructional use, but not to replace critical thinking. The two main approved tools at the high school level are Magic School and Google Gemini. The policy intentionally does not name specific products. As one board member put it, the moment you name applications, the policy is out of date.

No AI companions. A board member asked directly whether any tools available to students at any grade level offer an AI companion feature. Deputy Superintendent Parrish answered: no.

Vendor monitoring. Approved AI vendors are subject to periodic review and must notify the district of material changes to their product, terms of service, or data handling. A board member pushed to clarify that any such change automatically triggers a re-evaluation under the deployment review section. The IT director confirmed: any change in a vendor’s posted policy triggers review, and the district has a system actively monitoring vendor policies for changes.

The word “leverage.” The board grappled openly with word choice. “Leverage” sat oddly with one member who had flagged it during steering committee discussions. Other words on the chopping block during drafting included “support,” “augment,” and “enhance.” The chair came down on “leverage”: mechanical, purpose-driven, not implying replacement. (Video: ~58:21)

What the staff actually wanted. Multiple board members on the steering committee said the strongest support for the policy came from the staff itself. Teachers in grades 9-12 are, in the words of one board member who served on the committee, “already kind of in the wild wild west” and have been asking for guidance. (Video: ~1:04:20)

Opt-out. A board member raised whether parents could opt their children out of AI use. The committee had walked through this. The short answer is no, because no project mandates AI and the embedded AI in some tools can’t be cleanly removed. If teachers are not requiring AI use, there is nothing to opt out of. That is the current shape of it.

The committee model. Multiple board members called the AI Steering Committee process a model for how the district should handle future tech conversations. One board member who served on it framed it directly: “I would heavily encourage leadership through the chair to the superintendent to look at these types. I think we have tech conversations coming our way for quite a bit of time.” She called the parent and staff voices on the committee “vital” and not replicable on the board alone. (Video: ~55:31)

The vote is expected May 12.

Same Night, Different Room: Stossel at Ludlowe

While the board was working through Policy 6141.3273, parents were filling Fairfield Ludlowe’s auditorium for a community conversation with Max Stossel.

Stossel is one of the better-known voices on kids and tech. He helped start the team that became the Center for Humane Technology, then split off to focus specifically on parents, students, and educators. He’s spent the last decade on the road. The Tuesday parent event was the public-facing piece of a multi-day visit to Fairfield. He had also spoken with middle and high school students during the school day.

That structural shift is worth noting. From the dais, after returning to the meeting, a board member used the open comment portion to flag it explicitly:

“The decision was made by Fairfield CARES, at the recommendation of the district and PTA, to bring those programs in house. So instead of reaching a few dozen parents, we reached all of our middle schoolers and all of our high schoolers.” (Video: ~1:24:30)

That’s the model Fairfield has built: bring the speaker in for the kids first, the parents second. Same content, multiple audiences, same week.

Stossel’s framework, in one paragraph: Don’t argue with kids about whether social media is good or bad. The whole thing is a slot machine. The good content (funny videos, a friend’s reply, a Snapchat streak) is the reward designed to keep them coming back. The right question isn’t “do you like it” but “how does it feel after.” Most kids don’t actually love these apps, they just feel obligated to be on them because their friends are. Parents and kids are not on opposite sides of this. Both are being manipulated. The most useful posture is side-by-side, not tug-of-war.

The four norms Stossel pushes (drawn from Jonathan Haidt’s The Anxious Generation): no smartphone before high school, no social media before 16, phone-free schools, and more free play. Wait Until 8th, OK to Delay, and IRL are the community organizing models he points families toward. All of those, plus Fairfield CARES and Digital Wellness Fairfield, were named sponsors of Tuesday’s event.

A deeper write-up of Stossel’s content is coming separately. For now: take note. The Fairfield groups working on this issue are aligned, organized, and now reaching every middle and high school student in the district. The board’s first AI policy isn’t happening in isolation. It’s the next thing in a sequence.

The “Bell to Bell” Award: The Other Tech Story on the Same Agenda

Earlier in the meeting, before the AI policy ever came up, the district picked up four CABE Bonnie B. Carney Awards of Excellence in Educational Communications, recognizing the work of the district’s Director of Communications and her team: Social Media (Facebook, Reaching Our Community: Fairfield’s Digital Engagement), Annual Report (Transparency, Collaboration and Impact: Fairfield’s DIP in Action), Course Selection Guide (Guiding Futures: Comprehensive Career Pathways for Every Student), and Special Project. (Video: ~17:01)

The Special Project award is the one that matters here: “Bell to Bell - Cellphone Free Initiative.”

Fairfield’s bell-to-bell phone-free schools work is the third leg of the Tuesday-night convergence. The district has been implementing the phones-away policy that Stossel was, at almost exactly the same moment, telling parents was one of his four core norms. The state recognized it. The board accepted the plaque. The work continues.

Quick Hits

Invention Convention winners recognized. Fairfield fifth-graders presented original inventions to community judges and earned a packed house at the meeting. Inventions included the Car Sickness Conqueror, the Easy Peasy Rolling Pin, the Clueless Closet Comes to Life, the Barf Buddy, the Glow Helmet, and dozens more. Students from Burr, Dwight, Holland Hill, Jennings, McKinley, Mill Hill, North Stratfield, Osborn Hill, Riverfield, Sherman, and Stratfield were named individually. They advance to the state competition at UConn. (Video: ~17:35)

STEAM stays in the conversation. A parent used public comment to make the case that the STEAM and Invention Convention work on display Tuesday night is exactly what the district should not lose in the elementary schedule transition. She asked the board to look at the room of fifth-graders behind her and remember why the program matters. (Video: ~12:12)

ECC at Warde ed specs reapproved. The educational specifications for the Early Childhood Center at Fairfield Warde High School were sent back for copy-paste corrections (it had been described as an elementary school in places, which it isn’t) and were approved unanimously after the fix. (Video: ~26:14)

Healthy Food Certification approved. The annual certification needed for the National School Lunch Program (which brings in reimbursement for free and reduced meals), plus the standard exemption allowing non-compliant snacks at after-school events. Approved unanimously after a brief procedural reset. (Video: ~28:31)

McKinley Elementary partial roof project accepted as complete. Final state filing for reimbursement was the gating item. Approved unanimously. (Video: ~31:53)

Policy 3310 Purchasing first read. Updates align the policy with the town charter and add references to federal procurement compliance for grant-funded programs (especially school nutrition). Vote at the May 12 meeting. (Video: ~33:30)

Policy 3323 Bids and Quotations first read. No board questions. Vote at the May 12 meeting.

Policy 6162.51 Survey of Students first read. The proposed amendment lets the superintendent waive a board presentation when a recurring survey returns with no substantive changes (the Wakeman survey was the model). Board members raised two concerns: that the board still receive a notification copy when surveys go out, and that any survey tied to state or federal grant requirements still get a formal vote. Going back to policy committee. (Video: ~1:07:20)

Bylaw Advisory Committee approved. A three-member bipartisan committee will review the entire 9000-series bylaws. Bylaw changes require a 6-3 supermajority, which is part of why the chair pushed for bipartisan composition. (Video: ~1:13:42)

State legislative session closes May 6 at midnight. The board’s legislative liaison flagged several items still in motion: the home schooling bill (significantly pared back, with the proposed sports/classes provisions stripped out), kindergarten admissions policy implications, possible language changes affecting cell phone policy, and budget items affecting district funding. Expect policy updates in the coming weeks once final bills land.

Curriculum committee. The science curriculum rewrite gets its formal presentation in May. The elementary schedule progress is now a standing agenda item at every curriculum committee meeting. STEAM redistribution into science and library media is in active development. New science units coming over from STEAM mean each teacher will need additional materials bins, which is a budget implication the curriculum committee asked the administration to bring back to the full board.

RTM budget vote May 4. The RTM can only cut or hold flat, not add. No major reductions are anticipated.

Teacher and Staff Appreciation Week is next week. “You can never provide enough food for a teacher” is on the record.

What to Watch Next

• The May 12 vote on Policy 6141.3273, Use of Artificial Intelligence. This is the comment window. The chair was explicit on Tuesday: this is when the public should weigh in. After May 12, the policy is in effect.

• State legislation lands the same week. Several Connecticut bills move through final votes by May 6 at midnight. Multiple district policies may need updating soon after, including kindergarten admissions and possibly the cell phone policy.

• The science curriculum rewrite presentation in May. This is one of the active downstream effects of the elementary schedule change. STEAM standards are being absorbed into science. The curriculum committee has signaled there are budget implications they want the board to see, not hide.

• The Bylaw Advisory Committee starts work. Open-ended review of the 9000-series. Don’t expect immediate changes, but flag this as the place to send long-standing bylaw questions or concerns.

• More on Stossel coming separately. The Tuesday talk was the parent version of a presentation he gave earlier in the week to every middle and high school student in the district. There is a video link from the talk and a richer set of resources. Take note of this as a thread we’ll come back to.

Meeting Details

• Date: Tuesday, April 28, 2026, 7:00 PM

• Location: CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East, Fairfield, CT

• Format: Regular Meeting

• Watch the replay: FairTV on YouTube or Cablevision Channel 78

• Full agenda and enclosures: Fairfield Public Schools Board of Education page

• Next meeting: May 12, 2026, 7:00 PM, CO Board Room

Subscribe now

Recently I handed Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath’s book, “The Digital Delusion,” to each member of our Board of Education, with the hopes that they would at least flip through the pages. Based on years of research in the field of education, he concludes that our children are less cognitively capable than we were at the same age. He attributes this dumbing down phenomenon to the advent of screens in schools. His work demonstrates an alarming trend of standardized test scores plummeting after the implementation of 1:1 devices. Dr Horvath’s research is terrifying.Outside of raising awareness with my peers and policymakers I felt helpless as a parent. So, I put on my public health advocacy hat and turned to my friends at the PTA Council’s Digital Wellness Initiative.

Over the past two years, I have been working with a group of activated parents in Fairfield to raise awareness around the benefits of delaying the smartphone and Phone-Free Schools. We launched Fairfield’s Wait Until 8^th and OK to Delay chapters under the umbrella of The Fairfield PTA Council, and founded the Digital Wellness Initiative to engage, educate, and empower parents and students as they navigate this ever-changing digital ecosystem. Dr. Jonathan Haidt’s book, The Anxious Generation was our launchpad.

NYU professor and social psychologist, Jonathan Haidt’s premise is that we are “overprotecting children in the real-world and under protecting them in the digital world.” The opportunity cost of lost hours online is consequential. Children are missing real world opportunities to develop their brain and navigate real world challenges; experiences that they need to improve their confidence as they grow into adults. The digital world exposes children to inappropriate content, often gambling and pornography for boys and excessive social comparisons for girls, although current data shows this image driven word of “Looksmaxxing” also has found a place in adolescent boys, driving the dramatic increases in mental health issues. In their last report (2022), The Center for Disease Control and Prevention identified suicide as the second-leading cause of death for people under 24 years, while 20% of 12–17-year-olds had at least one major depressive episode. From a public health perspective these statistics are alarming, we have not seen anything like this in the 30 years of data collection.

Just last month, the landmark social media trials validated the research: Social Media harms children. While the content causes harm, the social media companies still have the Section 230 protections; the trials are holding them accountable for their addictive design. Social media has stolen a generation’s childhood and their ability to focus, socialize and, in some horrific cases, their lives.

The researchers and courts are sounding the alarm. Technology is making our kids dumber and sadder. We are in urgent need of policymakers to implement safeguards and schools to become tech-intentional (including a moratorium on AI).

In the meantime, we have partnered with Fairfield Cares and the Fairfield Public School System to engage and empower our students and families to drive change. Max Stossel, an award-winning author, poet, and speaker will be speaking at the middle and high schools next weekalong with a parent night on April 28^th at 7pm in the Fairfield Ludlowe High School auditorium.

Max’s parent night events sold out last year in Westport, Darien, Greenwich and New Canaan and we are thrilled to have him here in Farfield. This is a free event open to the entire community.

I hope to see you there. Please stop by and say hello and if you are interested in joining our movement, please email us at OKtodelay.Fairfield@gmail.com.

Rethinking Tech in Students’ Lives: An Evening with Max Stossel, Tuesday, April 28 • 7 PM - 8:30 PM

Reserve a Spot

This submission was prepared exclusively by the author and does not utilize AI content generation.

Author Bio: Elly Fatehi, PharmD, MPH, BCPS is a pharmacist and public health advocate. She is the past-president of the Fairfield PTA Council and has two children, one in middle school and one in elementary school.

Want the board to hear you? Email all nine members at boemembers@fairfieldschools.org or show up to any meeting for public comment. Meeting schedule & agendas

The Board of Finance votes on the full town budget on March 31. If you want the $844,236 restored to the education budget, the BOF public forum is this Saturday.

If Someone Asks You...

“The school board held its annual town hall last night and parents came out in force. The elementary schedule was the biggest topic. Parents are worried about losing STEAM and cutting art time for older kids, and the board held that the old schedule was broken and something had to give. Parents also came with research showing Chromebooks are hurting more than helping, and one parent described how her kids were falsely accused of using AI on schoolwork with zero protocol for how the school handles it. The board seemed to hear all of it, but the schedule is moving forward as planned for next year.”

60-Second Version

• The board blew through its formal business in under ten minutes, unanimously approving security vestibule specs for five elementary schools, setting graduation for June 16, and approving backlogged minutes. Then the real meeting started.

• The elementary schedule dominated the town hall for well over two hours. Parents, an art teacher, a Spanish teacher from New Canaan, and a former superintendent all made cases for preserving STEAM, protecting art time, and expanding Spanish to younger grades. The board defended the direction but acknowledged it’s not finished.

• A parent presented research linking 1:1 Chromebooks to declining test scores and asked the board to pause new edtech, audit existing platforms, and impose a moratorium on AI tools accessible to students. Multiple board members embraced her phrase “tech intentional” and expressed frustration that the district’s technology plan is more than three years old.

• A parent described her children being falsely accused of using AI at Fairfield Ludlowe, with no school protocol in place for how teachers should handle suspicions. Board members on the AI steering committee acknowledged the gap.

• Class sizes came up, with one parent asking how to advocate for smaller classes and a board member signaling plans to bring back a class size policy amendment this fall.

Subscribe now

Share

What’s Coming Up

• Sat, Mar 28 -- Board of Finance public forum. This is the public’s chance to advocate directly to the BOF for restoring the $844,236 cut from the education budget before the March 31 vote.

• Tue, Mar 31 -- Board of Finance and Board of Selectmen budget votes. Last stop before the RTM.

• Mon, Apr 28 -- Next BOE meeting (7 PM, CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East).

• Mon, May 4 -- RTM vote on the full budget. The RTM can only reduce or leave flat; they cannot add money back.

The Big Story: The Schedule Debate Comes Home

The elementary schedule overhaul that the board greenlit at its March 10 meeting was always going to generate heat. Last night’s town hall was the first chance parents had to look board members in the eye and say what they think. They used it.

The first parent up kicked things off with prepared remarks, identifying himself as someone whose own kids won’t be significantly affected (one elementary year left) but who felt compelled to speak for the community. His core argument: the district has spent a decade adding staffing, coordination, and structure to improve outcomes, yet scores haven’t moved. If those layers remain, he asked, why would more time inside the same framework produce a different result? He urged the board to pause and find a way forward that doesn’t sacrifice STEAM and art. (Video: ~12:06)

The board chair responded at length, making a point that came up repeatedly throughout the night: the genesis of the schedule change was not primarily test scores. It was that science and social studies were simply not being taught with integrity under the old schedule. Teachers were being double-booked, forced to choose between Spanish drop-ins, missed literacy blocks, and truncated science lessons. The new schedule, she argued, deals in reality rather than “fantasy numbers” where the board kept asking for more without ever taking anything away. (Video: ~15:38)

David Krasnoff who chaired the deep-dive sessions walked through the constraints: the committee examined options including longer specials, Spanish for K-2, rotating schedules, and folding gym into recess. All were considered and rejected based on staff feedback and logistical limits. He framed the current schedule as the “most holistic” option that preserved the broadest range of experiences without devastating any single subject. (Video: ~23:28)

A parent who is also an art teacher with 18 years of experience (currently teaching in Greenwich, with kids at Stratfield) made one of the night’s most memorable appearances. She described how specials are the first thing her kids talk about when they come home, argued that art builds courage and higher-order thinking, and warned that cutting art time in the upper grades is “detrimental not just to that one year, but impacts the next year and the following year.” She pointed to Easton, where art, music, and PE were cut in 2007 and never came back. And then she sang the STEAM song her son sings every night in the bathtub. The full song. At a board meeting. At 9 PM. (Video: ~38:31)

A board member engaged her directly, asking about the practical difference between 90 minutes of art for K-2 versus 45 minutes for upper grades. She was blunt: you won’t get projects done in fourth and fifth grade at 45 minutes. Upper-grade students need more time for planning, revision, and peer feedback, not less. (Video: ~53:08)

A parent who is also a Spanish teacher with 20 years of experience in New Canaan Public Schools offered a window into what a K-5 Spanish program can look like. In New Canaan, every elementary school has its own Spanish teacher, and students get ten minutes of Spanish every single day starting in kindergarten. The program is interdisciplinary, tying into social studies content. She noted that New Canaan scores among the highest in the state while maintaining this approach. (Video: ~2:06:31)

A curriculum committee member responded that the committee did look at daily short-block Spanish, but the district’s 11 elementary schools make staffing it a much bigger lift than in smaller districts like New Canaan. He also noted he personally reached out to a neighboring district that does K-5 Spanish and was told it’s “not going well” and under review. (Video: ~2:20:23)

A longtime Fairfield resident and former superintendent of schools made the case for treating Spanish as a core subject rather than a special. He argued that studying Spanish involves reading, writing, and oral conversation, all of which reinforce ELA skills. He urged the board to make Fairfield a “lighthouse district” for world language instruction and pushed for a formal evaluation system for the Spanish program. (Video: ~2:48:24)

Where STEAM is going: A parent pressed the board on exactly what happens to the STEAM curriculum. Based on board members’ responses, most STEAM content will be redistributed: science standards go back into the science curriculum (roughly one additional unit per grade), computer science and coding objectives return to library media, and one of two engineering design projects will be absorbed into science. The second engineering project currently has no home and may be lost. The full science curriculum rewrite is a couple of years away, so there will be a transition plan for next year. Invention Convention’s status was not definitively addressed. (Video: ~2:59:46)

One of the sharper exchanges of the evening came when a board member pushed for a written evaluation plan with stated objectives and measurable metrics to accompany the schedule changes. Her argument: if you’re making big changes, you should already know what you expect to get from them. (Video: ~2:29:32)

The board chair took a different position, arguing that the goal has already been achieved: teachers now have a schedule where they can actually teach what they’ve been asked to teach. There is nothing to measure because the problem (teachers being double-booked and unable to deliver approved curricula) has been solved. Whether the board likes what the schedule looks like is a separate, ongoing conversation. (Video: ~2:31:06)

The bottom line: The schedule is moving forward for the 2026-27 school year. No formal vote was taken or needed (it’s a management decision). The board signaled that it views this as a starting point. Topics flagged for continued exploration include: shorter, more frequent Spanish blocks for K-5; potential fifth-grade elective choices in specials; interdisciplinary curriculum work (especially social studies into ELA); and a formal evaluation process after year one.

Your Move: The board has said repeatedly that the schedule is not finished. If you have ideas or concerns, email the board at boemembers@fairfieldschools.org. The curriculum committee will continue working on this. The next BOE meeting is April 28.

“Tech Intentional”: Parents Want a Reckoning with Classroom Technology

The second major theme of the evening was a growing parent movement around technology in the classroom.

A parent presented data from the recently published book The Digital Delusion by Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath, a teacher-turned-neuroscientist who recently testified before the U.S. Senate. She shared slides showing that national NAEP test scores began declining around the time schools adopted 1:1 digital devices, that Connecticut’s own scores follow the same pattern, and that Fairfield’s district achievement data since the 2018-2019 Chromebook rollout shows similar trends. (Video: ~1:21:46)

She made four specific requests: pause investment in new edtech tools, audit existing platforms for effectiveness and safety, impose an immediate moratorium on AI products accessible to students, and become “tech intentional” as a district.

The board was broadly receptive. The board chair said she would adopt the phrase “tech intentional” going forward. A board member noted the district’s technology plan is over three years old and has been “asked for repeatedly to be updated.” She pointed out that the plan only called for 1:1 Chromebook issuance in sixth grade and above, raising the question of how younger students ended up with them. (Video: ~1:39:17)

Another parent took the conversation further. She described meeting with Superintendent Testani and the district’s technology director to explore what data exists on classroom tech usage. What they found was that individual app dashboards are “designed in a silo,” use inconsistent metrics (one measures usage in seconds), and can’t be easily aggregated. She proposed a district-wide survey of administrators, parents, and students to establish a baseline of what’s actually happening with technology in classrooms. (Video: ~1:59:09)

Board members expressed support for this kind of discovery work. One board member noted that multiple board members’ own children don’t have devices at home, and that tracking school-based usage has been a persistent challenge.

The one point of caution came around the word “technology” itself. A board member pressed for clarity: are we talking about 1:1 Chromebook issuance, or all technology including specialized courses like CAD, architecture software, and robotics? The parent confirmed she was focused on Chromebooks and general-purpose screen use, not specialized instructional tools. (Video: ~1:38:32)

“Show Me the Proof”: When AI Accusations Hit Home

The discussion took a personal turn when a parent described what happened when both of her children at Fairfield Ludlowe High School were accused of using AI on their schoolwork. (Video: ~1:43:47)

Her older daughter, a high-achieving student in all honors and AP classes, was accused by a teacher. The daughter was able to advocate for herself, sitting with a house principal to walk through her Google Docs edit history and prove the work was hers. A teacher from the prior year confirmed the student was capable of the writing. The accusation was cleared, but the teacher never apologized. The parent said her daughter now “dumbs down her work” to avoid being accused again, doesn’t want to go to school, and is afraid of the teacher. She wants to take AP French next year, but this teacher is the only one who teaches the course.

Her younger son had it worse. After submitting an essay that received a 99%, with an outline that had already been checked and approved, a teacher pulled him out of class weeks later, accused him of cheating, and gave him a zero. The parent said the school provided no proof, used no AI detection tools (“we don’t use them, they’re not reliable”), and based the accusation on the text appearing “too quickly.” In the same conversation, the parent said the teacher told her the son’s writing was excellent and he should be in honors the next year.

She said the family met with the administration and felt “completely gaslit.”

Multiple board members responded. Two members who sit on the AI steering committee said the protocol issue for how teachers handle AI suspicions has not been fully addressed in that committee’s work. One board member, who is also a working high school English teacher, acknowledged the difficulty of policing AI but said that developing school-level protocols is an administrative function, not typically a board policy matter. She encouraged the parent to stay in contact with the school administration and raise it at PTA meetings. (Video: ~1:54:01)

The parent pushed back: if the district requires students to submit everything through Google Classroom on 1:1 Chromebooks, there need to be protections for students who are doing honest work.

The AI steering committee’s work is expected to come before the board in the coming weeks. Based on the discussion, teacher-facing protocols for handling AI suspicions are now likely to receive more attention.

Class Size: A Familiar Fight Gets New Energy

A kindergarten parent at Stratfield Elementary raised class sizes as an issue and asked the board directly: how do parents advocate for smaller classes? (Video: ~1:10:39)

A board member who said this issue was “one of the main topics that got me into this work” shared that her own twins have been in at-capacity classes their entire time at Stratfield. She said the board attempted a policy change last year and was asked by the administration to revisit it in one year. That one-year mark is approaching, and she is “really hopeful in the fall” that this comes before the board again. (Video: ~1:11:31)

The vice chair made the case that lowering class sizes without redistricting is not realistic. He pointed to buildings at or near capacity and warned about new apartment developments that will eventually yield school-age children, even if current yield projections are low. He said he’s “willing and ready” to have the redistricting conversation if the board goes down the class size path. (Video: ~1:15:33)

Another board member noted that K-2 class size caps in Fairfield are on the high side compared to neighboring districts with policies, where the average is 21. She said enrollment projections are available online, and the practical answer to lowering caps is straightforward: “a change in policy and money in the budget.” (Video: ~1:19:41)

A curriculum committee member said he plans to bring back his class size policy amendment this year and noted that the elimination of standalone STEAM rooms could potentially free up classroom space in every building. (Video: ~1:20:19)

Quick Hits

Graduation set: Both Fairfield Ludlowe and Fairfield Warde High School graduations will be Tuesday, June 16, 2026 at 6:00 PM. Approved unanimously. (Video: ~5:26)

Security vestibules approved: Educational specifications for security entrance vestibules at Burr, ECC (Warde), McKinley, Roger Sherman, and Stratfield elementary schools all passed unanimously. These bring the five schools up to the same entrance standards already in place at other district buildings. (Video: ~6:01)

Minutes approved: Five sets of backlogged minutes (January 21 special, January 27 special, January 27 regular, February 10 special, February 10 regular) were approved unanimously after a minor amendment to remove a board member’s name from the February 10 regular meeting attendance (she was not present at that meeting). (Video: ~7:53)

Kindergarten entry cutoff: A parent asked the board about the elimination of early kindergarten entry testing for fall 2027. A board member explained that the September 1st birthday cutoff is now state law, replacing the previous waiver system. The board has no discretion to override it. Parents who want the law changed would need to advocate with their state representatives. (Video: ~2:42:23)

State education funding: A resident detailed how Fairfield’s ECS (Education Cost Sharing) funding has dropped from roughly $3.5 million to about $100 per student since 2015-2016. Adjusted for inflation, that’s about $4.5 million in lost annual revenue. He asked whether the board would advocate at the state level for increased funding. The board chair said she would “happily sign on” to a collective advocacy effort. A board member tracking state legislation noted that there are multiple bills for additional funding in the current session but cautioned that Fairfield is unlikely to see much benefit given how the formula works. (Video: ~3:20:23)

Budget advocacy reminder: The board chair closed by reminding the public that the Board of Finance public forum is this Saturday, where residents can advocate directly for restoring the $844,236 that was cut from the education budget. The BOF votes March 31. (Video: ~3:38:41)

What to Watch Next

• The AI steering committee’s work is expected to come before the board in the coming weeks. Based on last night’s discussion, expect teacher-facing protocols for handling AI suspicions to be a focal point.

• Class size policy is likely to return this fall. At least one board member plans to bring back an amendment to the current policy, and the one-year review window the administration requested is approaching.

• Technology audit and survey: Multiple parents proposed, and board members supported, establishing a baseline understanding of how technology is actually being used in classrooms. Whether this takes the form of a formal audit, parent/teacher/student survey, or both remains to be seen.

• The Board of Finance votes March 31 on the full town budget, including whether to restore the $844,236 to the education budget. Saturday’s public forum is the last chance for public input before that vote.

• Elementary schedule monitoring will be ongoing. The board has signaled that the curriculum committee will continue working on unresolved issues including art time for upper grades, Spanish format, interdisciplinary curriculum work, and a formal evaluation framework.

Meeting Details

• Date: Tuesday, March 24, 2026, 7:00 PM

• Location: CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East, Fairfield, CT

• Format: Special Meeting (business items) followed by Town Hall (moderated by Brenda Kupchick)

• Watch the replay: FairTV on YouTube or Cablevision Channel 78

• Full agenda and enclosures: Fairfield Public Schools Board of Education page

• Next meeting: April 28, 2026, 7:00 PM, CO Board Room

Want the board to hear you? Email all nine members at boemembers@fairfieldschools.org or show up to any meeting for public comment. Meeting schedule & agendas

The Board of Finance votes on the full town budget on March 31. If you have thoughts on the education budget, now is the time.

If Someone Asks You...

"The school board is asking the Board of Finance to put back about $844,000 that got cut from the budget. Most of the original $2 million cut already got covered by insurance savings and some smart moves on Chromebooks. The big risk now is transportation — they just pulled four buses off the road this week. The Board of Finance votes March 31, and they actually seemed pretty sympathetic."

60-Second Version

• The BOE is asking the Board of Finance to restore $844,236 that was cut by the First Selectwoman's office. New health insurance numbers (12.5% instead of 14%) and a plan to pre-purchase Chromebooks this year have already absorbed over $1.15 million of the original $2 million reduction. The $844K covers remaining risk in transportation and unanticipated costs.

• Transportation is the biggest budget risk. The BOE cut $648,000 from transportation at the board level, and Testani estimates roughly half of that (around $300K) carries real risk of going over budget. The district just consolidated routes and pulled four buses off the road to save money, generating some parent pushback.

• The elementary schedule change dominated Q&A even though it's not a budget item. Multiple BOF members pressed Testani on whether eliminating STEAM positions would produce savings. Testani and BOE Chair Jennifer Maxon Kennelly both emphasized the schedule change is educationally driven, not budget driven, and that financial impacts are still unknown.

• A new accounting method could unlock $945,000 in investment income for the town. The CFO proposed recognizing bond discount amortization in the budget, money the town was already earning but not counting.

• A BOF member flagged a 20-year trend problem: the grand list grows at 0.3% to 1.5% while education costs increase 4.5% to 5% annually. Several members called this trajectory unsustainable.

  What's Coming Up

  • Mon, Mar 16 and Thu, Mar 19: Board of Finance continues budget hearings (Monday at the fire station activity center, Thursday at the regular location). DPW presents next week.

  • Mon, Mar 24: BOE Special Meeting and Town Hall (7 PM, CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East). Security vestibule votes and the annual town hall.

  • Tue, Mar 31: Board of Selectmen and Board of Finance budget votes. This is the last stop before the budget goes to the RTM.

  • Mon, May 4: RTM vote on the full budget. The RTM can only reduce or leave the budget flat; they cannot add money back.

  Subscribe now

  Share The Fairfield Parent Brief

  ---

  The Big Story: Testani Makes His Case for $844,236

  Link - Board of Education Proposed Budget 2026/2027

  Thursday night’s Board of Finance hearing was the main event in this year’s budget season: the moment when the people who control the town’s purse strings get to question the superintendent directly about every dollar.

  Superintendent Mike Testani opened with a polished presentation covering the highlights of the $245.9 million proposed BOE budget (up 5.54% before reductions, or about 5.04% with the requested restoration). (Video: ~1:54)

  The core message was simple: this is a responsible budget built on real needs, and the cuts already made have created real risk.

  The math of the reductions:

  The budget started with $3.2 million in reductions at the superintendent level, including $1.3 million in salary and benefits from eliminating about 11 FTE positions (mostly through attrition, Testani emphasized, meaning nobody lost their job). The Board of Education then cut another $980,000. The First Selectwoman’s office cut roughly $2 million on top of that.

  Since then, three pieces of good news have offset a chunk of the First Selectwoman’s cut:

  • The state health insurance partnership plan came in at 12.5% instead of the budgeted 14%, saving approximately $491,000

  • Pension savings of roughly $487,000

  • A plan to pre-purchase Chromebooks this fiscal year (saving about $177,000 by buying before tariff-driven price increases hit)

  That gets the gap down to $844,236, which is what Testani is asking the Board of Finance to restore. (Video: ~14:35)

  The Elementary Schedule Elephant in the Room

  Even though the elementary schedule overhaul is explicitly not a budget item (it’s a management decision about instructional time, as we covered in our last edition’s Big Story), the Board of Finance couldn’t resist picking at it. And for good reason: there are 11 FTE positions currently dedicated to STEAM and gifted programming, and if STEAM is being eliminated as a standalone special, those people have to land somewhere.

  BOF Chairman Curley kicked off the discussion by noting the timing: "Obviously the people I did that night we were talking about tonight... I’d like to spend a little time talking about that." (Video: ~1:47:35)

  Shane Pendley zeroed in on the financial logic. If STEAM teachers move into vacant positions created by retirements, the district loses the salary savings it was counting on from attrition (replacing a $150,000 veteran with a $100,000 new hire). Testani confirmed this is likely: the attrition savings assumption in the budget "is a little bit too high, probably." (Video: ~44:42)

  But Testani and Maxon Kennelly both pushed back hard on framing this as a cost-cutting exercise. Testani said any savings from the schedule change would be reported back to the BOF, but the district also anticipates new needs: possibly a science coordinator to support classroom teachers who will now be absorbing engineering standards, and additional art staffing at the primary level.

  James Walsh finally cut through the back-and-forth: "You have no numbers for our discussion on that... We should just move on from this and not talk about it." (Video: ~1:59:44) Testani agreed.

  The First Selectwoman (who was present as Speaker 2 at various points) acknowledged that her $2 million reduction was informed in part by anticipation of the schedule changes, but emphasized she was trying to balance the needs of the entire town budget in a revaluation year.

  The bottom line for parents: the district had no savings numbers to present to the BOF that night, and any financial impact from the schedule change won’t be known before the March 31 vote. If it produces savings at all, it will show up later, and the BOF and RTM will know about it when it does.

  ---

  The 20-Year Sustainability Problem

  One of the most striking moments of the evening came when a BOF member pulled back to a 30,000-foot view. Looking at 20 years of budget data, they flagged a structural problem: Fairfield’s grand list (the total assessed value of taxable property, which drives tax revenue) grows at 0.3% to 1.5% annually. Education costs grow at 4.5% to 5%. Those two lines are diverging, and eventually something has to give. (Video: ~1:34:17)

  Testani acknowledged the math. He pointed out that Fairfield’s ask of roughly 5% is actually on the low end compared to similar DRG B districts (District Reference Group B, the state’s grouping of comparable wealthy suburban districts), some of which are requesting 8% or more. He also noted the structural inefficiency of operating two high schools: "Having two high schools is very costly. It’s very inefficient. But that’s what we have." (Video: ~1:37:42)

  James Meyers connected this to the proficiency data from the BOE’s elementary schedule presentation, noting that the district’s low-70s proficiency rates in ELA and math are concerning and don’t match the public perception of Fairfield as a top-performing district. Testani agreed, saying the literacy investments of recent years are paying dividends and he expects state test scores to show significant elementary gains this spring.

  Shane Pendley raised a longer-term concern: potential state legislation that could change zoning density (from three-acre minimums to half-acre), which could increase enrollment significantly and strain the already-stretched school infrastructure.

  The teachers’ contract adds another layer. This is the final year of the current agreement (negotiated in 2023 at 2.12% annually for top-step teachers, with 42% of the teaching staff already at the top of the pay scale). Negotiations begin this summer, and recent settlements across Connecticut have been running 12% to 13% over three years. One board member called this trajectory "spinning out of control."

  ---

  Cenergistic: Good Program, But BOF Wants Receipts

  The energy savings program with Cenergistic came up again, following Tuesday night’s detailed BOE presentation. The BOF was complimentary of the savings (Testani said almost $1 million since Cenergistic started, with Tuesday’s BOE presentation putting the figure at roughly $911,000 over two years) but pressed for more detail on the contract itself. (Video: ~1:14:24)

  James Walsh asked the key question: how are they actually achieving the savings? Testani described it as a combination of infrastructure optimization and behavioral changes, with the Cenergistic specialist working in buildings at all hours to tune systems and train staff.

  Walsh then pushed further: will the savings diminish over time as the low-hanging fruit is exhausted? And what are the actual contract terms? How much is the district paying Cenergistic for their services?

  Testani explained that the contract includes a performance guarantee: if Cenergistic doesn’t achieve savings exceeding their fees, they write the district a check for the shortfall. But Walsh noted that if the district pays $890,000 and saves $900,000, the town is only netting $10,000.

  The question of whether the contract went through a competitive bid process raised eyebrows. Testani said he didn’t believe there was a formal bid but that Executive Director of Operations Angelus Papageorge had vetted the company against other districts’ experiences. The First Selectwoman clarified that there was in fact an RFP process, according to the town’s purchasing department.

  Walsh and Meyers both requested a follow-up memo from the purchasing department explaining the procurement process, as well as more detail on the contract terms and fee structure.

  ---

  Investment Income: A $945,000 Accounting Fix

  In the second half of the meeting, the BOF turned to town finance items. Town CFO Tom Harris presented a recommendation to change how the town accounts for investment income from its bond portfolio. (Video: ~2:39:04)

  The short version: when the town buys bonds at a discount (paying less than face value), it earns money two ways. First, from the interest payments (the coupon). Second, from the "accretion of discount," meaning the difference between what they paid and what they’ll get back at maturity. The town has been budgeting only the interest portion, not the accretion. That means every year, the accretion shows up as a "surprise" surplus.

  Harris proposed amortizing the discount into the budget, which would add approximately $945,000 in recognized investment income for fiscal year 2027. This isn’t new money. It’s money the town is already earning but hasn’t been counting in its budget projections.

  Pendley was strongly in favor: "I’ve never understood why we end up with these surpluses when we can just do it like this." (Video: ~2:47:32)

  The BOF appeared broadly supportive. The only risk is if a bond gets sold or called early, but the town’s practice is to hold bonds to maturity, making that scenario unlikely.

  ---

  The Non-Lapsing Account Conversation

  A quieter but potentially significant discussion unfolded around Connecticut statute 10-248a, which allows boards of education to create a non-lapsing account. This would let the BOE carry surplus funds from one year into the next, designated for specific educational purposes.

  Testani and his team floated two possible uses: pre-purchasing textbooks (which are a major line item this year, with new social studies and math materials totaling over $1 million), or creating a reserve specifically for special education cost volatility.

  Curley was cautiously supportive but warned the BOE to be "very cognizant" of the optics of making year-end purchases in a tough budget year. The conversation got more pointed when Curley challenged the First Selectwoman on the logic of using projected surpluses to offset next year’s budget, calling it "horrible logic" based on his experience seeing surpluses fluctuate wildly between quarters. (Video: ~2:18:47)

  The First Selectwoman pushed back, noting that her reduction was a starting point and that she was trying to balance competing demands across all town departments in a revaluation year.

  ---

  Quick Hits

  Class sizes at the high schools drew scrutiny from BOF members, who flagged sections with fewer than 15 students in core subjects at Warde compared to Ludlowe. Testani explained that combining small sections risks exceeding contractual class size limits, but said the district will examine this closely as it builds the master schedule for next year.

  Staff salary increases prompted a detailed exchange. A BOF member pointed out that the headline 4.56% salary increase is somewhat misleading because it doesn’t include degree changes in the same line. When you add those together, the real number is closer to 2.8%, still above the 2.12% contract rate because teachers who aren’t at the top step also get step increases on top of the general wage bump.

  The Chromebook strategy has shifted: elementary students no longer take Chromebooks home. They stay in classrooms, reducing screen time and extending device life. The district still purchases for grades 6 and 9, where the academic need is greater.

  State ECS (Education Cost Sharing) funding remains flat. The foundation amount hasn’t increased in 13 years. There are bills in the state legislature that could raise it by $1,000, but even if passed, the formula means Fairfield would see minimal additional revenue.

  A personnel complaint was briefly discussed at the end of the meeting. Chairman Curley disclosed that he received a 25-page demand letter from a terminated town employee making allegations about the HR department and payroll systems. He forwarded it to the police chief and the full board. He emphasized this was a duty to act, not an endorsement of the claims. No details were discussed publicly.

  ---

  What to Watch Next

  • The $844,236 restoration decision will be made when the BOF votes on March 31. This is the single biggest open question for the education budget.

  • Elementary schedule financial impact remains the wildcard. The BOF asked for numbers; the district said they’d do their best but don’t expect definitive figures before the BOF vote. The RTM may have more information by early May.

  • Cenergistic contract details were requested by multiple BOF members. Expect a follow-up memo from the purchasing department on procurement process and contract terms.

  • Investment income methodology change ($945,000) appears likely to be adopted, which could ease pressure on the overall town budget and indirectly help the case for the BOE restoration.

  ---

  Meeting Details

  • Date: Thursday, March 12, 2026, 7:00 PM

  • Location: Board of Finance meeting room, Fairfield, CT

  • Body: Board of Finance (Budget Hearing #3)

  • Watch the replay: FairTV on YouTube or Cablevision Channel 78

  • Full budget book: Fairfield Public Schools Board of Education page

  • BOF agendas & minutes: Board of Finance page

  • Next BOF meetings: Monday, March 16 (Firehouse Activity Center) and Thursday, March 19

  • BOF Budget Vote: March 31, 2026

Subscribe now

60-Second Version

• The district unveiled a new elementary schedule that adds 10 minutes to ELA (English Language Arts) and 20 minutes to math daily, eliminates the standalone STEAM special and the separate WIN (What I Need) intervention block, and moves Spanish from a classroom “push-in” to a full 45-minute rotating special for grades 3-5.

• Six students and multiple parents showed up to defend specials. Fourth graders made passionate cases for art, STEAM, and Spanish. One student told the board that art is the one place where “there’s no wrong answer.”

• The board gave broad support to the direction but not without reservations. Art time for grades 3-5 was a sticking point for nearly every board member. Jennifer Jacobsen pushed hard on whether 914 annualized instructional hours was too close to the state minimum.

• The Cenergistic energy program reported roughly $911,000 in savings across its first two years, with a 13% reduction in energy use district-wide.

• Policy 6142.2 (Reading/Language Arts) was deleted on a 6-1 vote after Jacobsen’s amendment to update it instead failed 2-5.

• Security vestibule specs for five schools got their first reading and will be voted on March 24.

  Share The Fairfield Parent Brief

  Subscribe now

  What’s Coming Up

  • Thu, March 12 — Board of Finance takes up the school budget (Town Hall, 7:00 PM)

  • Tue, March 24 — BOE Town Hall for community input on the 2026-27 budget

  ---

  The Big Story: A New Elementary Schedule Takes Shape

  The biggest agenda item of the night was the proposed elementary schedule, and it drew the largest crowd. Chief Academic Officer James Zavodjancik walked the board through a recommendation that’s been months in the making, involving a 16-member committee, over 14 different schedule options, and input from staff, principals, and the curriculum committee.

  The core problem: Over the years, the board and previous administrations kept adding things to the elementary day (STEAM, expanded Spanish, longer lunch, more recess) without taking anything away. The result is a schedule where the time on paper doesn’t match reality. Teachers are routinely losing core instructional minutes because specials, push-in Spanish, and other blocks overlap and crowd out reading, writing, and math.

  The data backing this up was sobering. Student achievement in ELA and math has hovered in the low 70% range on state assessments for nearly a decade. Growth rates sit between 60-72%, well short of the 100% target. By eighth grade, only about 66% of students are hitting proficiency in math.

  What the new schedule does:

  The recommendation keeps the six-day rotation but restructures the specials within it:

  • Language arts goes to 120 minutes daily (up from roughly 110, though actual time varied widely by school)

  • Math goes to 80 minutes daily (up from 60)

  • The WIN/flex intervention block is eliminated. Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions will happen within the ELA and math blocks through small-group instruction.

  • STEAM is eliminated as a standalone special. Engineering standards will be folded back into science. The district emphasized this will mean more consistent science instruction within a dedicated 45-minute science/social studies block, rather than the fragmented approach that existed.

  • Spanish becomes a 45-minute rotating special for grades 3-5 instead of a 30-minute push-in (which, after setup and transition, often delivered only 15-20 minutes of actual instruction). Spanish will not extend to K-2, based on feedback from Spanish teachers that the period length was too long for younger students.

  • All remaining specials run at 45 minutes on a six-day rotation. All grades get two PE periods. K-2 gets two art periods, while 3-5 gets one art and one Spanish. Seven specials in six days means one day per cycle gets a double special, which preserves grade-level meeting time for teachers.

  • Morning meeting goes to 20 minutes (up from 15), and breakfast will move exclusively to the cafeteria next year so teachers aren’t losing morning meeting time to cleanup.

  The art problem: The schedule was well-received in broad strokes, but nearly every board member flagged the same concern: art time for grades 3-5 is getting reduced. Kindergartners gain about 50 minutes per cycle and first/second graders gain 40 minutes, but third graders lose 5 minutes and fourth/fifth graders lose about 25 minutes per cycle.

  Jacobsen drilled into this extensively, questioning whether the approach was too time-focused rather than standards-based. She argued that 2,700 minutes of art per year for a kindergartner but only 1,200 for a fifth grader didn’t align with the increasing complexity of upper-grade art standards. She also pushed for lengthening the school day (even by five minutes), noting Fairfield’s elementary day at 6 hours 35 minutes is shorter than surrounding districts like Trumbull and Ridgefield at 6 hours 45 minutes.

  Superintendent Mike Testani acknowledged those concerns but noted that extending the day would require negotiation with the teachers’ union and would have budget implications.

  Jennifer Maxon-Kennelly, who chairs the board and the curriculum committee process, was direct about the stakes. She reminded the board that this is technically a management decision that didn’t even need board input, but the administration chose to bring it forward. She also made clear that the status quo wasn’t an option, saying previous boards had approved curriculum after curriculum without providing the time for teachers to actually deliver it.

  David Krasnoff, who chaired the curriculum committee’s deep-dive sessions (roughly 6-8 hours of meetings plus individual homework), noted that the committee examined options like rotating specials, folding gym into recess, and expanding Spanish to K-2. All were considered and ultimately rejected based on staff feedback and logistical constraints.

  Jason Li made an impassioned case for why the change matters, pointing to the achievement data and asking the board whether it was content with 72% proficiency. He argued that Fairfield’s reputation as a destination school district demands better.

  Kathryn Anne Flynn, also on the curriculum committee, noted she couldn’t fully support the schedule at the previous day’s committee meeting because of the art cuts, but said the five additional minutes added to specials since then was reassuring. She also raised the idea of hiring paraprofessionals to cover recess duty so certified teachers could use that time for planning. Testani and the administration agreed to explore that model.

  Another curriculum committee member echoed broad support, calling the schedule a good starting point while acknowledging the art reduction was painful. She specifically praised the science improvements, noting that some students were previously getting as little as 20 minutes of science on some days.

  The bottom line: The board broadly supports the direction. No formal vote is required since scheduling is a management decision. The administration will continue refining based on board feedback, and the curriculum committee will keep working on follow-up items including a standards-based analysis of specials allocations, interdisciplinary curriculum opportunities (particularly integrating social studies into ELA), and potential staffing models for recess coverage.

  Subscribe now

  ---

  Public Comment: Students Steal the Show

  The most memorable moments of the night came during public comment, when a parade of elementary students stepped up to the microphone.

  Nora Romeo, a student at McKinley Elementary, opened by telling the board they should talk directly to students about how the curriculum affects them. She made the case that specials are essential to becoming well-rounded, and described art class as her only opportunity for hands-on creative work with clay, paint, and paper mache.

  A fourth grader from Stratfield used a Lego analogy to explain STEAM’s value, describing how it “connects all the other subjects into one big circle.” Another Stratfield fourth grader talked about stress and said art is the one subject where “there’s no wrong answer.”

  A fourth grader from Mill Hill was excited about Invention Convention through STEAM and advocated for keeping art at its current length, saying “rushing isn’t good, because then you won’t get time to finish it.”

  Parents echoed these themes. One McKinley parent noted that her children talk about specials more than any other part of their day. A parent who also teaches second grade in Westport warned that asking children to “sit longer, absorb more content, and meet increasingly intense academic expectations at earlier ages” could backfire.

  A representative from the Fairfield Education Association (the teachers’ union) acknowledged the difficult tradeoffs and thanked the administration for confirming that no teachers will lose their jobs due to the schedule changes. She also noted that Fairfield elementary teachers’ prep time is less than most neighboring districts.

  During the second public comment period at the end of the meeting, a parent named Greg Bosch made a pointed case for keeping STEAM, calling it “the one part of the curriculum that was intentionally designed” for interdisciplinary learning. An art teacher also spoke, asking why art was being treated as secondary to music and PE when all three are essential.

  ---

  Cenergistic Energy Update: $914K in Savings and Counting

  Gerard Batista, the district’s embedded Cenergistic energy specialist, delivered a detailed update on the energy conservation program now in its second year.
  

  The headline numbers: the district has saved roughly $911,000 across two performance years, with about $418,000 in year one and $455,000 in year two. The 12-month energy utility spend sits at about $3.97 million, compared to what would have been $4.88 million without the program. Overall energy use is down 13% district-wide.
  

  The environmental impact translates to 3,247 metric tons of CO2 avoided, the equivalent of planting over 53,000 trees over ten years.
  

  The savings come roughly 50/50 from two sources: mechanical optimization (boiler systems, air handlers, VRF systems) and human behavior changes (building programming, staff habits like closing doors and windows).

  Batista noted the district’s Energy Use Intensity score has dropped from 78 to 68 (the regional average is 75), and the program is pursuing Energy Star certification for individual buildings.

  The presentation also touched on a demand response program that would enroll middle and high school buildings during extreme weather over school breaks. The program has no upfront cost and would generate revenue through utility incentives. Board members expressed interest but wanted more details before committing.
  

  On solar, the district’s on-site arrays are generating value of about $360,800 annually at current utility rates. The team is working to align peak demand with solar production periods to maximize offset of demand charges.

  ---

  Policy 6142.2: Deleted After Amendment Fails

  The board voted 6-1 to delete Policy 6142.2 (Reading/Language Arts), ending a saga that has spanned multiple meetings. Jacobsen cast the lone opposing vote.

  Before the deletion vote, Jacobsen presented an amendment she’d drafted to update the policy rather than eliminate it entirely. Her version kept the opening paragraph about providing each student an educational program at their ability level, removed outdated references, and incorporated language from Connecticut’s Right to Read Act.

  Janine Goss, the district’s Executive Director of PK-12 Literacy, raised concerns about several elements of the proposed amendment. She cautioned that language about teaching at a student’s “level of ability” runs counter to the district’s current approach of teaching to grade-level standards. She also flagged the word “differentiation” as potentially confusing to teachers, noting there is limited research supporting differentiation as commonly understood.

  The amendment failed 2-5, with only Jacobsen and Flynn voting in favor. Maxon-Kennelly noted that while she appreciated Jacobsen bringing a concrete alternative (rather than simply voting no), the policy committee felt the language was problematic and that existing curriculum documents and state law already cover the same ground.

  ---

  Security Vestibules: First Reading for Five Schools

  The board heard the first reading of educational specifications for security entrance vestibules at five elementary schools: Burr, ECC (Warde), McKinley, Stratfield, and Sherman. These are boilerplate specs that will bring the five schools up to the same entrance vestibule standards already in place at other district buildings.

  Angelus Papageorge confirmed the scope matches the dollar estimates already approved by the town. The vote was deferred to the March 24 special meeting to allow time to draft the individual motions (each school requires its own motion). The Standing Building Committee meets at the end of March, so the timeline still works.

  ---

  Quick Hits

  Board Appreciation Month: Superintendent Testani recognized the board for their service, presenting small tokens of appreciation and noting that board work is "a thankless job" that involves "difficult decisions that aren’t always popular."

  Consent Calendar: Pushed to March 24 by unanimous consent. The minutes from five previous meetings (January 21 special, January 27 special, January 27 regular, February 10 special, February 10 regular) will be voted on then.

  Dwight Building Committee: The committee has selected an architect (not yet publicly announced pending notification) and the RFP for construction management has gone out.

  HVAC/IQ Committee: Work continues at Tomlinson Middle School. Parents should report any cleanliness or dust issues to the principal.

  Legislative Update: Jacobsen is tracking roughly 60 bills across several committees. She flagged Special Act 98, recently signed into law, which includes provisions on kindergarten entrance, seclusion and restraint, and extends racial imbalance requirements to 2030. Some new policy updates will be needed.

  Fairfield Cares Events: Two community events coming up. "The Sober Truth: From Addiction to Recovery" with Hunter Flores on March 30 at the Fairfield Public Library at 6:30 PM. "Rethinking Tech and Student Lives" with Max Stossel on April 28 at 7 PM at Fairfield Ludlowe High School, with in-school presentations at all three middle schools and both high schools.

  Parks and Rec Highlights: The Main Lake Carnival is approved for April 24-26 at Jennings Beach. The Fairfield Museum is planning a slate of events for the 250th anniversary, including a July 4th festival and a Labor Day weekend Revolutionary War reenactment with overnight encampment.

  Odyssey of the Mind: Fairfield has two primary teams, three Division 1 teams, and four Division 2 teams competing at the upcoming regional tournament.

  Policy Search Upgrade: The district’s policy consultant has developed a new search function for board policies that is significantly better than the previous Board Docs search. A screencast tutorial will be shared with board members, staff, and the public.

  ---

  What to Watch Next

  • March 24 Special Meeting and Town Hall (7 PM, CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East): Security vestibule votes, consent calendar, and the annual town hall. The elementary schedule will not be voted on since it’s a management decision, but expect continued community interest.

  • Art time for grades 3-5 remains the biggest unresolved tension. Multiple board members asked the administration to explore creative solutions, and the curriculum committee will continue working on this.

  • MTSS framework rollout: The district plans to present its finalized Multi-Tiered System of Supports framework to administrators in early April, covering literacy, math, and social-emotional/behavioral supports. This will directly affect how the new WIN-less schedule works in practice.

  • Interdisciplinary curriculum work is planned for the fall, potentially integrating social studies content into ELA blocks to create more time and reduce redundancy.

    ---

    Meeting Details

    • Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2026, 7:00 PM

    • Location: CO Board Room, 501 Kings Highway East, Fairfield, CT

    • Watch the replay: FairTV Education Channel or Cablevision Channel 78

    • Full agenda and enclosures: Fairfield Public Schools Board of Education page

    • Next meeting: March 24, 2026 - Special Meeting and Town Hall, 7:00 PM