Like many, my family moved to Madison because of our school system. As one of the top districts in the state, with a progressive superintendent championing smart education reforms, Madison is a highly desirable town for families with school-age children. It was therefore very troubling to witness a highly partisan debate at the April 18 Board of Education meeting on the School Facility Plan.

In any capital spending plan for the schools, we must always consider two factors: What’s best for the children and what makes financial sense for the town? Of two viable options to address the aging Ryerson and Jeffrey schools, the Republican-majority board chose the more expensive option, which also leads to the most inequity for students. Putting partisan politics above students’ best interest, they chose to build a new Ryerson first and send a Jeffrey renovation to referendum two years later. While there’s never a guarantee that any referendum will pass, the Republicans chose to gamble with Jeffrey’s future by kicking that can down the road.

The board’s consultant showed data that splitting the school projects this way would actually cost the town more, resulting in a higher tax impact. Doing both schools together would result in a lower cost and maintain student equity. Yet, some Republicans insisted on alternative facts, continuing to state that the split option was cheaper, despite data showing the opposite.

This is irresponsible and unfair. Doing both schools together saves the town money, and provides the most equity to all school children. This year, the first selectman’s salary is being increased by 25 percent to maintain parity with neighboring towns, while staff receives a less than three percent raise. Ask yourself why it’s so important for the first selectman to achieve parity in a single year, but not our children.

Matt Parthasarthy

Madison

Matt Parthasarthy is vice chair of the Democratic Town Committee.