SCUSD Parent’s Budget Analysis For Fiscal 2008, 2009 and 2010 by Léo Bennett-Cauchon1.0 by coopmike48

VIEWS: 151 PAGES: 29

More Info
									4.07.09

SCUSD Parent’s Budget Analysis For Fiscal 2008, 2009 and 2010 Respectfully Submitted by Léo Bennett-Cauchon 04/02/2009 Public Advocate Luther Burbank High School Parent Luther Burbank High School SSC Member SCUSD Community Member Special Education Parent Special Education Teacher BA Public Administration Former Area 5 Board Candidate District Advisory Committee Executive Board Black Parallel School Board Supporter Coalition to Save Public Education California Aware Member California First Amendment Member SCUSD Observer Contributor
(Organizations for identification purposes only)

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

1

4.07.09

Contents
Topic Title: Content: Narrative Summary: Critical Questions: General Fund Balance Trends General Fund Spending Trends Personnel Salaries Spending Trends (certificated) Personnel Salaries Spending Trends (certificated) Personnel Benefits Spending Trends Books and Supplies (4000) Object Codes Spending Trends Services and Other (5000) Object Codes Spending Trends Capital Outlay (6000) Object Codes Spending Trends Special Fund Reserves Trends General Fund Balance Trends (Parent Revision) SCUSD Budget Trends Analysis Estimated Deficit Analysis + (Balancing 08-09) Options to Balance 09 – 10 Analysis Twenty Questions or Points needing Clarification Additional Information (links): Addendum 1: Structural Deficit Claims Analysis Addendum 2: April 2 “Strategies to Balance Budget” Analysis Addendum 2: April 2 Other Balancing/Enhancement Strategies Addendum 3: 2009 Timelines Addendum 4: Parent’s 2nd Interim Budget Addendum 5: Corrections/Additions Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7–8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 – 16 17 – 18 19 20 – 21 22 - 23 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 2

4.07.09

Narrative Summary “Don’t tell me where your priorities are. Show me where you spend your money and I’ll tell you what they are.”
(quoted form James W. Fitzpatrick of Notre Dame University at SCUSD SPSA training) Methodology: It is considered best practice to present public decision makers with information of sufficient depth, breadth and clarity to allow for due diligence in a deliberative decision making process that is transparent and accountable. 1. In order to add depth to the budget information provided at Board meetings additional information gathered from SCUSD through Public Records Act requests is incorporated into this study. In addition information publicly available on the Internet which uses CDE data is utilized. Links to all information will be happily be made available upon request. 2. In order to add breadth to the budget the information was entered into tables to allow for a longitudinal comparison over ten years. 3. To add clarity to the budget the tables were plotted into a series of charts covering the general fund balance, actual total spending and spending on personnel, books/supplies and services as well as the ending balances of a sample of our other funds such as Adult Education, Child Development and Cafeteria Enterprise. 4. To better understand what is happening farther away from the classroom, information was studied which separates books from supplies. 5. Even farther from the classroom are services, which were studied separately as travel and dues, communication and consulting and service agreements. The last two are recorded somewhat interchangeably, so an additional study category was created to look at consulting and services as a combined item. 6. At the time of publication, SCUSD has chosen to not provide access to the electronic format of the budget so only a preliminary study could be done concerning the unrestricted and restricted aspects of supplies and services. This aspect of the study will continue. 7. A savings thought exercise was conducted which identified a potential for 26 M to 41.5 M savings in nonpersonnel budget items as a result of projecting actual spending at the current rate or by freezing selective items. 8. The notices of potential layoffs for principals, pupil services and teachers were studied as a percentage of all certificated staff as of CBEDS 2008. 9. A study table was created for the projections for the 09-10 deficit. Insufficient information is available to clearly quantify this important projection. 10. A study table was also created to track the many budget balancing options which have been presented by SCUSD. 11. Twenty questions were composed for consideration as additional areas of worthwhile study. Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 3

4.07.09

Narrative Summary (continued) "This unprecedented investment will provide our public education and early childhood programs with criticallyneeded funds.” (State Superintendent of Public Education Jack O’ Donnell)
Questions: In the course of this study the following critical question came up: 1. Can we prepare better and hope more realistically? 2. Are not cuts in proposed spending different than cuts in actual spending? 3. Are we affecting value to classrooms in an equitable manner? 4. Why are we estimating the cost of health care benefits above our average? 5. Why the Interim Two budget projected 25.73 M increase in Supplies (Code 4300) from FY 07 6. Does this add more value than teachers and other direct service provider? 7. Why the 3 M increase from Interim One budget and 36 M total spending on consultants? 8. Does the use of consultants add greater value than teachers and other direct service providers? 9. Can’t the Special Funds provide funds from their reserves as a bridge loan until the federal stimulus arrives? 10. Why an increase in building improvements greater than the projected savings from closing one small school? Observations: SCUSD can better prepare to successfully weather the ongoing state fiscal crisis without throwing over board staff and small schools. A focus on success for every student, staff and neighborhood school by name is best served by preparation that is aligned with the historically successful effort by SCUSD to match actual spending with actual income. Yes we can avoid continued layoffs and as well as school closures by surgical cuts back down to past levels away from our students and by budgeting in a prudent amount of the federal stimulus. SCUSD bond rating agency (11/08) and auditors (12/08) have commended SCUSD for its “conservative financial management” and “sound financial condition.” The projected budgets for FY 08, 09, and 10 depart from these practices by understating income, overstating expenses and overprotecting special fund reserves. A budget is a plan for the future and a better future for SCUSD can be envisioned that does not include the relocation of our students from their schools of family choice and the reduction of their valued teachers and their irreplaceable support members of the SCUSD learning community. Due to the support that SCUSD has been able to receive from local, state and federal sources of funding; our actual revenue has a slight positive slope over the past ten years. Thus our 100 M in cuts have been mostly in areas of proposed spending increases. This is fortunate since it gives us areas further from the classroom to closely evaluate in terms of value added to student achievement. The real challenges that SCUSD faces are also an opportunity to rigorously evaluate every supply and service item by these criteria. The current increase in Supplies from FY 07 has been explained in the past as a holding practice until site level decisions are made. These decisions are made in the Single Plan for Student Achievement which were approved last year and reviewed this year. With more than 2/3 of the year completed, it is time for greater detail on this item. The 3 M increase in consultant services between the Interim Reports as well as the projected 36 M total spending on this item needs to be explained. It does not appear to be justifiable in relation to lay offs and school closures. Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 4

4.07.09

General Fund Balance Trends “We must prepare for the worst and hope for the best.” (SCUSD)
Millions

450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 FY01 -50 Actual FY02 Actual FY03 Actual FY04 Actual FY05 Actual FY06 Actual FY07 Actual FY08 Proj FY08 Proj FY09 Proj FY09 Proj FY10 Proj FY10 Proj 1 2 1 2 1 2

Revenue

Spending

Excess(Def)

Transfer Net

Begin Bal.

Ending Bal.

FY = Fiscal Year, (01 = 01/02, 02 = 02/03, 03 = 03/04 etc.), Proj = Projected, 1 = First Interim, 2 = Second Interim
Millions

Fiscal Year Revenue Spending Excess(Def) Transfer Net Begin. Bal Ending Bal

2001 379 377 1.74 -5.46

2002 387 385 1.73 3.11

2003 371 381 -9.83 1.96 27.8 20

2004 383 382 1.28 0.89 20 22.1

2005 268 383 4.16 1.21 22.2 27.5

2006 409 402 7 0.56 27.5 34.8

2007 415 413 1.8 -0.95 34.8 35.6

2008 1 411 424 -13 35.6 22.7

2008 2 414 430 -16 35.6 19.5

2009 1 411 429 -18 22.7 4.59

2009 2 409 421 -11.9 19.5 7.58

2010 1 427 431 -3.63 4.59 0.956

2010 2 411 428 -17 7.58 -9.46

Can we prepare better and hope more realistically?
Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 5

4.07.09

General Fund Spending Trends “Over the past seven years, we have cut more than $100 million dollars”. “For this current year spending plan, we cut almost $30 million dollars after historic mid-year cuts”. (SCUSD)
Millions

445 435 425 415 405 395 385 375
FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Proj 1 FY08 Proj 2 FY09 Proj 1 FY09 Proj 2 FY10 Proj 1 FY10 Proj 2

Spending
FY = Fiscal Year, (01 = 01/02, 02 = 02/03, 03 = 03/04 etc.), Proj = Projected, 1 = First Interim, 2 = Second Interim
Millions

2001 377 M

2002 385 M

2003 381 M

2004 382 M

2005 383 M

2006 402 M

2007 416 M

2008 1 424 M

2008 2 430 M

2009 1 429 M

2009 2 421 M

2010 1 431 M

2010 2 428 M

Are not cuts in proposed spending different than cuts in actual spending?

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

6

4.07.09

Personnel Salaries Spending Trends “Value the work of all employees.” (SCUSD)

Personnel Compensation (Salaries) Spending Trends Data Table
1 = First Interim, 2 = Second Interim Millions
Fiscal Year Certificated Teachers Certif. Pupil Support Certificated Administrat Other Certificated Classified Instruction Classified Support Classified Administrat Clerical, Office, Technical, etc Other Classified
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 1 2008 2 2009 1 2009 2 2010 1 2010 2

152.4 149.02 139.88 10.23 16.23 7.06 9.57 22.41 0.81 16.47 3.96 10.53 17.25 7.88 9.12 22.27 1.12 16.77 4.13 7.38 17.09 11.44 8.52 22.77 1.7 15.88 2.35

136.2 138.61 145.52 150.12 140.32 144.13 7.34 16.73 11.35 8.515 22.7 5.85 17.28 2.48 7.45 16.73 10.79 8.86 22.85 5.75 17.03 2.34 8.29 17.6 10.1 9.2 24.3 5.67 17.1 2.33 9.09 18.2 10.2 9.35 24.5 5.77 16.9 2.5 8.12 17.1 8.54 9.28 22.9 5.15 17.18 2.03 8.64 17.15 10.67 9.48 23.28 5.53 17.21 2.3 .

Are we affecting value to classrooms in an equitable manner?

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

7

4.07.09

Personnel Salaries Spending Trends “Value the work of all employees.” (SCUSD)
Millions

150

120

90

60

30

0 FY01 Actual FY02 Actual FY03 Actual FY04 Actual FY05 Actual FY06 Actual FY07 FY08 Proj FY08 Proj FY09 Proj FY09 Proj FY10 Proj FY10 Proj Actual 1 2 1 2 1 2

Teachers Class. Support

Pupil Support Class. Admin.

Cert. Admin. Clerical etc

Other Cert Other Class.

Class. Inst.

Are we affecting value to classrooms in an equitable manner?
Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 8

4.07.09

Personnel Salaries Spending Trends “Value the work of all employees.” (SCUSD)
Millions

30

20

10

0 FY01 Actual FY02 Actual FY03 Actual FY04 Actual FY05 Actual FY06 Actual FY07 FY08 Proj FY08 Proj FY09 Proj FY09 Proj FY10 Proj FY10 Proj Actual 1 2 1 2 1 2

Pupil Support Class. Admin.

Cert. Admin. Clerical etc

Other Cert Other Class.

Class. Inst. Benefits

Class. Support

Are we affecting value to classrooms in an equitable manner?
Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 9

4.07.09

Personnel Benefits Spending Trends “Value the work of all employees.” (SCUSD)
Millions

120 110 100 90 80 70 60 FY01 Actual FY02 Actual FY03 Actual FY04 Actual FY05 Actual FY06 Actual FY07 Actual FY08 Proj 2 FY09 Proj 2 FY10 Proj 2

Benefits

Fiscal Year Benefits % Increase to next year

2001 61.62 10.04

2002 67.81 6.8

2003 72.43 11.49

2004 80.75 7.20

2005 86.56 2.52

2006 88.74 3.67

2007 92 3.8

2008 1 95.5 8.33

2008 2 97.62 7.6

2009 1 103.46 6.16

2009 2 105.10 7.9

2010 1 109.83

2010 2 113.43

7 year average = 6.55 3 year average = 3.3 San Diego % Increase 265.28 5.02 278.21

Why are we estimating the cost of health care benefits above our average?
Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 10

4.07.09

Books and Supplies (4000) Object Codes Spending Trends “We are working to keep cuts as far away from the classroom as possible.” (SCUSD)
Millions

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
FY01 Actual FY02 Actual FY03 Actual FY04 Actual FY05 Actual FY06 Actual FY07 Actual FY08 Proj 1 FYO8 Proj 2 FY 09 Proj 1 FY 09 Proj 2 FY 10 Proj 1 FY 10 Proj 2

Books
Millions

Supplies/Equipment
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 1 2008 2 2009 1 2009 2

Total
2010 1 2010 2

FY = Fiscal Year, (01 = 01/02, 02 = 02/03, 03 = 03/04 etc.), Proj = Projected, 1 = First Interim, 2 = Second Interim

Fiscal year

2001

Textbooks Books/Reference (4100+4200) Subtotal Materials/Supplies Equipment (4300 + 4400) Subtotal (4000) Total

03.46 00.36 03.87 08.97 01.59 10.56 14.43

03.46 00.41 03.23 08.97 01.60 10.41 13.63

05.29 00.51 05.79 09.27 02.37 11.64 17.44

03.57 00.50 04.07 44.67 00.86 45.43 49.61

03.57 00.72 4.29 35.00 01.69 36.69 40.98

48.2

36.3

45.7

32.5

Why the Interim Two projected 25.73 million increase in Materials and Supplies (Code 4300) from FY 07? Does this add more value than teachers and other direct service providers?
Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 11

4.07.09

Services and Other (5000) Object Codes Spending Trends “We are working to ensure that the well-being of both students and staff are uppermost in our priorities.” (SCUSD)
Millions

60 50 40 30 20 10 0
FY01 Actual FY02 Actual FY03 Actual FY04 Actual FY05 Actual FY06 Actual FY07 Actual FY08 Proj 1 FYO8 Proj 1 FY09 Proj 1 FY09 Proj 2 FY 10 Proj 1 FY 10 Proj 2

Ser.+Cons. Commun.
MillionP

Service Agree. Ins, Opp, Rent
2003 2004 2005 2006

Consulting Transfer
2007 2008 1 2008 2 2009 1

Travel/Dues Total
2009 2 2010 1 2010 2

Service Agree = Subagreement for services, Commun. = Communication, Ser. = Services, Cons. = Consulting, Proj = Projected, Ins = Insurance, Opp = Operations
FY = Fiscal Year, (01 = 01/02, 02 = 02/03, 03 = 03/04 etc.), 1 = First Interim, 2 = Second Interim

Fiscal year

2001

2002

Ser.+Cons. ServAgree Consulting Travel/Dues Commun.
Ins, Opp, Rent

36.97 36.97 00.82 00.88 11.08 -00.04 50.27

41.86 41.86 00.81 01.08 12.94 0.09 56.78

Transfer (5000) Total

42.43 25.93 16.50 00.81 00.80 11.96 00.12 56.12

32.95 03.41 29.54 00.51 01.47 13.19 -01.05 47.08

36.38 06.07 30.31 00.97 01.53 13.74 -01.02 51.61

45.6

44.4

41.6

41.8

Why the 3 million dollar increase from Interim 1 and the 36 million total spending on consultants? Does the use of consultants add greater value than teachers and other direct service providers?
Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 12

4.07.09

Capital Outlay (6000) Object Codes Spending Trends “We must continue to be thoughtful about our spending.” (SCUSD)
Millions

3

2

1

0 FY01 Actual FY02 Actual FY03 Actual FY04 Actual FY05 Actual FY06 Actual FY07 Actual FY08 Proj FY08 Proj FY09 Proj FY09 Proj FY10 Proj FY10 Proj 1 2 1 2 1 2

Land

Land Improv.

Building/Improv.

Bks Exp. Lib.

Equipment

Equip. Replace.

Total

Bks. Exp. Lib. = Books and Media for Major Expansion of Libraries, Building/Improv. = Buildings and Improvement of Buildings,
FY = Fiscal Year, (01 = 01/02, etc.), 1 = First Interim, 2 = Second Interim MillionP

Fiscal year

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008 1

2008 2

2009 1

2009 2

2010 1

2010 2

Land Land Improv. Building/Improv. Bks Exp. Lib. Equipment Equip. Replace. (6000) Total

0.327 0 0.53 0 1.58 0.009 2.45

0.209 0 0.972 0 1.58 0.01 2.77

0.098 0 0.4 0 0.263 0.006 0.766

0.138 0 0.578 0 0.467 0 1.18

0 0.127 0.202 0 0.094 0 0.423

0.108 0 0.114 0 0.078 0 0.3

0.257 0 1.54 0 0.436 0.04 2.28

0.023 0 0.329 0 0.15 0.032 0.535

0.028 0 0.892 0 0.256 0.027 1.2

0.535

1.1

0.535

0.989

Why an increase in building improvements greater than the projected savings from closing one small school?
Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 13

4.07.09

Special Fund Reserves Trends “Not enough money can slow down our students’ progress and cause talented and dedicated employees to leave our district or leave education all together.” (SCUSD)
Millions

8 6 4 2 0
FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual FY08 Proj 1 FY08 Proj 2 FY09 Proj 1 FY09 Proj 2 FY10 Proj 1 FY10 Proj 2

AE Balance
Millions

CD Balance
FY = Fiscal Year, Proj = Projected 2007 2008 1 2008 2 2009 1 2004 2005 2006

CE Balance
2009 2 2010 1 2010 2

AE = Adult Education, CD = Child Development CE = Cafeteria Enterprise Fund Fiscal year AE Balance CD Balance CE Balance 2001 2002 2003

03.65 03.48 03.04

01.84 03.32 02.97

01.73 03.12 03.18

02.14 03.30 03.22

06.83 03.02 02.82

07.74 02.18 02.82

03.33 01.68 02.32

Can’t the Special Funds provide funds from their reserves as a bridge loan until the federal stimulus arrives?

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

14

4.07.09

General Fund Balance Trends (Parent Revision) “Plan with hope and budget with realism.”
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Budget material and supplies at the fiscal year 2007 level.. Apply the high past average of health benefits increase of 6.55% rather than 7.9 %. Utilize 1 M in special fund reserves proposed earlier in the year as a general fund loan in 2010. Borrow another 1 M from adult education’s 3 M reserves in 2010. Prudently budget one third (10 M dollars) of the federal stimulus (30 M dollars). Keep all of our staff adding value to the classroom and all of our neighborhood schools doing the same. Chart illustrates first four steps:
Millions

450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50FY01 Actual FY02 Actual FY03 Actual FY04 Actual FY05 Actual FY06 Actual FY07 Actual FY08 Proj FY08 Proj 1 2 FY 08 Parent FY 09 Parent FY 10 Parent

Revenue

Spending

Excess(Def)

Transfer Net

Begin Bal.

Ending Bal.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Oval Office motto

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

15

4.07.09

General Fund Balance Trends (Parent Revision) Data Table
FY = Fiscal Year, (01 = 01/02, 02 = 02/03, 03 = 03/04 etc.), Proj = Projected, 1 = First Interim, 2 = Second Interim
Millions

Fiscal year Revenue Spending Teachers Pupil Support Cert Administrat. Other Certificated (1000) Total Cert Class Instruction Class Support Class Administrat Cler, Off, Tech, Other Classified. (2000) Total Class Benefits Textbooks Books/Reference (4100+4200) Subtotal Materials/Supplies Equipment (4300 + 4400) Subtotal (4000) Total Ser.+Cons. ServAgree Consulting Travel/Dues Commun. Ins, Opp, Rent Transfer (5000) Total Excess(Def) Transfer Net Begin. Bal Ending Bal AE Balance CD Balance CE Balance

2001 379 377 152.4 10.23 16.23 7.06 9.57 22.41 0.81 16.47 3.96 61.62

2002 387 385 149.02 10.53 17.25 7.88 9.12 22.27 1.12 16.77 4.13 67.81

2003 371 381 139.88 7.38 17.09 11.44 8.52 22.77 1.7 15.88 2.35 72.43

2004 383 382 136.2 7.34 16.73 11.35 8.515 22.7 5.85 17.28 2.48 80.75

2005 268 383 138.61 7.45 16.73 10.79 187.56 8.86 22.85 5.75 17.03 2.34 58.97 86.56 03.46 00.36 03.87 08.97 01.59 10.56 14.43 36.97 36.97 00.82 00.88 11.08 -00.04 50.27 4.16 1.21 22.2 27.5 01.73 03.12 03.18

2006 409 402 145.52 8.29 17.6 10.1 173.58 9.2 24.3 5.67 17.1 2.33 56.84 88.74 03.46 00.41 03.23 08.97 01.60 10.41 13.63 41.86 41.86 00.81 01.08 12.94 0.09 56.78 7 0.56 27.5 34.8 02.14 03.30 03.22

1.74 -5.46

1.73 3.11

-9.83 1.96 27.8 20 03.65 03.48 03.04

1.28 0.89 20 22.1 01.84 03.32 02.97

2007 415 413 150.12 9.09 18.2 10.2 181.46 9.35 24.5 5.77 16.9 2.5 58.61 92 05.29 00.51 05.79 09.27 02.37 11.64 17.44 42.43 25.93 16.50 00.81 00.80 11.96 00.12 56.12 1.8 -0.95 34.8 35.6 06.83 03.02 02.82

2008 1 411 424 140.32 8.12 17.1 8.54 174.08 9.28 22.9 5.15 17.18 2.03 56.37 95.5 03.57 00.50 04.07 44.67 00.86 45.43 49.61 32.95 03.41 29.54 00.51 01.47 13.19 -01.05 47.08 -13 35.6 22.7 07.74 02.18 02.82

2008 2 414 430 144.13 8.64 17.15 10.67 180.57 9.48 23.28 5.53 17.21 2.3 57.79 97.62 03.57 00.72 4.29 35.00 01.69 36.69 40.98 36.38 06.07 30.31 00.97 01.53 13.74 -01.02 51.61 -16 35.6 19.5 03.33 01.68 02.32

Parent 414 406

2009 1 411 429

2009 2 409 421

Parent 409 406

2010 1 427 431

2010 2 411 428

Parent 411 413.5

180.57

174.54

179.34

182

176.16

178.76

184

57.99 98.07

55.96 103.46

54.75 105.10

58
104.42

56.30 109.83

53.10 113.43

59
111.26

17.44

48.2

36.3

17.44

45.7

32.5

17.44

51.6 8 35.6 43.6

45.6 -18 22.7 4.59

44.4 -11.9 19.5 7.58

44.4 3 43.6 46.6

41.6 -3.63 4.59 0.956

41.8 -17 7.58 -9.46

41.8 -2.5 2 46.6 46.1 02.33 01.18 01.82

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

16

4.07.09 SCUSD Budget Trends Analysis
Numbers = Millions of dollars
Fiscal Year b see pg 12

U
01.25 18.46

Unaudited Actuals (U&R)a1 or a2 (see pg 12) 05-06 06-07 07-08 R U/R U R U/R U R
13.18 31.24 14.43 50.27 01.41 24.02 12.23 32.76 13.63 56.78 02.19 19.59 15.25 36.53

U/R
17.44 56.12

Interim Budgets 08-09 U R U/R Actual
49.61 47.08 02.96 22.86 46.65 24.22 49.61 47.08 41.11 50.95 04.15 21.82 36.82 29.80 40.98 51.61
Actual

U

Projected Budgets 09-10 10-11 R U/R U R U/R

Approved 1st c Book/Supply d Serv/Operat Projected 1st c Book/Supply d Serv/Operat Approved 2nd c Book/Supply d Serv/Operat Projected 2nd c Book/Supply d Serv/Operat
Ist Interim 4000 to 4999 e Book/Refer. f Supply/Equip. 5000 to 5999 g Subagreement h Travel/Dues. i Consulting j Communicat. 2nd Interim 4000 to 4999 e Book/Refer. f Supply/Equip. 5000 to 5999 g Subagreement h Travel/Dues. i Consulting j Communicat.

10/31 06.56 18.50 02.9 22.9 08.68 30.04 03.6 21.8 32.6 26.3 36.3 51.6 03.6 17.7 28.9 24.1 32.5 41.8 45.3 22.7 48.2 45.6 2.96 21.9 28.0 42.8 45.7 41.6

Details from Board Approved Budget

1/31

0.04 1.21

03.83 09.35

03.87 10.56

00.05 03.18 03.23 0.01 01.36 09.05 10.41 2.17 0.13 0.20 00.61 00.81 0.19 12.35 29.55 41.86 9.03 00.74 00.34 1.08 0.54

05.78 09.47 25.80 00.62 07.46 00.27

05.79 11.64 25.93 00.81 16.50 00.80

04.08 45.53 03.41 00.51 29.54 01.47

03.19 03.37 02.51 00.26 11.20 00.33

0.23 9.54 0.53

00.59 27.43 00.35

00.82 36.97 00.88

04.24 36.36 05.84 00.91 30.10 01.50

03.42 05.27 07.30 00.42 14.89 00.76

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

17

4.07.09 Page 17 row labels a1 = CDE SACS Financial Reporting Software for SCUSD Unaudited Actuals Form 01 a2 = http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Navigation/fsTwoPanel.asp?bottom=%2Fprofile.asp%3Flevel%3D06%26reportNumber%3D16 b = U/R = Unrestricted/Restricted, U = Unrestricted; R = Restricted c = (4000-4999) Books and supplies d = (5000-5999) Services and other operating expenses e. = (4100 + 4200) Approved Textbooks and Core Curricula/ Books and other reference. Actuals = 3.19 million of 4.08 f. = (4300 + 4400) Materials/Supplies and Equipment. Actuals = 8.67 million of 45.53 g. = (5100) Subagreements for Services. Actuals = 2.51 million of 3.41 h. = (5200 + 5300) Travel and Conferences/Dues and Membership. Actuals = .22 million of .45 i. = (5800) Professional/Consulting Services and Operating Expenditures. Actuals = 11.20 million of 29.54. j. = (5900) Communications: Actuals = .99 million of 1.47 Savings Thought Exercise 1st Interim possible savings scenario 08-09: (3/12) (in millions) Supplies and Equipment: Actuals 3.37 x 3 fiscal quarters = 10.11 of 45.53, thus 35.42 possible. Travel and Dues: Actuals .26 x 3 fiscal quarters = -.27. If frozen, .25 possible. Professional/Consulting Services. Actuals 11.20 x 3 fiscal quarters = -.4.06 If frozen, 18.34 possible. Communications: Actuals .33 x 3 fiscal quarters = .99 million of 1.47, thus .42 savings possible. Possible total savings for 08/09: 35.84 million unrestricted/restricted, ____ unrestricted, ____ restricted Frozen total savings for 08/09: 18.59 million unrestricted/restricted, ____ unrestricted, ____ restricted 2nd Interim possible savings scenario 08-09: (3/30) (in millions) Supplies and Equipment: Actuals 5.27 x 2 fiscal quarters = 10.54 of 36.36, thus 25.83 possible. If frozen, 25.09 possible. Travel and Dues: Actuals .42 x 2 fiscal quarters = .84, thus .07 possible. If frozen, .49 possible. Professional/Consulting Services: Actuals 14.89 x 2 fiscal quarters = 29.78 thus .32 possible. If frozen, 15.21 possible. Communications: Actuals: .76 x 2 fiscal quarters = 1.52, thus -.02 savings possible. If frozen, .74 possible. Possible total savings for 08/09: 26.2 million unrestricted/restricted, ____ unrestricted, ____ restricted Frozen total savings for 08/09: 41.53 million unrestricted/restricted, ____ unrestricted, ____ restricted Certificated Layoffs:
District Potential Certificated Layoffs Certificated 07-08 CBEDs Layoff % of staff (State = 6.16%) Sacramento San Juan 193/122/263.3 =578 399 193/137/101/2465 2,409 100%/89.1%/10.7% 16.6% Average 20% CBED certificated = administrators , pupil services, other and teachers Stockton 323 2,032 15.90% Elk Grove 317 3,194 8.10% San Diego 0 8213 0%

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

18

4.07.09 Estimated Deficit Analysis + (Balancing 08-09) millions Board Meeting
08-09 (1) Estimated revenue decrease: (2 Estimated
categorical decrease

1/29/09
-04.7% Rev. Limit = -12.7

2/12/09

2/19/09 (packet)
-04.7% Rev. Limit = -12.7

2/19/09 (handout)
-02.5% Rev. Limit =-6.3

3/05/09 (packet)
-02.5% Rev. Limit = -6.3

3/05/09 (handout)
(COLA Reserve, <WC, Frze,

3/19/09
(Implem 1.913) (Approv 4.05)
(Cat Res 2.2

3/26/09
Nutr Chg, wat, pst, COBRA) (< Cont, Unfund Lib, AE, NS, CD) Supp Sch Coun 1.0 CAHSE .598

4/02/09

-15.3 -28 -28
-02.5 % Rev. Limit =-05.8 -02.5%R. L =-05.8

-15.3 -12.7 to 15.3

-15% = -3.1 -9.4 -9.4

-15.4% = 3.1 -9.761M -9.761

(3) Estimated total revenue loss (4) Estimated shortfall 09-10 (5) Estimated revenue decrease (6) Estimated
categorical decrease

Ct Swp 1.6)

.102

+9.761 -9.761
-.75%R. L = 2.2

-.75%

-4.9% -7.9 -2.075 +4.511 -8.3
-.538 (1st Interim = flat for 09-10)

-4.5%
-19.84% Tier III

(7) Estimated net > salary/ben. (8) Deferred
maintenance match (9) Pars final year,

-2.5 + -5.4 =-7.9

-2.075
+3.77 + +.39 + +.35 = +4.51

W/C rate <, Nutr chg. (10) 08-09 one
time fund (OK reborrow)

-7.4975 -.538 +.45 +.0855 -.2

(11) Projected enrollment decline (12) Special Ed settlement (13) Water, postage.Cobra (14) Increase for
2% economic reserve

+.6

(15) 09-10 Estimated shortfall

-11.2

-15.7

-15.4

-15.4

-15.36

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

19

4.07.09 Options to Balance 09 – 10 Analysis
{blue = board adopted Not requiring Negotiation ( ) = option not used in 08/09}

Board Meeting
(1) Reduce Adult Ed (2) Reduce Site Staff (3) Elim. Mand. cost provider (4) Charter leases (5) No mailed checks (6) School closings (7) School lease income (8) Def. main. stays bond $’s (9) Water, postage, Cobra (10) Reduced Work Comp rate (11) Central Office reorganize (12) Decrease overtime (13) Eliminate Connection (14) Decrease contracts (15) 3 unpd wrk days unrep. (16) Routin. Maint. Funds to 1% (17) Furlough/unpaid days (18) Additional categorical reserve (19) Additional categorical sweep (20) Additional CAHSE (21) Reborrow AE, CD, CN

1/29/09

2/12/09

2/19/09 (packet)

2/19/09 (handout)

3/05/09 (packet)
.65 to 1.8 est 2.9 to 7.9 est

3/05/09
(Handout) 21FTE 94.3 FTE

3/19/09
In progress In progress

3/26/09
Actual $ ? Actual $ ?

4/2/09 ? ? ? +.25 TBD TBD +2.075 -0.85 -0.390 -1.9 -0.15 ? 1.3 ? ?
Consider

4/16/09

-.1 +.25 -.04 -1.2 for 3 +.3 for 3 +.25 See 9 -1.6 for 4 +.4 for 4 2.075 -.0855 -3.90 -1 -.15 -.16 -.2
( .094 08-09)

+.25 -1.6 for 4 +.4 for 4 2.075

+.25 TBD

+.25 TBD

+.25 TBD TBD

2.075

2.075

+2.075 -0.85 -0.390

-1 -.15
Consider Consider

-1 -.15

-1 -.15

-1.9 -0.15 ? 1.3 ? ?

-1.1 per day 3.8 possible
for 08/09

Consider

Consider

Consider

Consider

-2.2 for
08/09

(1.8
Possible available)

? ? ?
?

4 possible
for 08/09

-1.6 for
08/09

(2.4
Possible available) See pg 4 #3 See pg 4 #10

.102 4

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

20

4.07.09 Options to Balance 09 – 10 Analysis
{Blue = board adopted ( ) = option not used in 08/09}

Requiring negotiation Board Meeting
(20) >HS class size -38 FTE (21) >MS class size -24 FTE (22) Layoff 10% of employees (23) Admin. support
formula chg

1/29/09 -2.85 -1.8 -3.59

2/12/09 -2.85 -1.8 -2.85 TBD -3.65 -2.1 -5.4 TBD -.445 -.375 TBD

2/19/09 (packet)

2/19/09 (handout)

3/05/09 (packet) Consider Consider

3/05/09 (handout) Consider Consider
100% Admin,

3/19/09

3/26/09 No No

4/2/09

4/16/09

Teachers

In progress ?

(24) Freeze step and column (25) 1% salary reduction for all (26) Employee pick up H&W (27) H & W cont. copay, retire (28) <50% co-curricular.
sup. at site (29) Eliminate lunch/breakfast duty (30) Eliminate./reduce counselors, nurse, lib, psych, social wkr, music

Consider Consider Consider Consider

Consider Consider Consider Consider

-3.65 -2.1 See 27 TBD ? ?

? No No ? ? ? Partial 20.34 FTE = 1.71 Rescind No No

10.33

90% Direct Service 122.5 FTE

In progress

(31) Eliminate K-3 -234 FTE (32) Eliminate 9th – 11 FTE

-4 -0.2

-4 -1.2
2/19/09 (packet) 2/19/09 (handout) 3/05/09 (handout)

Requiring state flexibility
Board Meeting 1/29/09 2/12/09 3/05/09 (packet) 3/19/09 3/26/09 4/2/09 4/16/09

(33) Increase K-3 +5CSR -119 FTE (34) Increase 9th +5CSR -6.4 FTE (35) Categor Transfer

-8.925 -.48

-8.925 -4.80

Consider

-4.0 -137 FTE -.480 -7 FTE

-4.0 -137 FTE -.480 -7 FTE

(3/10) -4.0 -137 FTE (3/10) -.48 -7 FTE

Class size to 24.9 Class size by 5 2.63 or 2.0

Class size to 24.9 Class size by 5 2.63 or 2.0

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

21

4.07.09 Twenty Questions or Points needing Clarification 1. 08-09 Revenue increases from Original Budget of 387 M to 408 M Board Approved Budget to 409 Projected Ending Budget. 2. Object 4000 (Books/Supplies) Spending Increase from Original Budget of 11.4 M to 41.1 M Board Approved Budget with Actuals to date at 2nd Interim of 8.68. 3. Object 5000 (Services/Other) Spending Increase from Original Budget of 42.4 M to 51.0 M Board Approved Budget to 51.6 M Projected Ending Budget. 4. Revenue reduction of 539 K based on reduced ADA of 100 when month 6 report shows enrollment decline of 11 and ADA % increase of .4%. 5. Increase of one time 08-09 Budget adjustments return to 7.497 when total 08-09 deficit was 9.76 and transfer from AE, CD, CN was 4.0. Unfunded liability was 1.0. 6. For which year is 200 K needed to increase Economic Uncertainty Reserves to 2%. 08-09 is at 2% and 09-10 is -.36%. 7. Increase in central office reorganization savings of 900 K. 8. Decrease in categorical flexibility from 2.63 in narrative to 2.0 on number sheet. 9. Why are 3 furlough days for unrepresented management for 94 K savings absent from 4/2 posted materials after seven preparation days. 10. Where is the .102 extra transferred from CAHSEE funds for 09-10? 11. What is the actual reduction in spending of 94.3 FTE less site teachers and 21.0 FTE Adult Education teachers? 12. What is the status of the 1.8 categorical reserves and the 2.4 categorical sweep potential identified on 1/29/09? 13. Why is the option to reborrow form AE, CD, CN not listed even as we reborrow from bonds to pay Deferred Maintenance? 14. What are the options available in terms of the funds from Unfunded Liability? Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 22

4.07.09 Clarification needed (continued) 15. Categorical freeze impact on Board approved 08-09 budget. How much was spending reduced? 16. Contract Evaluation Matrix. 17. Take rather than borrow 08-09 option. 18. Federal Stimulus: http://www.ascd.org/public_policy/.aspx Estimated 29 million Title One and IDEA. 19. Federal State Stabilization Funds: http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/ar/documents/sfsdistltr.pdf 20. State ERP: http://www.opsc.dgs.ca.gov/Programs/SABPrograms/ERP.htm

Additional Information:
http://scusdobserver.blogspot.com/ (Informational Posts and Community Comments) http://www.scusd.edu/budget/Budget_updates.htm (SCUSD Budget Comments Link) http://www.scusd.edu/com_office/Comments/Comments.htm (SCUSD Facilities Comments Link) http://www.scusd.edu/board_of_education/members.htm (Board of Education Comments Link) http://apps.facebook.com/causes/239240?m=7d290bcb (Sutter High School Proposal) http://www.collegeglen.org/newsletters/CGNA_news_Jan09.pdf (College Glen Middle School and Toddler Proposal)
http://www.collegeglen.org/

(College Glen Survey)

http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/the_swarm/2009/03/021002.html (Sac Bee comments of Sutter/Kit merger) http://www.sandi.net/news/news_releases/2009/0310_balance_budget.html (San Diego City Schools Balanced Budget – no layoffs, no school closings, Yes to 1/3 of the Stimulus) Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 23

4.07.09 Addendum 1: Structural Deficit Claims Analysis March 12th SCUSD example of projections (2007-2008) Revenue (increases) $10.58 M (4.53% COLA) Expenditures (increases) $4.67 M (Health and Welfare) $3.51 M (Step and Column) $4.7 M (Declining Enrollment) Subtotal -$2.3 M (Deficit) Total budget projections (2007-2008) from FY 06 year end report Total revenue -$32 M (decrease in to 377 M) Total expenditures -$55 M(decrease in to 347 M) Subtotal 30 M (Surplus) Unaudited year end actual (2007-2008) from FY 07 report Total Revenue 415 M Total Expenditures 413 M Subtotal 1.8 M (Surplus) April 2nd District Handout Projected Deficits Analysis Fiscal Year (2009-10) (2010-11) (2011-12) 3/19 2nd Interim Report -$11.9 M -$17 M 4/2/09 Budget Handout -$15.4 M -$ 6 M -$2.5 M Reason for Change ? ? ? 24

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

4.07.09 Addendum 2: April 2 “Strategies to Balance Budget” Analysis (Bold = Count) Revenues - 538,500 (ADA decline by 100) or -$4,104,540 (Revenue Limit Decline projected at 2nd Interim) or -$5,408,184) (Total Revenue Decline projected at 2nd Interim) or + $13,370,955
ADA is funded on current or prior year, whichever is greater. Excluding charter students, we are using 07-08 ADA of 42,220 for this year. We will likely use this year’s ADA for 09-10. Currently we are using an ADA to enrollment ratio of 87.1% to project 09-10’s ADA at 41,973. If we use the historic average of 92.6% (we were at 94.5 % at the end of month 6) we would project an ADA of 44,456. This increase in ADA could generate $13,370,955 (44,456 – 41,973 = 2,483 x 5385 = $13,370,955) http://www.scusd.edu/board_of_education/BoardItems/2009-03/0191_039.pdf (pdf pg 23)

$450,000 (Special Education Settlement) $350,000 (Charge to Nutrition Services) $729,742 plus interest (St. HOPE Financial Settlement Repayment) $14,900,697 (Revenue increase from above) Expenditures 5,400,000 (H & W at 10% Increase) or 7,480,000 (Benefits increase at 2nd Interim) or $3,500,000 (H & W at 6.55% average of last seven years’ increases) $2,500,000 (Step/Column/Attrition) 7,497,500 (one time budget adjustments):
3,000,000 adult education transfer (remains transferred), 1,597,000 Categorical Sweeps/Flexibility Options (defer repayment), 500,000 borrow from Child Development (reborrow), 500,000 borrow from Child Nutrition (reborrow), 350,000 Hiring Freeze/Unfilled Positions (maintain or use transfers), 350,000 Charge to Nutrition Services (defer repayment), 200,000 Spending Freeze (maintain) http://www.scusd.edu/board_of_education/BoardItems/2009-03/0191_039.pdf (pdf pg 33 S2)

$2,075,000 (Deferred Maintenance Match back to General Fund from Bond Funds) -3,771,000 (Final Year of PARS Payment 2008-2009) -$350,000 (Charge to Nutrition Services) -$85,500 (Bottled Water, Postage, Cobra reductions like 08-09) -$390,000 (Worker’s Composition Rate reduction) $200,000 (Increase Required Reserve for Economic Uncertainties to maintain 2%) $7,599,500(Net expenditures increase from above) $7,301,197 (Surplus) Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 25

4.07.09 Addendum 3: April 2 Other Balancing/Enhancement Strategies Enhancing the Budget (Options presented to Board) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. TBD (Administration support formula change) $2,075,000 (Fund Deferred Maintenance match with bond funds or no contribution. $1,900,000 (Central office reorganization) $1,300,000 (Contract renegotiation and elimination) $1,000,000 (Unfunded Liability reserve) $450,000 (50% reduction in co-curricular support at site)

7. $375,000 (Eliminate lunch/breakfast duty) 8. $250,000 (Lease agreements with charters) 9. $160,000 (Eliminate printed Connection) 10. $150,000 (Decrease overtime) 11. $100,000 (Eliminate mandated cost provider) 12. $94,000 (stated 2/19) or 31,000(stated 4/2) three unpaid days for unrepresented management. Options to retire currently (consider if budget crisis deepens) 1. $4,000,000 (K-3 CSR Increase) 2. $2,000,000 (Categorical flexibility) 3. $1,700,000 (Reduce Student Services: Counselors, Librarians, Music, Social Workers, Psych. , etc.) 4. $480,000 (Increase CSR 9th grade) Options to retire permanently (consider office and plant staff sharing if budget crisis deepens) 1. $400,000 (Per school consolidation, closure and re-use Require Negotiations 1. 2. TBD (Health Benefits: Contributions, Co-pays, Retiree Benefits, Employee picks up H&W) 3. $3,650,000 (Freeze Step and Column) 4. $3,106,000 (3 unpaid days for represented employees) 5. $2,100,000 ($1% salary reduction for all employees) Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525 26

4.07.09 Addendum 3: 2009 Timelines 4/16 1. >K3 CS 2. < Categorical Programs 3. < Student Services 4. >9th grade CS 5. Reduce Contracts 6. School Closures 1. >K3 CSR 2. < Categorical Programs 3. < Student Services 4. >9th grade CSR5. 5. Reduce Contracts 4/23 1. < Student Services 4/27 Certificated layoff hearings begin 5/7 1.Negotitated Items: Unpaid days, Pay Freeze, Benefits Pay Reduce 5/21 1.Negotitated Items: Unpaid days, Pay Freeze, Benefits Pay Reduce 6/1 3rd “Interim “ Report to County 6/18 09-10 Budget Adoption

4/2 Board Packet

4/2 Board Handout

Certificated layoff hearings begin

1. School Closures 2.Negotitated Items: Unpaid days, Pay Freeze, Benefits Pay Reduce

3rd “Interim “ Report to County

09-10 Budget Adoption

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

27

4.07.09 Addendum 4: Parent’s 2 Interim Budget 2008-09 Second Interim General Fund Multiyear Projections Unrestricted/Restricted
Millions
Description A) REVENUES 1) Revenue Limit Sources 2) Federal Revenue 3) Other State Revenue 4) Other Local Revenue 5) Other Financing 6) Total B) EXPENDITURES 1) Certificated 2) Classified 3) Benefits 4) Books/Supplies 5) Services 6) Capital 7) Other Outgo 8) Transf. for Ind. Costs 9) Other Financing 10) Adjustments 11) Total C) NET + or (-) D)FUND BALANCE 1) Net Beginning 2)Ending Fund Balance 3a)Fund Bal. Reserve 3b)Eco. Uncertainties 3c)Fund Bal. Desig. 3d)Undesignated 3e)Total Ending 9710-9740 9770 9775, 9780 9790 1000-1999 2000-2999 3000-3999 4000-4999 5000-5999 6000-6999 7100-7299, 7400-7499 7300-7399 7600-7699 8010-8099 8100-8299 8300-8599 8600-8799 8900-8999 Object Codes

nd

07-08 Projected

07-08 Actuals

08-09 Original Projections

08-09 Projected Year Totals (A)

% Change(B)

2009-10 Projection (C)

% Change (D)

2010-11 Projection (E)

252.26 46.64 98.28 11.68 1.28 410.14 181.46 58.61 88.74 13.63 56.77 .30 6.37 (3.76) .717 0 402.84 7.3 34.8 42.1

248.12 47.83 105.75 12.970 .745 415.42 187.56 58.97 91.95 17.44 56.12 2.28 1.86 (3.27) 1.7 0 414.61 .81 34.8 35.6 .605 7.39 27.6 0 35.6

246.07 43.28 91.48 5.97 .716 387.52 158.38 50.82 88.95 11.39 42.43 .217 2.63 (2.27) 0 352.54 35. 35.6 70.61 35.17 7.39 1.36 26.7 70.61

240.51 53.74 106.99 8.09 4.715 414.05 180.57 57.79 97.62 40.98-28 51.61 1.2 2.71 (2.27) 0 0 402.21 11.84 35.6 47.44 8.97 8.45 1.45 28.57 47.44

236.41 53.74 104.44 8.34 5.72 408.64 182.32 58.59 101.12 12.98 44.39 .3 2.7 (2.17) 0 (.93) 401.47 7.17 47.44 54.61 .545 8.43 0 46.18 54.61

238.48 53.74 105.12 8.34 5.72 411.39 184.07 59.39 107.74 12.98 41.79 .3 2.7 (2.36) 0 7.5 414.11 (-2.72) 54.61 51.89 .545 8.7 0 43.19 51.89 28

6.55%

6.55%

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

4.07.09 Addendum 5: Corrections/Additions To 4/2/09 version Changed Title from “Citizen’s” to “Parent’s” Added Contents and renumbered following pages Added Question 10. Why an increase in building improvements greater than the projected savings from closing one Added Capital Outlay Chart Changed “Page 4 row labels” to “Page 17 row labels.” Changed Row (29): “-3.75” to “-.375” Added Addendums

Page 1: Page 2: Page 3 (now 4): small school? Page 13: Pg 16 (now 18): Page 19 (now 21): Pages 24 to 28:

Léo Bennett-Cauchon, leocauchon@netscape.net, 9 16 307-8525

29


								
To top