Download
1 / 25
250 likes | 337 Views
USD 320. In the course of developing an appropriate response to budget reductions, keep in mind the following: If a child does not learn to read by the third grade, they will struggle throughout life with their learning;
E N D
USD 320 • In the course of developing an appropriate response to budget reductions, keep in mind the following: • If a child does not learn to read by the third grade, they will struggle throughout life with their learning; • The research is very clear as to the impact of quality teaching and district and school level leadership on student achievement; • Having high quality curriculum, professional development, and collaboration time do have an impact on student achievement. • While athletics and activities are important, our children will go on to find their life’s work through their skills and knowledge associated with their classroom education; • Balance in a student’s life is important as it is when having to make difficult decisions; • A quality school system needs good secretaries, aides, bus drivers, cooks, custodians, and para-educators to operate effectively;
Your Legislative Representatives • Pottawatomie County • Mr. Richard Carlson 785-296-7660 or richard.carlson@house.ks.gov • Mr. Dennis Pyle 785-296-7379 or Dennis.Pyle@senate.ks.gov
Your Legislative Representatives • Wabaunsee County • Richard Carlson • Laura Kelly 785-296-7365 Laura.Kelly@senate.ks.gov
Your Legislative Representatives • Riley County • Tom Hawk 785-456-7665 tom.hawk@house.ks.gov • Roger Reitz 785-296-7630 Roger.Reitz@senate.ks.gov
History of Budget Reductions • 2008-09 Base State Aide Per Pupil (BSAPP) reduced from $4,433 and to $4,400. Loss equals $131,560. • Start of 2009-2010, BSAPP reduced from $4,400 to $4,218. Loss equals $438,555.
History of Budget Reductions • During 2009-2010 school year BSAPP reduced from $4,218 to $4,012. Loss equals $302,694. • Total budget reduction to date, not counting loss of assessed valuation in the LOB ($38,132), equals $872,809. With the loss of valuation the total is $910,941.
History of Budget Reductions • The total of hard budget reductions to date has come to $553,208. Other savings have come from changes in teacher and administrative payroll. • The most recent reduction of $302,694 occurred this past November and is being temporarily covered by a district wide reduction in spending and the contingency reserve fund.
Future Budget Projections • Currently the only funding proposal in the legislature (House Appropriations Committee) proposes more cuts to public education. For USD 320 the projected loss of funding would amount to a loss of general fund revenue of $233,467 and a loss of LOB revenue of $331,174. Total loss equals $564,641. When this is added to cuts during the current year, the total loss of revenue comes to $867,335.
Future Budget Projections • The state has developed the proposal to essentially shift the burden of any funding increases to come from the local level. By adding a 6.66 mill levy increase, the district has the authority to reduce the cuts to the LOB. Further, the House has determined that athletics and activities are not part of the mission of schools by proposing a Local Activities Budget option so local districts can increase local taxes for the sole purpose of paying for athletics and activities.
Future Budget Projections • In 2011 the state will no longer receive any ARRA Stabilization Funds. This amounted to $373,274 this school year. At some point in the near future, the state or more likely local school districts will have to address the loss of this revenue as well.
Budget Reduction Process • Step 1: Establish site based budget reduction committees comprised of teachers and site council members. Information concerning site based expenditures and participation/expense figures for activities were shared with this committee. Each committee was given a reduction target to reach based on their respective expense % of the overall district budget.
Budget Reduction Process • Step 2: Establish a district level budget reduction committee consisting of parents and district administrators. The information provided to this committee included the recommendations from each school, district level recommendations from the superintendent, all documents given to the site based committees plus three year scholarship information, enrollment numbers by classes in the MS and HS, staffing comparison with other 4A size school districts and staffing of USD 320 district 14 years ago, and research on class size in schools, the impact of district level leadership, and the impact of district level leadership.
Recommendations from District Budget Reduction Committee • The committee submitted a list of 91 possible items to be considered for budget reduction. They also submitted a letter to the BOE regarding their work and further comments they wanted pass along to the BOE.
Letter to BOE • Utilization of the Mill Levy • Developing an extended payment arrangement for families • Support of all day kindergarten • Support for the position of Director of C&I • Negotiation items between WTA and USD 320 BOE • Early retirement incentive • Reduction in the length of contract • Reduction of plan time at WHS
Additional Thoughts from the Superintendent • The list that I provided to the BOE simply addressed a re-ordering of the prioritization done by the district committee. • There are additional items that I really believe the BOE should consider. • There should be consideration for a change in the district facility usage policy. • The HS Language Arts department could be reduced by one staff member. • Through negotiations, reduce the length of the teacher contract, offer a one time only retirement incentive, restructure the school year. • Increase the district mill levy. • Protect the time given for Professional Learning Communities as much as possible. • The HS schedule should not dictate the efficient use of personnel. There is no research that I know of that links the HS block schedule and student achievement.
