By Elizabeth Barhydt
In a 5–3 decision at its May 1 meeting, the Greenwich Board of Education extended Dr. Toni Jones’ contract through June 30, 2028.
With a total compensation package exceeding $340,000, Dr. Jones—the highest paid employee in the Town of Greenwich, according to municipal payroll records—has become a focal point in a widening debate over educational leadership, taxpayer accountability, and the political identity of a town once defined by bipartisan pragmatism.
To supporters, the move offered needed continuity amid a fractious budget season and an increasingly competitive superintendent market. “We’ve put Dr. Jones in a very difficult position,” said Board Chair Karen Hirsh. “Frankly, I’m not sure we could find another superintendent right now given the situation we are in.”
Critics pointed out that is likely not true. “The town has at least two strong internal candidates—Ralph Mayo and Tom Healy—who would provide stability and experience,” one board member noted privately.
But for opponents, timing was paramount. Republican members Cody Kittle and Dr. Michael Joseph Mercanti-Anthony questioned the procedural judgment of locking in a long-term contract at this time.
“I don’t think this is the meeting when we should be doing this,” said Mercanti-Anthony, who cited the pending FOIA ruling and ongoing budget process. Kittle went further, accusing the board majority of partisan maneuvering. “We haven’t done what we’ve been tasked to do,” he said. “This is political theater.”
At the center of the dispute is a $4 million reduction in the BOE’s requested increase to its 2025-2026 operating budget. The initial proposal of $246.7 million reflected a 5.1% increase over the prior year or $12 million—an historically large ask. The Board of Estimate and Taxation (BET) ultimately approved a trimmed operating budget of $242.7 million—an $8 million year-over-year increase, but $4 million less than requested–what the BET characterized as a necessary recalibration after decades of budgetary expansion. Capital expenditures for school facilities remain fully funded at $19.6 million.
BET Chairman Harry Fisher offered a blunt postmortem: “I was very disappointed that the BOE took no action at its meeting on May 1. Rather, the Democrats who control of the BOE chose to kick the matter back to the BET.”
The procedural consequence is now clear: the statutory deadline to reopen the school budget passed on Monday, May 1. Whatever compromises remain must now be within the confines of the Board of Education’s approved bottom line.
The Board of Education was expected to reconvene Thursday evening to deliberate how to revise their budget to fit within the $198.4 million that was approved. While advocates for more money frame the moment as a crisis, fiscal conservatives see it differently. “This is not a cut,” one former school board member said. “It’s a recalibration. The school budget is still growing—just not as fast as some would like.”
A widely circulated letter from a former BOE Chairman outlined a specific five-point plan to meet the BET’s target while protecting classroom instruction. These proposals include managing teacher absenteeism to align with state norms, hiring at contractually negotiated salary steps, limiting the expansion of town-wide pre-K, postponing discretionary new initiatives, and realigning staff levels to reflect the student enrollment decline. Collectively, these actions could, according to the letter, generate $5–$7 million in savings without altering academic programs or class sizes. “Hyperbole doesn’t help,” the former official added
Others have questioned the growth of administrative staffing, including the number of secretaries system-wide. “Greenwich has only 152 police officers and over 100 administrative assistants in its school system. Something is out of balance there,” said one resident.
Critically, these proposals stand in direct contrast to the framing offered by some current board members, who warned that any reduction to the proposed increase would inevitably jeopardize student outcomes. “We are being forced to undo a decade of progress,” said one member. “It’s either earlier buses or fewer teachers.”
But that binary, critics argue, is false. Public tension has been exacerbated by these divergent narratives. Some parent advocates describe the situation as a crisis driven by partisan obstructionism. Others, including fiscal conservatives, point to what they see as fiscal mismanagement and politicization within the Superintendent’s office.
Nowhere is this divide more visible than in the debate over school start times. Scenario 6, which moves high school start time to 7:45 a.m., emerged as the favored option among the board majority, saving nearly $2 million in transportation costs and reducing bus tiers and morning traffic. Though unpopular with many public school parents, the move gained traction as a structural solution that avoided reductions to teaching staff.
“We’re not happy about this,” said Hirsh. “But our hand is being forced.”
“We’ve known about the teacher absenteeism issue for over a year,” said one BET member, referring to public data showing that Greenwich public school teachers use nearly twice as many sick days annually as the state average–often around vacations and weekends. The excess substitute staffing costs the district over $1 million annually. “The BOE has refused to take basic steps to address it. That’s not fiscal stewardship.”
As of press time, no comprehensive reduction plan has been finalized. But the path forward is narrower: the BET cannot reopen the budget, and the full burden now rests on the BOE to realign within its $198.4 million allocation.
