IMPACT OF STATE BUDGET CUTS ON OUR LOCALSCHOOL DISTRICTS April 2008 Presented by: Conejo Valley Unified School District Las Virgenes Unified School District

IMPACT OF STATE BUDGET CUTS ON

OUR LOCALSCHOOL DISTRICTSApril 2008

Presented by:Conejo Valley Unified School DistrictLas Virgenes Unified School District

Moorpark Unified School DistrictOak Park Unified School District

Simi Valley Unified School District

Free powerpoint template: www.brainybetty.com2

Agenda• Welcome & Introductions - Patti Yomantas - 12th District PTA

• State & National Perspective - Dr. Charles Weis, Ventura County Superintendent of Schools

• How School Finance Works - Mario Contini & Dr. Donald Zimring

• Regional Impact Ellen Smith, Kathryn Scroggin, & Tony Knight

• Questions & Answers• Closing Comments - David Pollock - Past President California School

Boards Association

• Next Steps

BUDGET BASICSFOR CALIFORNIA SCHOOLSMario Contini, SuperintendentConejo Valley Unified School District

Dr. Donald Zimring, SuperintendentLas Virgenes Unified School District


What You Should Know• Revenue Sources

• Typical Expenditures

• A Volatile History

• Governor’s & LAO’s Proposals

• The National Average

• Per Pupil Funding (Governor’s Letter)

• Have You Thought Of (efficiency)

• Long Term vs. Short Term


Revenue SourcesGENERAL FUND: Federal, State, Local, Other

FROM OTHER FUNDS• Adult Education• Bond $’S and Construction• Bond Redemption• Child Care• Child Nutrition• Deferred Maintenance• Developer Fees• Health and Welfare• Redevelopment Pass Through• School Modernization• Surplus Property• Worker Compensation Reserves

For Unrestricted Uses

For Restricted Uses (parcel taxes, partnerships & donations,…)


Typical ExpendituresPeople (85-90%), Services & Things (10-15%)

From Unrestricted Funds• Core instructional programs• Elective Programs• Co/extra curricular programs• Salaries and benefits• Books, supplies, Instruc. Mtrls• Equipment, Technology• Discretionary Uses• Extra, Co-curricular Programs

From Restricted Funds• Categorical (EIA, GATE, etc.)• Class Size Reduction *• Instructional Materials• Special Education *• Transportation *• Other* = General Fund must pay some


A Volatile HistoryUps, Downs, Shifts, Deficits, Loans, Deferrals

Stock Investment Dependent

One time, On Going Shifts

Unfunded Mandates

Deferred Payments to Districts

Prop 98 Suspensions

Prop 57 Recovery Bond

Deficit Prop 98 Minimum

Big Initiatives, $’s later cut

Lottery (2%) Not the Answer

Faced with $16 billion problem, ongoing debt and

a structural deficit.


The Governor’s ProposalAcross the board cuts, no real revenue increases.

In the “Year of Education”• 10% across the board cuts (few exceptions)• Proposed Suspension of Prop 98 Constitutional “minimum”• $360 million K-12 midyear “sweep” ( done)• A “minus” 2.4% Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) Proposed• A “minus” 6.5% adjustment to “special programs” (CSR/SpEd)• Defer June apportionment to September

(will require districts to pay interest on loans) • No taxes, a few fee increases• In last 2 years California dropped in $’s/pupil from 43rd to 46th

nationally and drop further if Governor’s proposal passes• Disregards 22 “Getting Down to Facts” adequacy studies

asked for by the Governor


Legislative Analysts ProposalTargeted Cuts, Revenue Generation

• Claims Governor’s proposal fails to set priorities• Bad times will improve next year, but will take years• Suggests “targeted” cuts, not across the board• Believes state could increase revenue

– VLF– Reduce tax credits

• $3 billion revenue plan• $11 billion “targeted” cuts• Plan to reduce the debt• Relax K-3 class size regulations• Retiring in November 2008


The National AverageWhat it would mean to local districts?

District Enrollment 96% ADA $’s

Conejo 22,300 21,408 $36.4 million

Las Virgenes 11,900 11,424 $19.4 million

Moorpark 7,300 7,008 $11.9 million

Oak Park 3,700 3,552 $6.0 million

Simi Valley 21,800 20,928 $35.6 million

TOTAL 67,000 64,320 $109.3 million

… if California were to increase per pupil funding to the national average as reported last month by the lowest estimated difference of $1,700…


A LETTER FROM THE GOVERNOR……..


The Governor’s Letter -

District 07/08 Actual Revenue

Revenue Based on Governor’s Letter

Difference

Conejo $170,800,000 $248,889,408 $78,089,408

Las Virgenes $97,375,000 $132,815,424 $35,440,424

Moorpark $61,370,000 $ 81,475,008 $20,105,008

Oak Park $29,497,000 $ 41,295,552 $11,798,552

Simi Valley $160,509,000 $243,308,928 $82,799,928

TOTAL $519,551,000 $747,784,320 $228,233,320

If our School Districts were to receive the amount the Governor reports as “Average Income to Schools of $11,626 we would receive the following:


Have You Thought Of…

• Districts in the region are below average for both site and District Administrative Costs

• Districts have initiated numerous creative approaches ranging from aggressive energy savings, bulk purchasing and creative leases of cell site and facilities.

• Current laws hamper Districts in being competitive in the ability to competitively bid for services and contracts.

School Districts are often accused of being inefficient. The Data shows differently…


Long Term vs. Short Term

• Long Term - California Public Schools need a stable funding model that increases funding and allows our students to be competitive with the rest of the nation as they enter the 21st century work force

• Short Term - Greater flexibility and local control in using the resources available. Let communities decide how to spend what is allocated until increased stable/competitive funding is restored.


So what does this all mean to our kids…….

REGIONAL IMPACT

Ellen Smith, SuperintendentMoorpark Unified School District

Dr. Kathryn Scroggin, SuperintendentSimi Valley Unified School District

Dr. Anthony Knight, SuperintendentOak Park Unified School District


Q. What is the fiscal impact to local school districts of the

proposed state budget cuts?

A: The estimated budget shortfall for 2008-09 for

the five districts totals $27.5 million (These figures include the

impact of state cuts, decline in enrollment and automatic increases in expenses.)


2008-09 Budget Shortfall• Conejo Valley $8 million 22,300 students

• Las Virgenes $6.8 million 11,900 students

• Moorpark $3.5 million 7,300 students

• Oak Park $2 million 3,700 students

• Simi Valley $7.2 million 21,800 students

• Total $27.5 million 67,000 students


Q: What are the programs and services that are in jeopardy of being cut locally?

A: School Boards in all five districts are considering cuts in the following

areas:


• Reduction of Teachers

– Possible loss of Class Size Reduction Program (grades K-3 and 9)

– Increases in class size and reduction in course offerings


•Reduction of Counselors, Psychologists, Nurses, Deans and Instructional Support Administrators

– Increases in student – counselor, psychologist and nurse ratios resulting in reduced access and longer waits for services

– Decreases in staff assigned to maintain student discipline and instructional improvement with impacts on the school learning environment


•Reduction of Classified Employees Examples:

– Reduced levels of cleaning and maintenance of grounds

– Reduction of instructional assistant support for students and teachers (kindergarten, Special Education, English Learner support etc.)

– Reduction of library staff and resulting losses of hours of operation

– Reduction of computer technicians impacting technology support for students and teachers


• Reduction of Funding for Transportation

– Increased fees or reduced services for home-to-school and extra-curricular transportation

• Reductions of all Budgets

– Reductions of supplies such as: instructional materials, new textbooks, office supplies, physical education equipment, custodial/ supplies and staff training/release time


•Reduction of Funding for Extra-curricular stipends and ASB support

– Reduction in the number and variety of sports teams or clubs offered unless fundraising is sufficient to pay for stipends

– Reduction or elimination of District funds for ASB accounting


• Reduction of Summer School and other Special Programs

– Summer School services may be reduced down to only required make-up courses, Special Education and Exit Exam preparation

• Reduction of Specially-Funded Music, PE and Science Programs

– Categorical program budget cuts will jeopardize many special program services including the new state music and PE teacher programs and funding for local programs such as science


• School Closure

– Districts are forced to consider the closure of small schools because they can’t afford the overhead. The underlying issue is inadequate state funding to operate schools.


Q: What are the overall impacts of these reductions in educational services?

A: When there are increases in the ratio of students to caring adults on school campuses, the daily needs of students…. academic, social and emotional…. go unmet. For some students that will lead to dropping out of school and the related problems of juvenile crime and the rising prison population in California. For other students, it will mean the lack of an

adequate education to help them achieve their dreams for college and a career. Ultimately, California’s workforce preparation will suffer with corresponding impacts on the economy.


Q: There have been lean years before in California funding, why is this year different?

A: There are several forces colliding that are creating this crisis for

local school districts:


• Funding for education in this state is so thin, that districts have hardly any options to deal with further cuts.

– That is why the cut lists for the five districts are so similar. Funding for education in California is 46th in comparison to the rest of the United States, yet the standards and outcomes we expect are among the highest in the nation. State funding fluctuates wildly year to year. In a good year, law makers create new programs for schools to implement. In a bad year like 2008, special programs are taken away and the proposed elimination of Prop 98, will cause school districts to cut out core services like counselors and teachers. School funding is so highly regulated that local School Boards have very little flexibility.


• Expenses to run a school district increase annually.

– Some of them include: automatic movement of employees on the salary schedule and increases in the cost of health benefits, utilities, insurance and mandated Special Education services.


• District enrollment is declining.

– The income for every student goes partly for the direct classroom expenses (teacher/instructional materials/utilities) but also for the overhead (principal, custodian, office manager, payroll, transportation, food service). The support services are still needed for current students, so it is difficult to make the necessary spending reductions required by the loss of income.


Q: What is needed to address the on-going public education funding crisis in California?

A: It is vital that everyone continues to participate actively in the public policy discussions leading up to the final adoption of the state budget by the legislature. There are three main fiscal points that need to be considered as Californians debate solutions to our state fiscal crisis.


1. Adequate Funding

Are we as a state going to provide realistic levels of funding to address the world class academic standards that California has set in place for all students to meet? California is currently number 46 in the U.S. for education spending.


2. Stable Funding

Do we value stability for education programs or is the “business model” that involves expanding and downsizing with the market the best way to serve California’s students? Business reduces products to meet market demand. Educational needs of students are not correlated to economic markets.


3. Local Authority for Use of Funding

Do we continue to combine high levels of accountability with highly restrictive state regulations or do we reduce regulation to enable local innovation and improvement initiatives? The idea behind charter schools is reduced regulation and local control, yet that same flexibility is withheld from public school districts.


For information on these questions, see the Stanford University independent research project: “

Getting Down to Facts: A Research Project Examining California’s School Governance and Finance Systems http://irepp.stanford.edu/projects/cafinance.htm

and the Report from the Governor's Committee on

Education ExcellenceEveryChildPrepared.org

http://irepp.stanford.edu/projects/cafinance.htm

http://irepp.stanford.edu/projects/cafinance.htm


Questions?????

• Please frame questions as they relate to our region. Hold questions regarding individual Districts to after the meeting with the appropriate Superintendent or Staff Member


Closing Comments

IMPACT OF STATE BUDGET CUTS ON

OUR LOCALSCHOOL DISTRICTSApril 2008

Presented by:Conejo Valley Unified School DistrictLas Virgenes Unified School District

Moorpark Unified School DistrictOak Park Unified School District

Simi Valley Unified School District

Documents

IMPACT OF STATE BUDGET CUTS ON OUR LOCALSCHOOL DISTRICTS April 2008 Presented by: Conejo Valley Unified School District Las Virgenes Unified School District