Amity Finance Committee advances revised budget after deadlocked vote at Joint Workshop with ABOE

The Amity Regional School District No. 5 Board of Education (ABOE) and its Amity Finance Committee (AFC) met in a joint budget workshop on February 23 to finalize the AFC's recommendation on the district’s proposed 2026–2027 budget. Due to the major winter storm that closed district facilities, the meeting was conducted fully remotely and livestreamed on the district’s YouTube Channel.

Although the session functioned as a joint workshop, it was formally an AFC meeting in accordance with ABOE bylaws. That structural distinction became central during the evening’s voting.

The AFC deliberations culminated in two motions — one that failed on a 3–3 vote and a second that passed 4–3 after the ABOE Chairman participated in the roll call vote.

Ex-Officio participation

The Board bylaw establishing the AFC specifies that it consists of six voting members and provides that the Board Chairman may vote only if he or she appoints him/herself as one of its three ABOE representatives. At the outset of the February 23 workshop according to the recording's transcript, it was stated by ABOE Chairman Paul Davis that he would be participating and voting on any motion by the AFC in his ex-officio capacity. The meeting then proceeded under this stated interpretation.

Amity Finance Committee’s unique configuration and role 

The AFC was created following a prolonged governance crisis in 2002–2003, when the Amity school district experienced a state-record 17 failed budget referenda (see article “Revisiting May 2002 - ‘Voters Say No to Amity’” from the Orange Bulletin for initial background reporting).

During that period, in the absence of an approved spending plan, state law required the district to operate under level funding from the prior year. The repeated failures created fiscal uncertainty for the district and the three member towns, strained municipal budgeting processes, and underscored the need for a clearer system of fiscal checks and balances across school district and municipal governance.

The six-member AFC structure — three members of the ABOE and one Board of Finance representative from each member town — was adopted as Board Bylaw 9132.6 to institutionalize a formal layer of financial review and intergovernmental checks before a budget reaches the full Board, and to provide oversight throughout the year whenever new spending needs or major transfers are considered. The structure was intended to create an early checkpoint in the process, aligning educational priorities with municipal fiscal capacity and preventing a recurrence of prolonged budget instability.

According to records of past meetings, the AFC membership is currently as follows:

3 ABOE representatives
• Sudhir Karunakaran (AFC Chairman) – Woodbridge
• Meghan Rabuse – Orange
• Autumn Cloud-Ingram – Bethany

3 Town Board of Finance representatives
• Donovan Lofters – Woodbridge
• Joseph Nuzzo – Orange
• Sally Huyser – Bethany

According to excerpts of the AFC bylaw reviewed at the meeting (see presentation image above), by March 1 each year the AFC must forward its recommended budget to the full Amity Board of Education, which then acts on the proposal by March 15. In cases of disagreement, several additional steps are contemplated before the budget proceeds to referendum consideration in the three towns.

Superintendent presentation of budget adjustments

At the February 23 workshop, Superintendent Byars was asked to step the joint meeting participants through a detailed explanation of the revisions made since the initial budget proposal. The working document outlining those changes — including additions, reductions, and personnel adjustments — was reviewed line by line during the session. The budget adjustments reviewed included the following:

Additions:
• Medical insurance adjustment: $123,644
• Tuition – new student placement: $78,050
• Tuition – existing placement increase: $52,971
• Behavioral support services: $71,025
• School Resource Officer contract adjustment: $14,399
• Transportation software: $9,142
• Health/Physical Education teacher: approximately $99,080 (including estimated cost of benefits)

Reductions:
• Tuition placement changes (3 lines total): –$341,000
• STEM Instructional Coach (with benefits): –$113,785 (deferred one year)
• Special Education excess cost revenue adjustment: –$60,441

The most discussed adjustments involved staffing, including the proposed STEM instructional coach position, budgeted at $113,785 with benefits. This new, district-wide role would have supported teachers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics rather than carrying a direct classroom load. Given fiscal pressures across the three towns, the Superintendent opted to defer the position for one year as a cost-control measure.

The budget proposal was described as retaining funding for two Health/Physical Education (HPE) teachers — one per middle school — to support scheduling changes at the middle schools while maintaining HPE staffing levels at the high school. The budget was also said to maintain funding for a 1.0 FTE world language teacher shared between the two middle schools to increase choice for middle school world language.

Overall budget and town allocation impact

As presented by the Superintendent at the February 23 meeting, the proposed 2026–2027 budget totaled $58,997,700, an increase of $888,701 over the current year’s $58,108,999 budget — a 1.53% overall increase.

Town allocation impacts presented that evening were:
• Bethany: +$294,379 (3.21%)
• Orange: –$80,309 (–0.29%)
• Woodbridge: +$400,485 (1.99%)

Vote sequence and results

At the conclusion of discussion, the first motion considered by the AFC was to recommend the revised budget as proposed at a 1.53% increase. Upon roll call vote, the motion to approve was deadlocked 3–3 and therefore failed. All three ABOE representatives had voted in favor and all three Board of Finance representatives had voted against.

A subsequent motion, made by ABOE Chair Paul Davis acting as previously stated in his ex-officio role on the AFC, passed on a 4–3 vote. His motion was similar to the previously defeated motion but added a stipulation of “not to exceed a 1.53% increase” – an indication that upon receiving such a recommendation, the full Board would be restricted to consideration of reductions but not increases to the total presented at this joint budget workshop. During the roll call, Davis’s vote was counted in favor, joining the affirmative votes of two AFC members representing the ABOE (from Woodbridge and Bethany) and one Board of Finance representative (from Bethany).

Looking ahead

With the AFC recommendation now deemed approved for forwarding to the ABOE, the focus shifts to full Board deliberation and possible action at its March 9, 2026, Regular meeting. Once approved by the ABOE, the district’s budget will be presented at a Public Hearing scheduled for April 6, 2026, at 6 pm, and is ultimately expected to go to a referendum vote for approval in the three towns on Tuesday, May 5, 2026, after consideration at a District Annual Meeting to be held Monday, May 4, 2026, at 5:30 pm.