This Week’s Letters to the Editor

Editor’s Note: The Letters to the Editor section in the Woodbridge Town Chronicle is a place where community voices can be shared and heard. In the print newspapers of years past, letters to the editor were often the liveliest section, where readers spoke directly to one another, the broader community, and its leaders. To submit a letter for consideration please refer to the submission guidelines.

Resident raises concerns regarding state reimbursement

To the editor,

I have serious concerns about the information provided by the town about the tax increase for the proposed new Beecher Road School. The town is relying heavily on receiving a 53% reimbursement from the State of Connecticut. When looking at the rest of the state, this level of reimbursement seems idealistic at best, or delusional at worst.

On June 19, 2026, CT Insider published an article (These are the major school construction projects that will get state funding), describing the levels of grant funding awarded this year to six school construction projects around the state.

It is starkly apparent that there is a large difference in state reimbursement depending on the town. For example, Seymour is building a new elementary school with an estimated cost of $60 million and an estimated grant of $38.7 million, which is a reimbursement rate of approximately 65%. In comparison, Westport is building a new elementary school at a cost of $110 million but is only receiving a $12.2 million grant, a reimbursement rate of just 11%.

Woodbridge is much closer to Westport than to Seymour in income level, which the state appears to strongly consider in grant funding. The previous Beecher construction project received only 22% reimbursement. What are the financial consequences if that 53% projected reimbursement is not realized?

The town is expected to ask voters to authorize the entire $118 million, so the tax impact calculations should be based on that number. I request that this full amount is used to show residents the proposed tax increase. I think voters need to go into this referendum with their eyes wide open on what this new school could actually cost the taxpayers if the most optimistic scenario does not occur, or if the consultants have underestimated the actual cost — or both.

As the saying goes, one should not count their chickens before they hatch.

— Stephane Pennington, Ph.D.

Vote No — We need a better plan for Beecher

To the editor,

We are Woodbridge residents who believe in excellent public schools, responsible stewardship of our Town facilities, and respect for the taxpayers who support them. These principles lead us to one simple conclusion: The $118.5 million plan to demolish and rebuild Beecher Road School is the wrong plan for Woodbridge at this time — and we will vote NO on October 13.

Here’s why:

• The financial review is incomplete. Woodbridge faces other significant capital needs, including the Police Station, other Town buildings, and anticipated Amity projects. As of September 7, the Board of Finance has not even been presented with the Town’s long-term debt analysis. Before authorizing $118.5 million, we need to understand how Beecher fits into the bigger financial picture. A decision of this magnitude cannot responsibly be considered in isolation. 
• The proposed debt is extraordinary. The Town’s own projections show annual debt service quadrupling in five years and reaching 11.47% of operating expenditures — above the 10% level the Town itself identified as a critical benchmark. The consequences will extend for decades and could threaten our AAA rating. 
• Taxpayers will pay a high price over a prolonged period. Current estimates depend on substantial anticipated state reimbursement that cannot currently be assured. Until the Town completes its financial analysis and tests the assumptions behind these estimates, taxpayers cannot know what this project will actually cost each of us. For the proposed Beecher project alone — across the duration of the bonds — available data show an increase in taxes for the average taxpayer of approximately $18,332 and for the highest taxpayers over $50,000.
• We are being presented with a false choice. Beecher is not “falling apart.” The consultant’s report describes it as in “good condition.” We’ve invested millions in Beecher, including major renovations and recent roof work — debt taxpayers will continue to repay even if the school is demolished. We can continue to improve the school, address needs as they arise, and make responsible investments without overburdening taxpayers.

Voting NO does not mean doing nothing. It means demanding a better plan. Woodbridge deserves one. We must VOTE NO to get it.

Learn more: WoodbridgeVoteNo.org

— William Silberberg, M.D.
— Matthew T. Giglietti

Dr. Silberberg served as a member of the Amity Board of Education for eight years, and was instrumental in establishing the Town of Woodbridge's Senior Tax Stabilization program.

Mr. Giglietti is the current Town Treasurer and was a member of the Woodbridge Board of Finance from July 1986 to December 2023, serving as Chairman for 35 years.

Editor’s Note: Letters reflect the perspectives of their authors. They are published to foster dialogue about issues of local concern, including questions of governance, transparency, and accountability, as well as topics such as highlighting upcoming or past events from community groups. To submit a letter for consideration please refer to the submission guidelines.