BOSTON (WHDH) – An incurable allergy is changing the menu on Martha’s Vineyard.

Tick-borne diseases have long been a problem in the vineyard. This problem has exploded in recent years with the spread of Alpha-Gal Syndrome.

It’s everywhere, we all know someone, a wife, a daughter, a friend, we all know someone who has it,” said Jennifer Lorusso, owner of Chilmark General Store. “It’s just a portion of our basic customer base that lives here.”

Alpha-Gal Syndrome is caused by the bite of a lone tick. This causes the victim to develop a severe allergy to red meat and other animal products such as dairy, which changes their lifestyle.

“We’re starting to see changes in the way people interact with nature,” said Virginia Barbatti of Tick Free Martha’s Vineyard. “It really changes what it means to take a walk in the woods.”

As more people are bitten and diagnosed with a food allergy, more restaurants have adapted their menus to meet the needs of the community.

“We created a separate menu that is Alpha-Gal friendly and brings everything together for someone,” Lorusso said. “So they can really enjoy everything from our menu, from the pizza to the egg sandwich and many prepared foods.”

A nonprofit organization is now looking for solutions that go beyond the backyard to address the problem islandwide. Tick-Free Martha’s Vineyard says they research the deer they carry to get rid of the lone ticks.

“We have the highest deer population density in the state on the island,” Barbatti said. “It creates an environment for deer to breed.”

As kitchens become more considerate about what they cook, experts are coming together to solve the problem once and for all.

“We find ways to meet the needs of the people here on the island, but we also don’t accept that,” Barbatti said. “There are real actions underway to change the situation we find ourselves in.”

(Copyright (c) 2026 Sunbeam Television. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)

Subscribe to our newsletter to get the latest news straight to your inbox

Marina R. Tetreault

Concord, NH – Marina R. (Cyr) Tetreault was born on April 2, 1935 in St. André, New Brunswick, Canada. She was the daughter of Philias Cyr and Claudia (Langlois) Cyr. She attended school in St. Andre’ and after completing her education moved to Limestone, ME to help her aunt run a small restaurant. Here she met her future husband, Auguste J. Tetreault, an airman stationed at Loring Air Force Base. They were married on October 25, 1954 at the Loring AFB Chapel.

After Auguste completed his military service, they settled in Franklin, New Hampshire and purchased a small grocery store and snack bar. They have worked tirelessly for ten years to make the company the best it can be. It became a popular place for ice cream, sandwiches, a quick grocery stop and snacks for the high school kids on the way home after school. They eventually sold the store so they could spend more time with their young family.

Marina continued to devote herself to cooking and culinary pursuits, accepting a position as a pastry chef and salad chef at Franklin Regional Hospital and continuing her education, most notably learning cake decorating at the New Hampshire Technical Institute. Over the years she has baked dozens of beautiful and intricately decorated cakes for family and friends.

In 1979, Marina decided she was ready for a complete career change. She accepted a position with Blue Cross and Blue Shield of NH as a billing specialist in the Group Accounts department. She made many friends and enjoyed her work and retired in July 1994.

She had many hobbies, but particularly loved sewing, bowling, hiking and cross-country skiing, and cooking. You could never come and go without eating “a little something.” After retirement, Marina and Gus took many bus trips to see parts of the country and enjoyed this time immensely.

When it came time to make life easier, Gus and Marina sold their home and moved to Havenwood Retirement Community in Concord. They loved their vacation home, their neighbors and the community.

Marina is survived by her two daughters, Linda G. (Tetreault) Estee of Dover NH and Gerianne L. (Tetreault) Holdsworth and her husband Stephen Holdsworth of East Concord, NH, five grandchildren, Elizabeth (Holdsworth) Lazarra (Sean) of Wells, ME; Johnathan Holdsworth (Gwen Buel) of Arlington Heights, MA; Amelia Holdsworth of Penacook NH; Alexandra (Estee) Weber (Samuel) of Rollinsford, NH; and Michelle Estee (Christopher Levesque) of Madbury, NH.

Marina was also blessed with seven great-grandchildren; Quinn, Natalie, Casey, Ronan, Jacob, Juliana and Henry. An eighth great-grandchild will join the family this year.

She was predeceased by her beloved husband and friend Auguste J. Tetreault, her parents, a sister and six brothers. She is survived by her sister and brother-in-law Claire and Joseph Abele of Bolton, Connecticut, and her brother and sister-in-law Maurice Cyr and Linda Lang of St. Leonard, New Brunswick, Canada. She also leaves behind many nieces, nephews and friends with whom she kept in touch over the years, as well as her beloved cat Gracie.

A Mass of Christian Burial will be celebrated at 10:30 a.m. on Tuesday, June 9, at Immaculate Heart of Mary Church, 180 Loudon Rd. Concord.

Waters Funeral Home is in charge of arrangements.

In lieu of flowers, donations may be made to Immaculate Heart of Mary Parish in Concord NH, Havenwood Resident Support Fund, 33 Christian Ave. Concord NH and Pope Memorial SPCA of Concord NH.

Click here to sign the guestbook or honor her memory with flowers, donations or other heartfelt tributes

BAR HARBOR, Maine — As Graham Platner returned to the campaign trail Friday, he took a moment to indirectly address new allegations of “toxic” and “disturbing” behavior made against him by three women from his previous relationships.

Subscribe to read this story ad-free

Get unlimited access to ad-free articles and exclusive content.

At the same time, hundreds of Platner’s followers signaled that they were still by his side despite a barrage of negative attention. They gave him several standing ovations and at one point shouted the name of his wife, Amy Gertner, as he singled her out to support.

In his remarks, the Democratic Senate candidate spoke of Maine as a state that gave him personal strength to recover from the brink.

“From the beginning, Maine, you have had my back. When the hurtful things I said on the internet a decade ago became public, as I shared my personal journey through PTSD and the darkness of recovery, responsibility and growth, Maine had my back,” he said to cheers.

Platner then pointed more specifically to Thursday’s New York Times article detailing his former girlfriends’ allegations, saying, “As every piece of this past and journey is unearthed, litigated and weaponized, you stand with me.”

While some of the women described positive experiences with Platner, three did not. One woman, Lyndsey Fifield, said that when she was dating Platner between 2013 and 2015, he once “twisted her arm behind her back, pushed her into a bedroom and held the door closed on the other side so she couldn’t get out, and told her to stay there until she was ‘calm.’

Fifield has also worked for conservative groups and campaigns, which Platner appeared to be referring to when he said some of the allegations were “politically motivated” and “false.” The former military veteran spoke about a journey he took after his military deployments to overcome post-traumatic stress disorder.

Graham Platner speaks at a campaign rally Friday, June 5, 2026, in Bar Harbor, Maine.Robert F. Bukaty / AP

“The state of Maine raised me and the state of Maine saved me,” Platner said. “To all of you out there, Maine, I will always have your back.”

At some point, Platner asked his wife to get up. The crowd chanted “Amy! Amy,” giving her a standing ovation.

Gertner came into focus last week after the Wall Street Journal first reported that Platner had sent sexually explicit text messages to several women during their marriage. The story came to light after a former campaign official revealed that Gertner himself had disclosed sexting on the campaign trail as a potential vulnerability last year.

Gertner defended her husband last week, talking about how difficult the marriage was, but that they grew stronger together afterward.

Platner did not address reporters after the event but participated in local interviews, including with Maine Public Radio, where he denied ever being physically threatening.

In an interview with MS NOW on Thursday, Platner denied some of the allegations in the New York Times article, including that he was physically abused.

“Anything that claims physicality, anything that claims I knew what my tattoo was, those are the statements of someone who is politically motivated,” he said.

Platner tries to move beyond the headlines of his personal life and refocus the message on the need for change in Maine. On Friday, his campaign announced that he had raised $200,000 since the New York Times article was published, calling it his best fundraising day since the departure of his primary opponent, Gov. Janet Mills. The primary election will take place on Tuesday.

As he spoke to Mainers, he tried to steer the conversation back to his general election opponent, Republican Sen. Susan Collins. Collins has long managed to win re-election by winning majority votes and independents by portraying herself as a moderate.

Platner called this image a “charade.”

“We see through the charade, and we see through her because of what she does. She voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, who, before he was busy trying to repeal the Voting Rights Act and disenfranchising black Southerners, was busy getting to work on the job he went there to do, which was to repeal a woman’s right to vote, and she told us, she told us, that that was settled law,” Platner said. “She looked him in the eyes and he told her he would never do something like that. Well, either she lied to us or she’s an idiot. Either way, you shouldn’t be a U.S. senator from the state of Maine.”

At least half a dozen supporters who came to Platner’s event Friday said they stood behind him, regardless of the latest round of allegations.

Janice Low said she wanted to hear from Platner in person after his remarks tonight. Her decision: “I will definitely choose him.”

She said what was “criminal” was the war in Iran, accused President Donald Trump of never getting congressional approval for military action, and said she wanted to finally oust Collins, who voted with Trump most of the time.

Galen Low, her husband, added that he believes Platner has grown beyond the allegations against him.

“I have left behind the feeling that people cannot make mistakes and are condemned to do the things they did,” said Galen Low. “I didn’t like some of the things I heard, but then I realize that we are human and that as humans, sometimes we do things that we are not proud of. But that doesn’t mean we can’t admit it and move on.”

State Rep. Gary Friedmann, who was also in attendance Friday night, called Platner’s speech “brilliant.”

“Mainers are pretty down-to-earth, and we’ve all made a lot of mistakes in our lives, we’ve all done things that we regret,” he said. “When it comes down to who we vote for in November, it will be the candidate who truly stands up for the people, and we realize that Susan Collins does not.”

The Fun Fest for Kids and Kids at Heart offers audiences of all ages an afternoon of music, puppetry, circus arts and hands-on creativity. Highlights include Sandglass Theater’s Punch, an enchanting hand puppet performance rooted in German fair tradition; lively, Balkan and jazz-inspired music by The DiTrani Brothers; and performances by the Putney Central School Middle School modern and jazz bands.

Families can also try out the flying trapeze with NECCA, enjoy balloon art by Doug the Devil Stick Man, contribute to a community art project with Amber Paris, and explore activities by local organizations.

Part of the Bandwagon Summer Series, this family-friendly outdoor event celebrates imagination, community and art in a relaxed festival atmosphere. Children under 12 have free entry. Food, refreshments and local vendors on site – bring a blanket or lawn chair.

Putney Central School Field

$28-32

3:00 p.m. – 11:59 p.m. on Saturday, June 13, 2026

Information about the artist group

heather@nextstagearts.org

New Hampshire Gov. Kelly Ayotte traded the State House for the starting line on Friday when she visited New England Dragway on the opening day of the 2026 NHRA New England Nationals presented by bproauto.

Accompanied by NHRA President Glen Cromwell, Bob Tasca III and Austin Prock, Ayotte received a behind-the-scenes tour of New Hampshire’s premier annual sporting events and was able to get an up-close look at the NHRA Mission Foods Drag Racing Series and the teams that compete at speeds in excess of 330 miles per hour. Ayotte spent time on the starting line during qualifying, where she witnessed firsthand the intensity and precision required to start Funny Cars on the historic track.

She also met with members of Team Tasca, including Bob Tasca III, and the Ford-backed Funny Car organization, which has its home in New England. The visit offered Ayotte the opportunity to learn more about the economic and tourism impact of the New England Nationals, which attracts thousands of fans, racers and crew members to southern New Hampshire each year. The event is considered one of the state’s largest motorsports attractions and has been a staple of the NHRA’s national events calendar for decades.

Team Tasca, long one of New England’s most prominent motorsports organizations, welcomed the governor as part of her tour. The Rhode Island-based team has deep roots in the region and remains one of Ford Performance’s flagship NHRA operations. For Ayotte, the visit provided a unique perspective on the technology, teamwork and dedication that drives professional drag racing, while highlighting the importance of New England Dragway and the NHRA New England Nationals to the region’s motorsports community.

Images courtesy of NHRA and Shutterstock

Freshly painted lines and a newly renovated soccer field are available Bentley University as the school prepares to host the French national team in advance World Cup.

University officials told WBZ that months of work went into upgrading the facilities to meet the standards of one of the best soccer programs in the world.

“It’s incredible to be the one that won France. Unbelievable. The best team in the world,” said Bentley sporting director Vaughn Williams. “You couldn’t put it better.”

The two-time world champion chose Bentley as his training location. Williams said the university is honored by this opportunity and has worked diligently to ensure facilities are ready for France.

“The field got to this state after a winter like the one we had; they did a great job,” Williams said. “And that’s the most important thing, this field. I’m happy when I get the chance to see the first training session or to take a look at how they stand on this field for the first time.”

The renovations were financed by FIFA and the French Football Federation. Grounds staff said the French team had specific requirements for its training environment.

“The big thing France wanted was for this field to be emulated Gilletteand it’s pretty darn close,” said Ryan Gaffey, director of facilities at Bentley.

Gaffey oversaw the field restoration project, which included multiple rounds of reseeding and installation of multiple grass varieties.

“Some of the finer grasses you see are fescues. That’s good for portability with the lugs in the field…it will help with stabilization,” Gaffey said. “There is also a variety of ryegrass that is needed for settlement.”

The result is a carefully tailored playing surface designed to meet the expectations of top international athletes.

For those responsible at Bentley, the extensive preparations are a small price to pay for the chance to welcome one of the most successful football teams in the world to Waltham. The first training session will take place on June 11th and France will play Norway on June 26th in Foxboro.

More from CBS News

In:

The Connecticut Supreme Court in Hartford upheld the state’s assault weapons ban on Wednesday in a closely watched gun rights challenge. The court ruled the 2013 law, enacted after the Sandy Hook shooting, was constitutional because plaintiffs failed to prove the firearms were necessary for self-defense, and the public interest favored maintaining the ban, according to court documents.

The court’s decision follows a unanimous 3-0 ruling by a panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Aug. 22, 2025, which upheld Connecticut’s assault weapons ban as constitutional. The appellate court found that plaintiffs challenging the law had not demonstrated that the firearms they sought to possess were necessary for self-defense. The panel also ruled that maintaining the ban served the public interest, a position supported by the court’s review of evidence and legal standards, according to court documents and filings.

Senior U.S. District Judge Alfred V. Covello issued a 47-page decision upholding the law’s constitutionality.

The case targeted Connecticut’s 2013 assault-weapons law, enacted in response to the Dec. 14, 2012, Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, which killed 26 people. The law bans the sale and ownership of certain semiautomatic rifles, including AR-15 style firearms, and imposes magazine-capacity limits and other gun-control measures. It also requires owners of newly banned assault rifles to register their weapons, as detailed in court filings and prior district court rulings.

At the district court level, Covello wrote that the legislation was “substantially related to the important governmental interest of public safety and crime control” and dismissed all three constitutional challenges raised by the plaintiffs. The judge noted that Second Amendment rights were preserved through the continued availability of alternate weapons for self-defense, hunting, and sporting purposes, according to court records.

The 2nd Circuit’s ruling emphasized that the Second Amendment allows lawmakers to enact targeted regulations aimed at preventing tragedies like Sandy Hook. The panel’s decision aligned with rulings from five other federal appellate courts, including the First, Fourth, Seventh, Ninth, and D.C. Circuits, which have upheld similar bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. The court held that states have the authority to regulate firearms to protect residents and children from mass-casualty events, according to the appellate opinion.

Opponents of the law, including gun-rights organizations, argued that the bans violated constitutional protections under the Second Amendment. They contended that the restricted firearms, such as AR-15s and similar semiautomatic rifles, are common weapons used by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes. However, a Supreme Court opposition brief filed in related litigation stated that the petitioners failed to show the firearms were in common use for self-defense, a key legal standard established in recent Second Amendment cases.

Gun-control advocates welcomed the court rulings as affirmations of the balance between gun rights and public safety. The district court decision was described as a victory for those supporting stricter gun laws, reflecting a judicial recognition of the state’s interest in reducing gun violence through assault-weapons restrictions. The appellate court also noted that allowing the ban to remain in effect serves the public interest, particularly in light of the law’s origins following the Sandy Hook tragedy.

The legal challenge and resulting rulings have become a significant test of post-*New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen* Second Amendment doctrine, particularly the question of whether semiautomatic rifles like AR-15s are protected arms “in common use” for lawful purposes. The case has attracted national attention because it involves Connecticut’s high-profile gun control measures enacted after a mass shooting and because the constitutional questions raised have implications beyond the state.

As the Connecticut Supreme Court upheld the assault weapons ban, the ruling adds to a growing body of federal and state court decisions affirming the constitutionality of similar firearm restrictions. The case remains part of broader ongoing litigation and debate over gun rights and regulation in the United States.

Vermont Attorney General T.J. Donovan filed environmental lawsuits in June 2019 against PFAS manufacturers, including 3M and DuPont, over contamination of drinking water in the Burlington area. The state alleged the chemicals polluted water, wildlife, soil, and sediment, according to court documents and officials.

The complaints allege that these companies produced and distributed per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a group of synthetic chemicals, which contaminated Vermont’s natural resources, including drinking water, wildlife, soil, and sediment.

The lawsuits target major chemical manufacturers including 3M Company, E.I. Du Pont de Nemours, Chemours, Chemguard, Tyco, National Foam, Buckeye Fire Equipment, and Kidde-Fenwal, according to court documents and statements from the Vermont Attorney General’s office.

The state filed two separate cases in June 2019. One complaint, dated June 26, 2019, was filed against 3M, DuPont, and related entities, while the other focused on companies associated with aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), a firefighting foam containing PFAS chemicals. Vermont Attorney General T.J. Donovan publicly announced the lawsuits during a press conference in Burlington on June 27, 2019, according to contemporaneous news reports.

PFAS chemicals, including PFOS, PFOA, PFNA, PFHxS, and PFHpA, are identified in the legal filings as toxic, human-made substances that persist indefinitely in the environment. The Vermont Attorney General’s office has described PFAS as “forever chemicals” due to their resistance to natural breakdown processes. The state’s legal claims link these substances to contamination of the state’s water supplies and broader environmental harm.

The lawsuits assert that PFAS contamination has affected public water systems in the Burlington area as well as other parts of Vermont, although court records and state statements do not specify exact contamination levels within individual utility systems. Instead, the filings emphasize statewide environmental impacts on water, wildlife, soil, and sediment. The Vermont Attorney General’s office continues to characterize the litigation as a critical effort to protect the state’s natural resources from ongoing PFAS pollution.

The litigation is part of a broader wave of state-led lawsuits against chemical manufacturers over PFAS contamination. Legal experts have noted that Vermont’s cases align with a national trend of governmental product liability claims targeting PFAS producers and distributors. A 2024 legal analysis highlighted Vermont’s lawsuits as among the more prominent and long-running PFAS-related enforcement actions.

The case against 3M and others has proceeded through various stages of litigation, including federal appellate review. In August 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a decision addressing procedural issues related to the removal of the case from state to federal court. The court vacated an earlier ruling and remanded the matter for further proceedings, underscoring the complex legal landscape surrounding PFAS claims. The litigation has spanned more than six years, reflecting the challenging nature of environmental enforcement against large chemical manufacturers.

As of January 2024, the Vermont Attorney General’s office reported that it was still actively litigating two major PFAS and AFFF cases. The office maintains an online actions page tracking ongoing environmental litigation, including these PFAS matters. The complaints filed by Vermont detail chemical lists, contamination allegations, and the state’s efforts to hold manufacturers accountable for pollution affecting public health and the environment.

PFAS are a class of substances widely used in industrial applications and consumer products for their water- and grease-resistant properties. Their presence in firefighting foams has been a particular focus of environmental concerns due to documented contamination near military bases, airports, and fire training sites. Vermont’s lawsuits address contamination from both PFAS production and firefighting foam use, rather than a single facility or product line.

The Vermont Attorney General’s office has emphasized the persistence and toxicity of PFAS chemicals in its environmental highlights and official statements. The ongoing litigation seeks to remediate the contamination and prevent further harm to Vermont’s drinking water and natural ecosystems.

Maine Gov. Janet Mills signed a bipartisan bill Tuesday in Augusta aimed at holding opioid manufacturers and large distributors accountable for their role in the state’s opioid crisis. The legislation, sponsored by Senate President Troy Jackson, imposes new obligations and potential financial liability on companies for deceptive marketing and sales practices, officials said.

The legislation, titled “An Act to Hold Drug Companies Accountable for the Opioid Crisis” (LD 710 in the 131st Legislature), was sponsored by Senate President Troy Jackson and targets opioid manufacturers and large distributors for deceptive marketing and sales practices, officials said.

The bill establishes an opioid stewardship and accountability framework that imposes new obligations and potential financial liability on these companies if their actions are found to have contributed to Maine’s opioid epidemic.

Jackson and other supporters described the measure as a ban on specific industry practices that fueled overprescribing and misuse, including misleading promotion of opioids’ safety and risks, according to legislative records. The bill explicitly focuses on manufacturers and large distributors rather than individual prescribers or patients, reflecting a legislative judgment that corporate conduct played a central role in the crisis. Sponsors cited drug companies broadly, including firms that develop and market opioids as well as wholesale distributors responsible for supplying pharmacies across Maine.

Large distributors are singled out in the bill because they control high-volume opioid shipments into communities and have regulatory duties under federal and state law to monitor and report suspicious orders, according to state officials. By targeting these entities, the legislation aims to shift costs and accountability “upstream” to corporations, rather than primarily on taxpayers, local governments, or individual users, sources confirmed.

The bill is part of a broader package of opioid-related legislation advanced in Augusta this session that focuses on treatment, prevention, and corporate accountability. It complements earlier laws expanding Good Samaritan protections and requiring reporting on the expenditure of opioid settlement funds by municipalities and counties, officials said. The accountability framework is designed to operate alongside existing state enforcement and civil litigation against opioid manufacturers and distributors, providing Maine with additional statutory tools to regulate corporate conduct, according to legislative analysis.

Governor Janet Mills, a Democrat and former attorney general, has made opioid response and accountability a signature policy area during her administration, officials said. She has convened an annual Opioid Response Summit for seven years to coordinate prevention, treatment, recovery, and enforcement strategies statewide. Mills previously signed legislation on May 3, 2022, expanding Maine’s Good Samaritan Law (LD 1862) to protect people seeking medical help during overdoses from arrest or prosecution for most nonviolent offenses, underscoring her administration’s focus on harm reduction.

In the recent legislative session, Mills also signed a package of bills on May 16 that included measures requiring public reporting on how opioid settlement funds are spent by local governments, aiming to ensure transparency and alignment with public health goals, according to state records. Her administration has emphasized comprehensive approaches that include childhood trauma prevention, mental health supports, and community-based services as key components of reducing opioid misuse, officials said.

The opioid epidemic has imposed substantial health care, criminal justice, and social service costs on state and local governments in Maine. Public health officials link opioid misuse to social determinants of health such as childhood trauma, economic stress, and unmet basic needs like food security, informing the state’s broader response, according to presentations at the Opioid Response Summit. The new accountability bill is promoted by sponsors as a tool to reduce future public costs by discouraging harmful marketing and distribution practices that drive overprescribing and addiction.

Enforcement of the bill is expected to be coordinated with the Office of the Attorney General and relevant regulatory agencies, continuing Maine’s pattern of using civil litigation and settlements to address the crisis, officials said. The legislation is intended to work in tandem with Maine’s existing consumer protection and public health enforcement powers, enabling the state to challenge deceptive or dangerous corporate behavior more directly.

Maine’s policy framework also includes harm reduction measures such as expanded naloxone access, treatment expansion, and prevention programs, providing context for the new corporate accountability regime, according to state health department sources. The strengthened Good Samaritan Law ensures that efforts to hold companies accountable do not deter individuals from seeking emergency help during overdoses by limiting criminal exposure for those calling 9-1-1.

The bipartisan measure advanced under Democratic legislative leadership but drew support from lawmakers across party lines focused on public health and taxpayer protection, according to legislative sources. Senate President Jackson framed the bill as a course correction from earlier policy eras when pharmaceutical lobbying and marketing heavily influenced prescribing norms. The legislation’s advancement reflects a sustained political consensus in Maine that the opioid epidemic is a nonpartisan public health emergency requiring both expanded services and corporate accountability measures.

The Hartford Board of Education voted in May 2026 to close two under-enrolled elementary schools at the end of the 2025–26 school year. Officials said the decision was part of a multi-year plan to adjust school capacity in response to declining enrollment and demographic changes, despite protests from parents and teachers during the public comment period.

Students currently enrolled at the schools will be redistricted to other Hartford elementary schools beginning with the 2026–27 school year, officials said. The district’s transition plan includes individualized placement notifications for families, information on transportation options, and efforts to keep siblings together when possible.

The two elementary schools targeted for closure are scheduled to cease operating as neighborhood schools at the end of the 2025–26 academic year, with no new student enrollments accepted after that date, according to Hartford Board of Education agenda materials.

Board members cited persistent under-enrollment at the two schools relative to their building capacities and overall district seat availability as a primary reason for the closures, according to the board’s public meeting records. Hartford Public Schools has experienced multi-year declines in elementary enrollment, with total district enrollment falling faster than the available seat capacity, officials said. Maintaining and staffing under-enrolled schools diverts funds from instruction, support services, and higher-need schools, district staff told the board. Financial projections presented during the May 2026 meeting indicated that closing the two schools would generate recurring operating savings through reduced staffing, transportation, and building maintenance costs.

District officials described the closures as part of a multi-year restructuring plan aimed at “right-sizing” elementary school capacity in response to demographic changes and enrollment trends. The superintendent emphasized that the decision was based on enrollment projections, building condition assessments, and budget constraints, not on school performance, according to district communications. The board characterized the vote as “difficult but necessary” to maintain fiscal stability and protect core academic and support programs across the district.

During the public comment period preceding the vote, parents, teachers, and community members protested the proposed closures, organizing rallies outside the board meeting and speaking against the plan. Speakers expressed concerns about longer transportation times, the loss of neighborhood schools, and disruptions to students’ social-emotional well-being, according to meeting transcripts. Some teachers highlighted the role of the closing schools as community hubs that provide food distribution, after-school programs, and trusted relationships within their neighborhoods. Parent groups criticized what they described as insufficient early community engagement, saying they learned of the potential closures too late to propose alternatives.

Despite the protests, the board approved the closures by a majority roll-call vote, with at least one member voicing concerns about the community impact before ultimately being outvoted. Board leadership acknowledged the emotional and historical significance of the schools slated for closure during the meeting. The district plans to use a combination of redistricting and school choice placements to reassign students, with Hartford Public Schools officials committing to limit class-size increases in receiving schools and maintain or improve access to special education, English learner services, and enrichment programs after consolidation.

Most classroom educators and support staff at the closing schools will be offered positions at other schools, subject to contractual and certification requirements, district officials said. Specialized programs such as bilingual and special education services will be relocated to receiving schools rather than eliminated, according to the superintendent. The district also plans to provide transition supports, including counseling and orientation activities, to help students adjust to new school communities in the 2026–27 school year.

The 2025–26 school year will serve as a planning and transition period, with family outreach efforts including information sessions, school tours for affected families, and translation and interpretation services. Following the vote, Hartford Public Schools is implementing a detailed transition plan with milestones for student reassignment, staff placement, transportation routing, and building closure logistics. The district has committed to providing regular progress updates to the board and the public, including data on enrollment, class sizes, and transportation metrics at receiving schools after consolidation.

Board members requested equity impact monitoring to assess how the closures and reassignments affect historically marginalized student groups and neighborhoods. The district is also evaluating options for the future use of the closed buildings, including potential community uses, lease agreements, or other educational purposes consistent with city and state regulations. Any change in building use or disposition will require additional board actions and coordination with the City of Hartford and state education or facilities authorities, according to district communications.