Welcome to my weekly budget blog. Because information is constantly changing, it is my intent to give you a central location to find out information about the current budget challenges we face. My goal is to have an update at least every Monday morning. By establishing this blog, I will be able to provide information to those that want it and at the same time respect the wishes of those that don’t want to worry until something final is decided.
To bring everyone up to date, Arizona’s 2008-09 budget has been balanced. As a result, the Mammoth-San Manuel Unified School District was cut $104,786 ($85,459 in base support and $19,327 in soft capital). We are able to absorb these cuts without cutting staff or programs this year. This is possible for a variety of reasons, including fuel costs not being as high as budgeted for, savings in our utility costs, and because they are allowing us to use soft capital for M&O purposes for the remainder of this year. Last week the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) stated that if revenue patterns continue as they were in December, the Legislature might have to cut an additional $420 million out of this year’s budget. There is no word yet whether that will happen, and if so, whether K-12 education will be cut further.
Next year’s budget is the one that is really scary. If the budget was adopted as proposed, the Mammoth-San Manuel Unified School District would be cut $1.4 million from a $7 million budget. Many have asked what we plan on doing, and the answer is the same: it depends. The guiding philosophy is that we will only cut what is necessary to address the loss in funding from the state. Thus, we can’t answer what will happen until we know how severely we are cut. Obviously, being cut $1.4 million would require much more drastic measures than being cut $200,000.
You can ask questions and post comments by clicking below. I will publish all questions/comments that are appropriate for public viewing.
February 25, 2009 at 7:46 am |
Are you going to put together a financial committee again? Last year you had a committee, and I think that this year is much more dire. I think the committee could find ways to save money and find budget waste without cutting teaching positions. I am really afraid because teachers have to be highly qualified to teach in their subject area, the elementary schools are going to take the brunt of the lay-offs and budget cuts.
February 25, 2009 at 10:41 am |
The committee Amy is referring to was called the Financial Advisory Group. This group met from September 27, 2007 through March 13, 2008 and consisted of a teacher from each building, a support staff representative, a building administrator representative, the business manager and me. The purpose of the group was to establish (when we had the time and were not under pressure) a framework to guide us through tough decisions that we knew we would eventually face. After spending months reviewing an enormous amount of data, cost saving strategies identified by the group were: establish class size ratios; implement energy conservation strategies; move the Gardner Computer Lab; restructure the swimming pool hours to reduce costs; establish a field trip budget; and reduce two support staff positions. All of these strategies have been implemented.
The group also came to consensus that philosophically we agreed that we would protect staff and programs to the best of our ability. With that overriding philosophy, we came up with a framework to address further cuts that included considering a four-day week; closing a school or schools; and asking the community for a budget override. All agreed to these strategies, but there was not a consensus as to what priority these should be implemented.
I would be agreeable to meeting with the original Financial Advisory Group members if the majority of them feel there is something we could accomplish. Starting a new group is not an option due to the amount of time it would take to educate them on the data we already spent months reviewing.
What makes this so difficult for us is we have already been addressing this issue for the past few years. Any “easy” or “good” decision to reduce costs has already been made, leaving us with choices nobody wants to make. If the legislature cuts us to the degree that their proposal indicated, the choices we will have to make will not be good for students, for staff, or for the community – but they will be necessary. I am continuously looking for suggestions as to how we can reduce the impact of cuts and am hoping that this blog will provide me with some.
As for your concern that elementary teachers will take the brunt of the cuts, I want to first emphasize that we don’t know yet if there will be any cuts. It is my understanding that Arizona accepted the Federal stimulus package – which includes a lot of money that must be spent on education. If that is accurate and they allocate the money as it was meant to be allocated, our cuts will be minimal. However, in the case that we do have to cut teachers, we will follow the Governing Board Policies on Reduction in Force, which are aligned with Arizona law. Those policies and laws include attrition; qualifications and certification; overall teaching experience, academic training, and ability; past contributions to the educational program of the District; and length of service.
March 25, 2009 at 6:52 am |
How were teachers chosen to be rifted? Surely there were jr high and high school teachers with less than 6 years experience in the district. Why weren’t any of those teachers rifted? Why were only elementary teachers rifted?
March 25, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
When it was decided to rift only elem. teachers, was every teacher qualifications and certifications looked at? As stated in your blog… teacher cuts were determined by…. Those policies and laws include attrition; qualifications and certification; overall teaching experience, academic training, and ability; past contributions to the educational program of the District; and length of service…. Are there not teachers that still don’t have a degree in hand????