2nd special education forum highlights issues facing towns

Norwich — Nearly two dozen local, regional and state officials debated Monday the costs of special education, potential solutions, and the complex issues that have led to skyrocketing costs for local school districts.

Monday’s 90-minute forum was the second session hosted by Norwich Mayor Peter Nystrom this summer, and a third is planned for September.

Nystrom organized the forums in response to rapidly rising costs in the Norwich school district for special education, which have caused big budget deficits in the past two fiscal years.

Mystic attorney Andrew Feinstein, who represents families with special needs children, offered several ideas to reduce costs and improve relations between school districts and families fighting for high quality services for their children.

Feinstein said Connecticut needs more regionalization of services for special education, including creating “centers of excellence” in which experts could teach local teachers how to meet individual students’ need. Feinstein said the current system of local schools districts is costly, inefficient and inequitable.

He termed another of his suggestions “defund Darien,” saying the wealthiest towns should not receive state education funds.

Feinstein also argued that local boards of education should be allowed to keep budget surplus funds at the end of one fiscal year for use next year, rather than be forced to either spend or turn over surplus funds to the municipality.

Norwich Superintendent Abby Dolliver said regionalization would not benefit Norwich if it forced the city to pay tuition to send more students to regional programs. With a growing number of students on the autism spectrum, Norwich has created local specialized programs to reduce outof-district tuition and transportation costs.

Dolliver said the regional education center LEARN helped Norwich set up the local programs and, after training Norwich’s teachers, LEARN representatives “went away.” She said that’s how regionalization could work.

State Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague, asked representatives from local boards of education in attendance if they would prefer the state create a state policy for funding special education to remove the burdens of high-cost individual students from a local town.

Several Norwich school board members and New London Board of Education Chairwoman Mirna Martinez all said they would welcome a new state policy, saying: “Have at it.”

State Rep. Doug Dubitsky, R-Chaplin, said the state’s mandate that towns spend at least the same amount on education as in the previous year — the minimum budget requirement — should not apply for special education budgets.

Dubitsky said a high-cost special education student moved into Chaplin mid-year, leaving the town to scramble to fund the $300,000 to $400,000 cost. But when the student moved out of town, the state refused to allow Chaplin to reduce the required spending.

Osten said the legislature is considering ways to rewrite the legislation.

Osten also said every year, bills are proposed that would put the burden of proof on families of special education students that a requested program is the best for the child. Feinstein, who argues on behalf of families in placement cases, said the change would not save much.

Feinstein said state due process hearings for special education placements are long, tedious and expensive. But he said attempts to shorten the process could backfire, with more parties seeking hearings rather than trying to settle the case. Connecticut, he said, has the highest rate of mediated settlements, which saves money and time.

Feinstein also told the group Monday that protesting the lack of federal funding for special education would be a waste of time. Federal law calls for 40 percent federal reimbursement, but the state actually receives 17 percent.

“Any hope you’re going to get more money from the feds is a loser,” Feinstein said. “It’s been at 17, 18, 19 percent reimbursement rate since the beginning … 17 or 18 percent is what we’re going to get, and we ought not press our hope on what we’re getting from Washington.”