Notes from PAUSD School Board Meeting and Special Study Session February 9, 2010

Prepared by Lauren Janov, PTAC Advocacy Chair

Board Packet accessible at:
http://pausd.org/community/board/downloads/brd_packet/item_011.pdf

A. Staff Overview and Proposal

Overview

PAUSD staff explained the review process and budget situation outlining efforts already undertaken:

• $2 million of staffing savings for the current school year through lower enrollment growth, increased K-5 class sizes (K-3:21, G4&5:23), soft hiring freezes, and tighter secondary staffing.
• $450,000 miscellaneous savings (lowering legal, consulting and summer school costs by increasing tuition)

Assuming passage of the higher parcel tax this May, increased revenues by permanent transfer of deferred maintenance to general fund and PiE funding Spectra Arts, as well as, using $2.1 of estimated surplus, PAUSD will still need to make $3.7 million in cuts (the total structural deficit is $7.6 million) for 2010-11. Not factored in to these cuts are the additional cuts that PAUSD will need to make if the federal government does not bail out CA to the tune of $7 billion. We will know this school year whether this will happen or not.

2011-12 expect an additional $2.6 deficit, including 14% increase in classified staff pension costs because of 25% market decline. Open questions are whether parcel tax will pass, what the increased cost for certificated staff pension costs will be (Cathy Mak: "may be drastic"), and health benefit, enrollment and state budget adjustments.

Cuts:

What PAUSD does not recommend:

• March 15 pink slips
• Reductions to major programs
• Reductions to professional development
• Furlough days

What PAUSD recommends be cut:

Operations ($1.67 million), including:

• Transfer $35/student of site discretionary funds to district (decrease from $105/student) ($402,500 savings)
• Transfer 25% site rental income to district ($125,000 savings)
• Close middle school pools November to March
• Reduce subsidies to summer school and food service (retaining $172,000 food service subsidy caused by extra staffing at 4 hours with 100% benefits because of extra time needed for off site food preparation). ($150,000 savings)
• Anticipated health benefit savings caused by employee open enrollment selections this year (increase in 12 employees who opted for $2,500 cash instead of the $12,800 average/employee health benefit costs (previously 51 employees) and switching to different plans) ($286,000 savings)
• Anticipated savings generated by encouraging employees to take vacation days instead of cashing them out ($20,000 savings)
• Anticipated enrollment savings over projections (anticipate 299 new students, 58 fewer than projected) ($300,000 savings)

Staffing ($1.56 million), including:

• Increase class sizes (from 09-10 class sizes)
• Increase elementary by 1 student (K-3: 22, G4 & 5: 24) ($60,000 savings)
• Increase middle school 6th grades by 2 students (G6:26, G 7 & 8: 26, G 7 & 8 Math and English: 24) ($240,000 savings)
• Increase 9th and 10th grade math and English classes by 1 (from 22 to 23) ($80,000 savings)
• .8 FTE reduction in district personnel (position not specified) ($120,000 savings)
• 5.75 FTE classified support reduction (positions not specified, some at sites) ($320,000 savings)

Other ($92,500) - reducing primary language tutors to serve only the neediest students (being more selective about when hourly employees are called in by sites, continue to serve free and reduced lunch kids). Impact will mostly be felt in primaries, because of the pressing need in secondary schools for students to understand content and stakes for college. Anticipate that parents will pay privately.

Areas they will study/focus on for future potential savings**

• Energy savings
• Special Education
• District office reorg (will depend on skills of new people they hire)
• Further review of health benefits
• Residency verification (i.e., proof of residency for all incoming 9th graders- employee announced that they were ready to do this as soon as they get the word). PAUSD supported retaining staff's ability to enroll their children in district.
• Continue soft hiring freeze
• Continue to manage employee overtime
• Delay adoption of new instructional materials
• Examine technology savings (i.e. electronic v. printing)

B. Impression of Effect of PTAC Survey

Scott Bowers thought the PTAC survey was extensive and provided "wonderful" input. Without the survey PAUSD would not have been able to reach as many people. Melissa Caswell thanked the PTA for the survey.

No support for PTAC's most popular idea - going online with classes - because of impression that it would not save money and the administrative investment needed to get the o9f State of California sign off on required classes.

There were no cuts specified that were on the rest of PA PTAC survey's most popular cut list - reducing top administrative staff (put in “focus” area) and requiring supplemental programs like lunch and summer school to be fully self-funding (PAUSD proposed reducing the costs but not eliminating district subsidies).

On the other hand, there were no cuts that were specified on PA PTAC least favorite cut list either - guidance/college/career counseling, parent teacher conferences, reading specialists, janitorial, and traveling music and PE, other than middle school class size increases mentioned above.

C. Topics of Concern:

1. Transfer $35/student of site discretionary funds to district

Staff reported that principals supported this, but this was of concern to 4 board members (Barb Mitchell, Barb Klausner, Camille Townsend and Melissa Caswell). Camille Townsend was particularly concerned about the impact of this on the middle and high schools. Staff will come back with more details on impact to classroom. Melissa Caswell wanted to see how it would feel in the classroom without this money.

Kevin Skelley said that the increased PiE funding will results in approximately $15-$20/student extra at the sites (amount will depend on the actual enrollment numbers for 2010-2011)
PA PTAC Survey: 31% recommended $20 reduction

2. 25% reduction in site rental income

Camille Townsend was particularly concerned about the impact of this on the middle and high schools. Melissa Caswell wanted to see how it would feel in the classroom without this money.
PTAC 62% recommended 50% reduction

3. Increase class sizes

Increase elementary by 1 student (K-3: 22, G4 & 5: 24)
[PTAC Survey: 61% recommended increase from 21 to 22]
Increase middle school 6th grades by 2 students (G6:26, G 7 & 8: 26, G 7 & 8 Math and English: 24)
[PTAC Survey: 26% recommended increase by 3]
Increase 9th and 10th grade math and English classes by 1 (from 22 to 23)
[PTAC Survey: 36% recommended increase by 2]

Dana Tom was concerned that the current class size in 9th and 10th grade English was too large already and Barb Klausner agreed that care should be taken when increasing these classes. A Gunn English teacher spoke very eloquently against increasing English class sizes too - noting the impact on teachers who tend both to the intellectual as well as social and emotional needs of their students - a life and death matter. Camille Townsend said she too would hate to increase high school class sizes. Melissa Caswell was particularly concerned about middle school.
Kevin Skelly said he would revisit the middle and high school cut decisions; initially staff wanted to spread the a pain.

4. Focus area

Examine technology savings (i.e. electronic v. printing)
Did not offer online classes as an option for cost savings now or later. Staff did not feel it would generate much savings because of staff's continued involvement. PTAC rep mentioned that Gunn and Paly already had a private pay model in place where HS credits could be offered for certain off site and online classes; they agreed that that model would generate savings. Scott Bowers thought courses would need state approval first, and wanted IS and principals to weigh in on this.

Barb Klausner, Melissa Caswell and Camille Townsend all inquired further about this.
In PTAC survey this was supported by 83% - the most popular option.

5. Reducing primary language tutors to serve only the neediest students

Melissa Caswell wanted to know what the impact on kids would be. Three staff members (2 ELD tutors and 1 librarian) spoke out against this cut, one saying that kids specifically come to our district because of this program and another saying parents have said they are willing to contribute toward its costs.

Kevin Skelly said he was open to suggestions; he wants to keep the tutors for the middle and high school students as well as low income elementary students.

6. Professional Development

Camille Townsend expressed concern about continued investment in professional development for elementary math program that has not yet been shown to work. People who contacted her want to be assured that money spent on professional development will be beneficial. We need to make sure it is the best curriculum. We need to keep our eye on it.

Barb Klausner said that she is a strong proponent of professional development and wants to see where PAUSD is now with its professional development plan.

7. Cuts at 25 Churchill’s Administrative Offices

Barb Klausner wanted to see an organization chart.
Kevin Skelly said most hiring decisions will be driven by the kinds of people they find.

8. More info needed

Barb Mitchell: Wants a list of PAUSD expenses that have grown faster than enrollment and inflation and wants the list of 25 cuts to be ranked in order of importance, incase revenues pick up and items restored.
Dana Tom: Wants suggestions now about what to cut if Parcel Tax does not pass.

D. PiE Announcement

PiE announced $2.9 million collected for 2009-2010, $330,000 over goal. It will be picking up the cost of K-5 Spectra Arts resulting in $65,000 PAUSD savings.