Ridgefield’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs) reveal that Ridgefield Public Schools (RPS) enrollment peaked in 2006 at 5,641. Next year’s RPS budget projects an enrollment of 4,439. That is an enrollment decrease 14 of the intervening 16 years totaling 1,202 or 21.3%
CAFRs also show that RPS staffing in 2006 was 660 while the 2021-22 RPS budget calls for a staff of 730, an increase of 70 or 10.6% over that period… an increase of 6 next year alone while enrollment is projected to decrease 120. That will increase the per-pupil cost 5.1% in one year to over $23,000 in 2021-22.
CAFRs also show last time RPS enrollment was below 4,600 was in 1998, when Ridgefield had one middle- and five elementary-schools. Ridgefield did not add a second middle-school until 2003 or a sixth elementary-school until 2005.
UConn population projections estimate that the ages 5-to-19 population of Ridgefield will continue to decline until 2030 and not recover to current levels before 2040.
Mothballing excessive school facilities and eliminating unnecessarily redundant administrative, clerical, custodial, library, and plant operating costs would save at least $2.5 million annually. Over 20 years that is $50 million without inflation.
Rightsizing RPS facilities would free millions of dollars to invest in more AP courses, music, art, world language and defray pay-to-play in athletics.
Outspending RPS peers in District Reference Group A is not a worthy goal. Outsmarting and outperforming them is. In RPS’s case less would be more.
Voting against the RPS budget on May 11 is compatible with efficiently achieving greater educational excellence.
If you wish substantiation or sources for any facts herein please contact me at Kirk.carr@gmail.com or call me at 203 505 5818.
Ridgefield, CT
The views expressed here belong solely to the author and do not necessarily reflect that of HamletHub.
HamletHub’s mission is to make every town better by connecting each member of the community. Allowing residents to express opinions and help inform each other is vital to accomplishing this mission. We hope to facilitate healthy discussion, but will not allow unproductive vitriol. This is how we judge the difference.
*The primary purpose of any submission is to make the town better. *The writer of each piece assumes that anyone with an opposing view is coming from a place of love for our town and every single person in it, and that is portrayed to the reader
We do not have the resources to fact check and monitor every submission. We are relying on the greatness of every single person in this town to help us make this portal a vehicle for community connectivity. When that happens we all win.