School District to Reduce Jobs, Programs By $1.4 Million
By Jonathan B. Opet, Alameda Sun, March 2, 2007
After nearly a month and a half of discussion, community meetings and revision, the Alameda Unified School District board of education approved $1.4 million in reductions to the 2007-08 budget.
After nearly a month and a half of discussion, community meetings and revision, the Alameda Unified School District board of education approved $1.4 million in reductions to the 2007-08 budget.
The board of education trustees voted 3-2 in favor of district Superintendent Ardella Dailey’s recommendation, which was $600,000 less than an alternative list of cuts.
Trustees Mike McMahon and Tracy Lynn Jensen dissented from the majority, saying the cuts went too far in their scope.
The cuts will touch many areas of the school district, most notably management in schools’ offices.
The list of reductions has been called “risky” by the school district’s chief financial officer because it leaves no money available for unanticipated expenses next year like new teaching positions or a salary increase for district employees.
“We are in a financial dilemma that we have to address,” Dailey said before the trustees voted on the budget reductions. But she said it was in the “best interest of the district” to go forward with the recommendations.
The district’s chief financial officer, Luz Cázares, called the reductions “a temporary fix that does allow some time for community advocacy.”
Since the district started working on reductions for next year, many parents, students, teachers and employees in the school district have voiced their opinions on the financial situation. The school district and an ad hoc education group have held community meetings to explain the budget process and brainstorm ideas on how to raise money.
Trustee McMahon implored the audience at the end of a five and a half hour meeting to “keep energy and focus on trying to find a solution.”
He later said: “We need to change the way we as a district do business.”
Webmaster Note: Actually Board President Forbes made the comments attributed to Board member McMahon.
During the past six years, the school district has made $6.3 million in reductions.
At the board of education meeting Tuesday night, 27 people spoke to the board, all against the spending reductions or in favor of finding other ways to balance next year’s budget.
“It is painful for me to vote on this list,” said Trustee Bill Schaff, who along with David Forbes and Janet Gibson voted in favor of the reductions. “At the end of the day, we are responsible for balancing the budget.”
But it was Island High School’s board of education student representative Angel Guerra-Burdick who summed up many of the audience members reaction to the cuts by saying: “What will we end up with in the end?”
The elimination of Encinal High School’s Junior ROTC program, which came up against community opposition, did not appear on the reductions list. Earlier in the night, the trustees approved an additional $180,000 for special education and an additional $140,000 for technology services.
TOP
$1.4 MILLION CUT FROM SCHOOLS 2007-08
Budget reduction 'one-time fix;' with more trims to come, Superintendent says
By Peter Hegarty, Alameda Journal, March 2, 2007
Alameda school leaders trimmed $1.4 million from their 2007-08 budget this week, but that does not mean the district's financial woes are over.
Superintendent Ardella Dailey called the belt-tightening a "one-time fix" and said even more cuts will take place next year unless the district can generate additional cash.
"If we don't ... move forward with the knowledge that we're going to change this pattern, break this pattern, then we're stupid," Dailey said.
The budget crisis has already prompted a drive to create an endowment fund to help the district. Parents and others also may file a lawsuit to try and force state officials to change the way that Alameda schools receive money.
Whether those ideas will actually prevent future cuts remains unknown. But school board President David Forbes said he backs the effort.
"I would be in favor of a two-pronged approach," he said. "We need to work to raise money within the district and we need to put pressure on our state representatives to change the funding formula."
Declining enrollment, a complex state-funding system and long-declining aid from the federal government are the reasons for the budget problems.
The cuts that the board approved Tuesday by a 3-2 vote means the district will no longer pay for background checks for volunteer workers and that stipends earmarked for athletic coaches will be reduced.
It also means the position of head counselor at the city's three public high schools will be eliminated. Layoffs within those offices, however, will be confined to a single part-time employee, thanks to a one-time state counseling grant, according to district officials.
Board members Tracey Lynn Jensen and Mike McMahon cast the dissenting votes.
Jensen said she could not support them after the board voted earlier to increase spending in technology services, while McMahon said the cuts would hurt students too much.
The cuts -- which board member Bill Schaff called "painful" -- could have been worse.
The district was initially considering closing Will C. Wood Middle School and eliminating JROTC at Encinal High School, along with ending class-size reduction programs for ninth-grade classes, as ways to save about $2.1 million.
Among other things, the budget approved Tuesday reduces hours for office assistants and health clerks, some of whom asked the board to reconsider.
Vickie Levitch, office manager at Lum Elementary School, described the various jobs that office assistants perform -- everything from answering phones to taking care of children with bloody noses or upset stomachs.
"If the cuts go through, my question is, which of these responsibilities will be eliminated because they can't be done?" Levitch said.
What made approving the cuts difficult is that the budget has very little fat: Officials have trimmed about $6.3 million over the past few years due to declining enrollment and other issues.
TOP
Alameda school board cuts may not be enough
Dissenters say clerical, other reductions are too much
By Kelly Rayburn, Alameda Times Star, March 1, 2007
ALAMEDA — The board that governs Alameda Unified School District approved deep budget cuts for 2007-08 but the district still could be financially vulnerable in the months ahead.
District officials acknowledged the plan was risky and called it another temporary fix to ongoing financial woes.
"If we don't ... move forward with the knowledge that we're going to change this pattern, break this pattern, then we're stupid," district superintendent Ardella Dailey said, shortly before the 3-2 board vote Tuesday.
The $1.4 million in reductions will cut school counselors, athletic coaches' pay and support staff. Costs of fingerprinting and background checks of volunteer workers no longer will be covered by the district, but rather by volunteers or individual schools.
The decision came over the objection of parents, teachers and, especially, clerical workers.
Among other things, the new budget plan reduces hours for office assistants and health clerks, many of whom appealed to the board to reconsider.
Marianne Harms, office manager at Amelia Earhart Elementary School, and many others described the various jobs that office clerical workers perform — everything from answering phones to writing tardy slips to taking care of children with bloody noses or upset stomachs.
Harms said that ultimately, student well-being would be harmed.
"We're talking about safety issues here," she said. "And if you're concerned about enrollment, think about what parents will think if they come in and see a school office in disarray."
Declining enrollment, a complex state-funding system and long-declining aid from the federal government are the primary reasons for the budget problems.
The cuts approved Tuesday represent a compromise.
The district had been eyeing much larger reductions, to the tune of $2 million, that could have seen the closure of Will C. Wood Middle School and the elimination of JROTC at Encinal High School and of class-size reduction programs for ninth-grade classes.
Avoiding these cuts forced the district to dip deeper than is recommended into a pool of money from state reimbursements.
It also left no money for teacher pay increases if a deal is reached following ongoing union negotiations.
Acknowledging the move was risky, officials said the decision would buy more time for community advocacy for a fairer funding system in the long run.
The two board members who dissented were Tracy Lynn Jensen, who expressed qualms about an earlier decision to boost spending in technology services while cuts were being made, and Mike McMahon, who previously had gone on record against many cuts and was willing to dig even deeper into the state-reimbursement pool.
Board president David Forbes disagreed with McMahon.
Forbes said the district faces its current fiscal problems because, in the past, the board did not cut deep enough.
"We cannot afford to continue doing what we're doing," he said.
TOP
Alameda schools' cuts may prove deep
Officials mull layoffs to close $2.1M budget gap
By Kelly Rayburn, Alameda Times Star, February 27, 2007
ALAMEDA — In October, when school district officials presented the Alameda Board of Education with a plan to close a $2.1 million budget gap, then-board president Tracy Lynn Jensen remarked that the financial changes seemed relatively "painless."
Things have changed.
"Painless" is a word few are likely to use tonight as the Board of Education is faced with making an additional $1.4 million in spending reductions that likely will lead to layoffs and program cuts.
The meeting is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. in City Hall at 2263 Santa Clara Ave.
The proposed reductions come on top of budget cuts made in each of the past six years.
To some, the worst has been avoided: District Superintendent Ardella Dailey ditched a plan earlier this month to close Will C. Wood Middle School after the idea drew intense protest from parents.
And the budget proposal actually includes increases in special education and technology services.
On the chopping block, however, are high school counselors and stipends for athletic coaches.
District staff also recommends that some of its administrative work be diverted to the principal of Franklin Elementary School because Franklin has low enrollment compared to other schools.
Dailey said the changes are needed.
"We're not crying wolf here," she said.
Yet even with significant cuts, the budget proposal for the 2007-08 fiscal year is considered risky.
Here's why: It relies heavily on reimbursements from the state that could be taken away. The state reimburses districts for mandated programs such as class-size reduction andcollective bargaining negotiations.
However, the state controller has audited other districts' reimbursement claims and, in many cases, revoked them.
For this reason, Alameda County recommends that districts hold onto 80 percent of the reimbursements. District officials in Alameda propose keeping only 69 percent.
One school board member, Mike McMahon, is willing to use even more of the state reimbursements if that means saving high school counselors, athletic stipends and other district expenses.
He said some cuts under consideration could sway parents toward sending their children elsewhere for high school, further hurting the district.
Indeed, the district's budget woes stem largely from declining enrollment. It has lost more than 700 students since 2000.
The problems are also caused by a complex state funding system that leaves Alameda schools with the second lowest per-pupil funding among the county's 16 districts.
Finally, the federal government's contribution to Alameda's public schools has fallen from a peak of $2 million a year when the Naval Air Station was open to roughly $56,000 for the current fiscal year.
So far, even in budget straits, students have fared fairly well.
The district-wide Academic Performance Index score has increased annually from 733 in 2002 to 806 in 2006. (The API is a formula the state uses to gauge academic performance. On a scale of 200 to 1,000, 800 is the state's target score.)
The fall budget changes arose in part to cover teacher pay increases that ultimately were settled after the district originally approved its 2006-07 spending plan in the summer of 2006.
District staff came up with a plan that almost entirely relied on using one-time dollars to fund ongoing programs.
At the same time, officials acknowledged that, come February, more fundamental changes would have to be made.
It is difficult to tell how many people would be laid off under the district proposal, because some changes would involve shifting responsibilities and reducing part-time hours.
But cross-checking the most recent proposed changes with documents the district released earlier this month shows that the district would lose a net of about eight or nine full-time equivalent positions.
All to the dismay of Earl Rivard, president of the Alameda Education Association, who criticized the idea of cutting high school counselors in particular.
"The whole point of the whole enterprise is to help young people to succeed in a very harshly competitive academic environment," he said.
For the district to cut counseling services would be to "enter into a dereliction of the principal duty of an education institution," he said.
For her part, Jensen, who still serves on the school board but no longer as president, said she did not consider the current round of cuts painless.
"It wasn't painful (in the fall) because we didn't have any layoffs," she said. "It gets more painful when you're in the classroom and potentially cutting counselors and athletic stipends."
TOP
School board poised to drop budget ax
Plan calls for district to commit more of the funding received from the state toward the $1.4 million shortfall
By Peter Hegarty, Alameda Journal, February 27, 2007
After several weeks of public wrangling, the Alameda Unified School District Board of Education is poised tonight to cut $1.4 million from its 2007-08 fiscal year budget in an effort to balance its troubled books and avoid going into deficit.
Initially, Superintendent Ardella Dailey recommended a few larger-scale cuts to balance the district's spending plan. But after running into public opposition, Dailey chose to make dozens of smaller cuts in a budget-reduction effort that will impact a wider field of people and programs.
As the five-member board prepares to wield the budget ax, however, at least one member, Mike McMahon, says he will vote against the proposed spending plan.
The announcement by McMahon comes after he asked Dailey to back away from about $550,000 of her proposed cuts, including laying off some high school counselors and clerical staff at elementary and middle schools.
"The budget reductions made in prior years and being proposed while reducing expenses also reduce the perceived value of the educational experience in Alameda public schools," said McMahon, who first came out against Dailey's proposals during the Feb. 13 board meeting.
The board needs "to draw the line now," he said.
Dailey has agreed with McMahon to preserve the class-size reduction program for ninth-graders, taking off the table a cut that would have saved the district an estimated $88,000.
As with McMahon, parents and teachers have called for maintaining the program, saying it provides children with the attention that they need to learn.
Dailey said she was swayed by their arguments.
"As always, the concerns that I'm hearing out of the community is about the counseling and class-size reductions," she said.
Parent complaints also prompted Dailey to nix the idea of closing Will C. Wood Middle School, which would have saved $585,000.
To recoup the money, Dailey now wants trustees to earmark more of the reimbursement money the district receives from the state -- for standardized testing and other programs -- toward the deficit.
But what makes that idea risky, she said, is that the Office of the State Controller recently audited some reimbursement claims, deciding to withdraw the money from some districts over documentation and other issues.
Under Dailey's current proposal, 75 percent of reimbursement money would be set aside in case of an audit.
The Alameda County Office of Education suggests setting aside 80 percent, while McMahon said keeping the programs and jobs he wants saved means the district would have to set aside 50 percent.
An arbitration decision with the teachers union in July is the reason for the current budget crisis. But school district leaders also note that enrollment issues, too little money from the state and less federal money because the U.S. Navy base closure has led them to cut about $6.3 million from the budget during the past few years.
"You never get yourself into a dilemma in one year -- dilemmas develop over time," said Luz Cazares, the district's chief financial officer.
TOP
AUSD finance crisis is everyone's business
By Jeff Mitchell, Alameda Journal Editorial, February 16, 2007
In case you haven't noticed lately, our school district is in a financial world of hurt.
Superintendent Ardella Dailey says that in order to balance the 2007-08 school year budget, the district must cleave some $1.5 million from what is already a fat-free spending plan.
With nothing left but bone and muscle, the cuts that remain to be made are going to be painful.
But today, we're not so much concerned about how we got here as how we will extricate ourselves from this mess. There will be plenty of time for good old-fashioned, Alameda-style finger-pointing later.
And, mind you, this is a terrible situation. There's no hyperbole here. Nothing less than the future health and well-being of our community's children is on the line.
From our perspective several things need to be done quickly. Here are a few ideas:
- First, the school board must realize that it is our best offense and defense in this situation. Now is not the time to be cerebral elegant governors but loud and pesky activists. The funding situation from the state is most definitely a political issue, and our school board must get into the fight in both traditional and creative ways. Never could the old saw about the squeaky wheel getting the grease be more applicable.
If this means sitting outside of state Senate Pro Tem Don Perata's office in Sacramento until he decides to start helping AUSD, so be it. This powerful politico, who once taught in Alameda schools, needs to remember his roots. We need his high-profile help now -- not later. Sending an aide to a major community budget meeting just isn't cutting it.
Newly elected state Assemblyman Sandre Swanson, who represents the Island as part of the 16th state Assembly District, should be right there alongside these board members and parents. He should be Perata's wingman in this struggle.
Superintendent Dailey, during one of the recent community budget meetings, said changing the base revenue limits is critical to giving AUSD the kind of funding it needs to survive and flourish. And, yes, during good years, the district benefits from the receipt of equalization aid, but that is so hit-and-miss it cannot be depended upon.
- Second, it's time for the Alameda real estate and business community to roll up its sleeves and realize that it very much has a dog in this fight. After all, if our schools are in financial and physical disarray, who is going to want to buy a house here? Who is going to want to do business here?
Moreover, the folks in the Alameda real estate and business community are sharp. Their leadership and ability to think unconventionally is critically needed to help resolve this crisis.
- Third, Mayor Beverly Johnson and the city of Alameda must do more than have friendly little meetings with members of the school board every couple months. Johnson and the City Council should form a task force with school district leaders to quickly examine the kinds of city assistance that can be rendered to AUSD. (Hint to the city: starting thinking 'Berlin Airlift' and you'll get the right picture.)
- Fourth -- and this may be the toughest pill to swallow -- is that we must agree to tax ourselves more. A lot more. While neighboring communities have local parcel taxes exceeding $1,000 a year, our school district levies just $189 annually. This is crazy.
While we can hope that through proactive leadership and political pressure Sacramento gets the message and acts affirmatively, we ultimately must depend on ourselves to save our own bacon -- if history is any teacher.
We therefore call for this school board to place a new parcel tax before the city's voters on the November general election ballot.
This won't be easy. To get such a tax passed will require two-thirds of the Island electorate to vote yes. And, as part of such a new parcel tax, there should be exemptions for our elderly property owners and for homeowners in truly dire financial situations.
But with those exemptions, we should all be prepared and willing to pony up in the name of saving our schools -- the bedrock institution of our community.
My Response Posted Blogging Bayport Alameda
TOP
Parent groups attack funding issue
Two foundations seek change in how schools get money and a boost in community contributions to cash-strapped district
By Eve Pearlman, Alameda Journal, February 16, 2007
In the face of the Alameda Unified School District's budget woes, two parent-driven support organizations are stepping up their public profiles to help the financially struggling district.
Now with some $1.5 million to cut from the district's 2007-08 fiscal year budget, the Alameda Education Foundation and Alamedans for Better Schools are devising plans to raise funds and channel parental interest and energy.
A Feb. 8 community meeting at Lum School, sponsored by the two organizations, drew more than 200 eager to learn more about why the district continues to cut basic programs each year -- and what they can do to make a difference.
"This community wants to be informed and they want to know what they can do," said AEF president Anne DeBardeleben.
Franklin Elementary PTA President Christine Strena helped organize last Thursday's meeting because she wanted to help other parents who, like her, are struggling to understand how schools are financed in California and why AUSD seems to be in a perpetual state of crisis.
"When I started asking questions about why funding is the way it is, I was outraged," said Strena.
Because of a decades-old formula for allocating state money to school districts, AUSD gets many hundreds of dollars less per student than other state districts. And federal and state laws often require the district to provide programs and services to students without providing the funds to do so.
"In reality, there's no quick fix," said Strena, but the community's willingness to commit resources and energy appears to be growing.
Some parents, according to Ron Mooney with Alamedans for Better Schools, are eager to work on changing how funds are allocated statewide, both through lobbying legislatively and through a class action lawsuit. Other parents are interested in doing the kind of private fundraising that has sustained other districts across the state.
AEF in the community
Created in 1982, AEF works to support schools in a variety of ways. In cooperation with the Bank of Alameda, the foundation runs an Adopt-a-Classroom program, which last year provided more than 100 classroom teachers with small grants of $500 and up to purchase materials and supplies.
AEF also runs the after-school enrichment program, provides minigrants to teachers for innovative programs, runs the free teacher supply store and has just launched, with the Alameda Chamber of Commerce, a financial literacy program for high school seniors.
"Our aim is to support educational excellence in Alameda," said AEF executive director Kris Murray. "But I think now the light bulbs are going on and people see that AEF can really do something bigger than your PTA can -- we can support schools throughout the island in a long-term way."
In districts that have managed to avoid dramatic cuts to school services, a large portion of the school's operating budgets come from outside sources.
In Piedmont, for example, only 69 percent of the school district's budget comes from the state. (In Alameda, that figure is around 95 percent--a parcel tax passed in 2001 and renewed in 2005 collects $189 per parcel, generating $3.2 million a year).
Piedmont's parcel tax raises $6.9 million a year for the city's schools and the city's education foundation raises another $1.5 million a year.
Picking up the slack
In other districts, parents pay yearly "voluntary tuitions," ranging from a few hundred dollars on up. In Moraga, for example, parents and community members raise over $1 million a year (this year's goal is $1.2 million) to support their district's 3,200 students. Parents with children in Moraga schools are asked to donate $500 per year per student.
AEF is set up to work in both ways. AEF's Legacy Fund is an endowment fund spearheaded in early 2004 by school board member William Schaff. The eventual goal is to raise $10 million so that Alameda schools can count a predictable income, regardless of the condition of the state budget. The Legacy fund right now has about $60,000.
At their board meeting earlier this week, AEF officials discussed how to harness new community energy and formed two committees, one to work on enhancing the Legacy Fund and a second to work on a reinvigorated Dollar-a-Day campaign, in which donors are asked to give one dollar per school day, or a $180 a year, to support the foundation's activities.
School Superintendent Ardella Dailey, who also sits on AEF's board, says she is hopeful about the positive energy in the community and hopes people will step up to work for and fund long-term solutions to the ongoing funding shortages in AUSD.
"Right now I've got a short-term fix for a long-term problem," Dailey said, speaking of the cuts the school board will soon make. "But I need a long-term fix in order to move this district forward."
TOP
Schools mull parcel tax increase bid
At $189 a year, current levy for AUSD is small compared to those assessed in neighboring cities
By Peter Hegarty, Alameda Journal, February 16, 2007
The budget woes of the Alameda school district have left school officials scrambling for money and parents and others asking how they can help.
Among the ideas already floated to offset the $1.5 million shortfall -- which is set to recur every budget cycle unless an ongoing source for money is found -- is raising the annual parcel tax that benefits local schools.
"We've got to look at the parcel tax," said Mike Cooper, vice principal of Encinal High School. "We absolutely have to look at it."
Encinal students were among those who packed recent community meetings on the district's budget, arguing that officials were unfairly singling out the school by proposing to cut JROTC and other campus programs.
Currently, Alameda property owners pay $189 annually for the tax, which voters approved in June 2005.
It lasts seven years and senior citizens can apply for an exemption.
Supporters describe the tax as a small price to pay to help public schools. They point to what residents in neighboring cities pay: In Palo Alto, the tax is $493, while in Piedmont some property owners pay more than $1,900 each year.
But Alameda school board President David Forbes -- who helped spearhead the drive to pass the school parcel tax here -- said the idea of raising it is a nonstarter.
"I would like to try and find other alternatives before we go back to the voters," he said. "We need to look within ourselves."
The reason?
Securing the two-thirds majority needed to pass the tax was an uphill battle: Voters turned down an initial ballot measure to create a $50 parcel tax in June 1997. And while they supported a $109 tax in November 2001, many clearly did not want to raise the tax to its current $189 when it appeared on the ballot less than two years ago.
It squeaked to victory with just 53 votes.
What's needed now, Forbes said, is political lobbying in Sacramento to get more money for Alameda schools, along with a campaign to support an endowment fund so that it can provide ongoing revenue.
"I think that's where we need to go right now," he said. "We need to have a focused fundraising campaign, like an election campaign."
The political lobbying would likely center on changing the state funding formula, which has led Alameda schools to receive $266 less per student than the county average. If that was changed, the district could receive an additional $2.6 million each year, according to school officials.
Kris Murray, executive director of the nonprofit Alameda Education Foundation, said about $60,000 now sits in its endowment account.
"We have not pushed the account like we should have been," Murray said. "Someone needed to champion it. Unfortunately, we have not had those people. But that's going to change."
The foundation's goal is to have $10 million in the account within the next three years, she said.
"I believe we can do that," Murray said. "We are looking at every source we can. Everything is fast-tracked. We are trying to capitalize on the interest that's been generated by the recent cuts."
The foundation is currently asking 600 people to donate $180 annually -- or $1 for every day of the school year.
That would raise $100,000, Murray said.
Whatever the source of money that will eventually offset the budget deficit, it needs to come as a regular revenue, Superintendent Ardella Dailey said.
"A single fundraiser is not enough," she said. "I can't create a budget on that. The money needs to be ongoing."
Meanwhile, the greater Alameda community seems to be growing increasingly aware of the district's financial problems.
"There seems to be never enough money for our schools," said Helen Lindsey, one of about 200 Alamedans who attended a recent community meeting on the crisis at Lum Elementary School. "We should do whatever we can to help. Everyone benefits by good schools."
TOP
School District Officials Snub 'Creative Solutions'
By Jonathan B. Opet, Alameda Sun, February 15, 2007
A risky list of nearly $1.5 million in cost reductions was presented to the Alameda Unified School District board of education Tuesday night, going against a county recommendation and leaving no money for unanticipated expenses next year.
Enlargement of 9th grade math and English unlikely, recommended list of reductions is risky, CFO says.
A risky list of nearly $1.5 million in cost reductions was presented to the Alameda Unified School District board of education Tuesday night, going against a county recommendation and leaving no money for unanticipated expenses next year.
The list does not recommend closing Will C. Wood Middle School, but as a result, the savings next year would be about $500,000 less than the alternative recommendation, which includes the closure.
The list is called the Spending Reductions and Resource Allocation Plan for 2007-2008, and is in response to a $2.1 million shortfall that the school district is facing.
But as some board of education trustees asserted Tuesday night, the school district's financial problems are not new.
The 21st century has brought the school district an unremitting problem: for the last several years, it has not had enough money.
And as a result, district officials and board of education trustees have been forced to cut programs and consolidate schools.
In the recent weeks, as this process has unfolded once again with the superintendent, at one time, proposing to close a middle school along with other program cuts and shifting of funds, it appears that the board of education will once again reduce costs in the school district in the face of a growing chorus of residents demanding more creative solutions.
"The concern for this district is a long-term solution," school district Superintendent Ardella Dailey said Tuesday at a board of education meeting. "I am not happy with what we have tonight — I don't think anyone is happy with what we have to look at."
Daily was referring to the list of programs cuts she and her cabinet submitted to the board of education trustees Tuesday night.
Last year, Ruby Bridges Elementary School was built for students from three elementary schools that were consolidated to save the school district about $600,000.
Board of education trustee Mike McMahon said at the meeting that since he was elected to the board in 2003, he has had to deal with spending reductions each year.
He said the school district and the board should have made more fiscally responsible decisions in the past, meaning the board should have voted for more program cuts than it did.
As a result, McMahon said, the board began making "damaging cuts last year when [the board of education] started cutting programs."
McMahon painted a picture of a financially strapped school district responsible for providing under-funded mandated programs and having to revise the budget last year to include a school-district employee salary increase.
The salary increase was the after effect of a July 2006 arbitration agreement between the school district and the teacher's union, which resulted in a $4.2 million salary increase.
President of the teacher's union, Earl Rivard, said at the Tuesday night meeting that the salary increase was "back rent" and "was due a long time ago."
As a series of community budget workshops put on by the school district to get residents' opinions on program cuts unfolded, a common theme arose: Why haven't the school officials and state legislators done more to correct was is seen by many as a problem.
That problem for many is a state-used formula to calculate how much money each school district receives.
Second-year Superintendent Dailey said the problem with "unequal revenue" that Alameda Unified receives in comparison to similar school districts "is bigger than our district.
"Public education as a whole is facing some real challenges," she said.
Meanwhile, district officials are hammering out how to save money next year.
The school district's chief financial officer, Luz Cázares, said the recommended list of reductions "involves some risk."
She called it a "temporary solution."
The risks involved if the board of education adopts the recommended list of reductions are that it "leaves no balance available for any unbudgeted spending increase," according to a report. And it suggests setting aside 5 percent less than the county recommended 80 percent of reimbursement money during a potential state-audit period.
Board of education President David Forbes said: "I, too, worry what we are doing." He later said: "We are treading on very, very thin ice."
The school district is also dangerously close to not meeting a required 3 percent reserve of total spending. Failure to meet the requirement would result in county intervention.
Cázares said: "We should be reducing our spending by $2 million."
Earlier in the night, during a public comment period, one person suggested turning the Kofman Auditorium into a profit-generating asset, while another person suggested filing a lawsuit against the state arguing against the state's education funding formula.
Rivard has said the cuts should be as far away from the schools as possible.
"This is not a pretty picture," Dailey said.
The recommended list also includes funding for technology services and a new special education program.
The board of education will approve a final list, after the recommended one is tweaked, at a Feb. 27 meeting.
TOP
School Board Mulls Cuts
By Peter Hegarty, February 13, 2007
Cutting high school counselors and reducing class size reduction are among the latest proposals that Alameda school district leaders will consider as a way to off the district's budget deficit.
While the overall shortfall totals about $2 million, the recommendations that Superintendent Ardella Dailey will present tonight total about $1.5 million.
Offering the fewer cuts means that trustees also will not have money to cover any unforseen expenses over the upcoming year, such as a need to hire more teachers or to pay for any upcoming raises, Dailey said. She also said she's hoping that parents and others will consider helping annually pay for athletics and other programs to help the district save money.
"I would really like to see those kind of programs become self-sufficient," she said.
The struggle to balance the budget so that the Alameda school district can secure a balanced budget has already prompted parents and others to look at new ways to generate cash -- with ideas ranging from launching an endowment to lobbying politicians in Sacramento.
Mayor Beverly Johnson was among those who braved the rain to attend a community meeting on the district's budget woe's Thursday at Lum Elementary School, where she hit out at the fact that Alameda schools receive $266 less per student in state average daily attendance money than the county average.
"How is that fair?" Johnson said.
The district would receive an additional $2.6 million each year if it met the county average, according to Alameda County education officials.
School board President David Forbes urged the approximately 200 people who gathered at the meeting to push elected officials to change the state funding formula -- which has been in place since 1972 -- and help secure more equalization money.
Newly-elected Oakland Assemblyman Sandre Swanson said he supported the idea.
"I will try and impact the (state) budget in such a way that it will give us an advantage for our children," Swanson said.
While the mechanism for school funding has been in place for decades, securing equalization money has hinged on the health of the state budget and whether extra cash was available, Forbes said.
But with little hope of a windfall anytime soon, Trustee Tracy Lynn Jensen said she will not be traveling to Sacramento.
"I don't have any plans to go to Sacramento, and I don't believe the board does," Jensen said. "But I am regularly meeting with the staffs of the offices of Don Perata and Sandre Swanson about what's happening in the district and our concerns."
On the other hand, Jensen said her interest was piqued by the idea of raising the district's annual parcel tax.
It's currently $189 per year. Any increase of the amount would have to go before voters and would require a two-thirds majority to pass.
Other money-boosting suggestions at the meeting included creating an endowment to help pay for district programs and filing a lawsuit to try and get more state money.
The meeting was organized by the Alameda Education Foundation and Alamedans for Better Schools, which helped spearhead the campaign that got the parcel tax passed in 2001.
"Hopefully, the meeting will show our elected officials that the school budget issue is a community-wide problem," Jensen said. "It's impacting everyone, not just parents."
District officials find themselves in a financial crisis due to a July arbitration decision over their contract with the Alameda Education Association, which has forced them to find extra money for salaries and benefits.
TOP
District Officials Propose Closure
School Board Mulls Cuts
Written by Casey Friedman, February 2, 2007
A proposal to consolidate three Alameda middle schools into two provoked a heated, emotional response from parents, district employees and the community at the Alameda Unified School District’s second public budget workshop on Monday evening.
A proposal to consolidate three Alameda middle schools into two provoked a heated, emotional response from parents, district employees and the community at the Alameda Unified School District’s second public budget workshop on Monday evening.
The consolidation was one item on a preliminary list of reductions and reallocations aimed at closing a $2 million budget gap that was presented at the workshop by Superintendent Ardella Dailey and her cabinet.
The list also included increasing class sizes, cutting and readjusting counseling positions, reducing high school management staff, eliminating the Junior Reserves Officer Training Corps, cutting athletic stipends, and a significant restructuring of administrative staff.
Chief Financial Officer Luz Cázares first explained the origins of the $2 million projected shortfall. She focused on the low amount of money AUSD receives per student — second-to-last in Alameda County — and the July 19 arbitration decision to pay one year’s retroactive wage increase for teachers.
During a question-and-answer period on potential reductions, tensions occasionally boiled over. Attendees vehemently expressed their indignation, often to applause from the audience.
“We’ll fight it as long as we can, tooth and nail,” said Wood Middle School teacher Patty Lopez. “We’ll fight for the rights of middle school students.”
Dailey emphasized that the list is “very preliminary,” but that after six years of cuts, AUSD has few options.
If the district were to move forward with consolidation, Wood would be closed down, while Lincoln and Chipman middle schools would be expanded to roughly 1,100 students each.
Chipman would also incorporate the former Woodstock Elementary School campus, possibly using it for an “eighth-grade academy.”
Middle school consolidation could save the District $585,000 in custodial, administrative, and program costs, but those savings are very vulnerable to a drop in enrollment.
If 100 middle school students left the district for private schools, for instance, the entire $585,000 would be lost.
Many participants felt that consolidation represented a betrayal of Alameda’s commitment to small schools and that it would hurt students. Some also pointed out that the greater distance to school might impact morning traffic and the health of students, who would no longer be able to walk or ride their bicycles.
Nonetheless, the cabinet stood by its classification of consolidation as “high” for its capacity to “maintain core values.” In response to community members’ incredulity, they explained that larger schools would allow for more equitable and complete programs, such as electives. This could remedy the gap of available electives in the existing middle schools, they said.
Community members expressed doubt about other proposed cuts, as well. Karen Keegan, chapter president of the California School Employees Association, said that they were aimed “right in the bull’s-eye at Encinal,” disproportionately harmful to the West End high school.
Several attendees also questioned the wisdom of a $140,000 increase in technology services at a time of such financial crisis.
Another source of frustration is the federally mandated special education program, which “pits kids against kids,” according to Dailey. The state and federal governments don’t provide enough money to support these mandates, and districts are left to fill the gap with unrestricted dollars.
In spite of restructuring, special education services will cost AUSD another $180,000 of unrestricted funds next year. Much of the list is less controversial, involving only technical reorganizing that allows restricted funds to be spent on budget items that have been paid for with unrestricted dollars previously.
Participants brainstormed alternative ideas for the superintendent’s council to consider, including year-round schools, inter-district open enrollment, elementary consolidation, class size restructuring, seeking support from local businesses, cutting from the district office, increasing development fees, exit surveys for students leaving AUSD, fundraising drives, and district-wide pay cuts.
Other proposals suggested included: projecting the number of days school could run with no cuts or a political campaign to raise the amount of money given to AUSD per student.
TOP
Teen's voice resonates in budget fight
School board student representative, a senior at Enicinal High, earns high marks from adult counterparts
By Peter Hegarty, February 20, 2007
As Alameda Unified School District officials argue over what cuts to make in order to eliminate a $1.5 million budget deficit, one voice has been among the most articulate in the fight to preserve many student programs and services.
But as Cecilia Martinez, an Encinal High senior and student representative to the school board, sees it, she's just doing her job.
"I cannot vote," the 18-year-old said of her post on the district governing board. "But I can let people know what Encinal thinks. I'm speaking on their behalf. And I am there to say that what they're proposing to cut is ridiculous and shouldn't happen."
The recommendations from Superintendent Ardella Dailey, which are aimed at trimming $1.5 million from the budget, initially hit the school on Central Avenue hard.
Among the proposals was eliminating Encinal's JROTC program and laying off both a vice principal and the head counselor at the school.
Dailey backed off, however, after Martinez and other Encinal students began arriving at district budget meetings en masse to oppose the cuts.
"I understand they need money and that they've got to find it somewhere," Martinez said Thursday as she took a break during her Spanish class. "But any cuts that are made should be fair and across the board. And they should effect kids last."
Fighting the good fight was not what Martinez expected when she began her term in September.
"At the beginning, I was just learning about the board and how it works. But now, anytime there's a meeting about the budget, I try and make sure that a group of us from Encinal attend," she said.
While standing up and opposing many of the district's proposed budget cuts has been stressful, the struggle has also given Martinez a rare opportunity to assert a student voice into what has generally been an adults-only debate.
And when Martinez speaks -- whether in a stuffy gym before a standing-room-only crowd or in the confines of the City Council chamber -- people of all ages tend to stop what they're doing and listen.
