Tuesday, December 16, 2008

OUSD Plans For Next Round Of Budget Cuts

Schools search for $1.6 million in cuts for next year, $800k for 2010-2011

By Sondra Murphy
The Ojai Unified School District has the dubious distinction of being known as the poster child of declining enrollment of Ventura County schools and the state budget crisis is aggravating the financial fallout from that condition.
“It is in dire straits,” said Ventura County Superin-tendent of Schools Stanley Mantooth. “Declining enrollment has been with us in Ventura County overall now for at least four years, some places more than others. Ojai has had the particular challenges with declining enrollment for a decade or so.
“Every time you lose a student, the district loses in the neighborhood of $9,000 to $10,000. When you lose students it’s not easy to cut back proportionately. OUSD in particular has done an excellent job in preserving its programs and cutting everything they can as far away from the classrooms as they can. It is now looking at its core programs, and that is not unique to Ojai. It is a terrible situation and the economy might be lending a hand there.”
Ojai Unified School district held a special governing board study session Monday to begin early planning for its 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 budgets. Fresh from announcing its first-ever qualified certification last week, board members, administrators, staff and community met to look over preliminary numbers and formulate strategies.
Superintendent Tim Baird and Dannielle Pusatere, assistant superintendent of business and administrative services, submitted draft reports that broke down from which part of the $25 million budget each department’s supporting funds originated. The packet also contained dollar figures associated with programs and schools to aid the board in making $1.6 million in anticipated cuts for next year and $800,000 the following year. The information was intended to get the budget cutting process started and is expected to be continuously updated and fine-tuned as state budget decisions are made known.
“We are not going to solve the budget issue this evening,” said Baird. “We are still in the input stage and will be there really for the course of the rest of the school year.”
Dollar figures were not yet attached to specific positions. Vice president Kathi Smith said the process would be more efficient, “If we could get the dollar amount for each site and each department.
Member Pauline Mercado agreed. “Rather than backtrack, I need to have all the information in front of me. Looking at these FTEs (full-time equivalent job statistics), it’s really hard to be able to determine the cost. We need to have the dollar amount.”
Pusatere explained that it would be difficult to estimate the savings of cutting jobs because of the varying pay rates due to seniority. “It might not be accurate because you might be looking at the cost of a senior position, but bump a less senior position in your cuts,” she said.
“We understand why you didn’t put it in, but we need to know all the prices,” said Smith. “It’s just too abstract.”
“We need total salaries of everyone in the district,” said member Steve Fields.
“The budget numbers are not exact,” said Baird. “The missing component is staff recommendations. We will get the hard numbers for any recommendations and put them on the list for subsequent meetings.”
“I would like to know grade-by-grade class size reductions,” said clerk Rikki Horne.
“Also how many staff would be affected, if we eliminate it,” President Linda Taylor added.
Possible strategy plans presented to the board included one-year, two-year and quick-response plans. Baird said that, at this point, administration is recommending a two-year plan because it would be the least disruptive to the curriculum. “In a one-year plan, you essentially make all the cuts you need to make, but you have nothing left to cut the next year,” he said. “In a two-year plan you say let’s do some nasty cuts, but not all in year one and go into the reserves, knowing we still don’t have the end to the two-year solution, but in case something else could be done. But you have to refill your reserves the next year. Right now, I’m leaning toward the two-year plan because the one-year looks really devastating and you’ve used one-time monies.”
The quick response plan involves negative certifications that bring in the state and help districts qualify for 20-year emergency loans. That method results in loss of board control and, usually, the superintendent, substituting a state manager to make decisions based on financial assets and not necessarily the students’ best interest.
In the information packet, Baird included some sample plans of other California school districts going through similar struggles and that have submitted negative certification budgets this year.
“Some districts are looking at rolling back salary schedules and reductions of work days,” Baird said. OUSD currently has 184 work days and must have at least 180.
Two public speakers were critical of the way OUSD has handled the budgeting process. “I feel you are completely unrealistic to use the governor’s October budget,” said Bill Gilbreth. “If you don’t really look at what is likely to be, you’re likely to make the wrong decision.” Gilbreth pointed to that opinion as why he did not support Measure P in the most recent election. The measure proposed a seven-year tax of $89 per parcel in the OUSD boundaries.
Pusatere said that the district was awaiting an update from the state sometime next month, which is why some of the estimates are unknown.
“If you don’t cut salaries, you’re not showing the public that you’re taking honest cuts,” said Ron Wilson. “I think overall your service is outstanding, but it’s a very, very difficult process for the public to understand.”
“I can appreciate what Bill and Mr. Wilson have to say because we know this is dire,” said Kathleen Smith, “but we have to look at everything.”
“What’s upsetting me is that my kindergartner is not going to get the same education that I received,” said parent Marianne Ratcliff. “Ojai should be ashamed of itself for not passing the parcel tax. Mr. Gilbreth’s letter to the editor made me angry and I wasn’t angry tonight until I just heard it again. I’m dedicated to raising the $7,000 to put another parcel tax on the ballot and swaying Mr. Gilbreth to write another letter to the editor encouraging support.”
Kathleen Smith told the board that local parent organizations are beginning a campaign to get Measure P supporter to donate $89 to OUSD.
“I appreciate your efforts and that you are continuing to work on this,” district employee Chuck Crawford told the board. “I understand categorical funding, but it’s hard to explain that to someone who’s just lost their job. I try watching the budget and it’s hard to have confidence in the process.”
Meiners Oaks teacher John Hook boiled down the emotions associated with the meeting. “What is going to happen to the children, with no support services for students who are struggling?” he asked. “We need to realize what we’ll be losing in human terms.”
“And as we shed employees, it impacts the economy here,” said vice president Smith.
“As a union, I think it’s time to put our differences aside and work together in these difficult times,” said president of the Ojai Federation of Teachers Martha Ditchfield.
“In January, we will find out about our midyear cuts,” said Taylor. “On Jan. 13, we’ll have a continuation of our budget discussion and have more specific numbers. School funding is very complicated with all its categoricals and how it’s spent and how we need to get loans every year because we don’t get the money we’re supposed to. I appreciate people who keep coming to these meetings.”
“I want to thank John Hook and those people who talked about the faces of our employees,” said Horne. “All of these people represent our students and that’s why we’re all here. The thought of obliterating the school district that my daughter still attends is devastating.”
originated. The packet also contained dollar figures associated with programs and schools to aid the board in making $1.6 million in anticipated cuts for next year and $800,000 the following year. The information was intended to get the budget cutting process started and is expected to be continuously updated and fine-tuned as state budget decisions are made known.
“We are not going to solve the budget issue this evening,” said Baird. “We are still in the input stage and will be there really for the course of the rest of the school year.”
Dollar figures were not yet attached to specific positions. Vice president Kathi Smith said the process would be more efficient, “If we could get the dollar amount for each site and each department.
Member Pauline Mercado agreed. “Rather than backtrack, I need to have all the information in front of me. Looking at these FTEs (full-time equivalent job statistics), it’s really hard to be able to determine the cost. We need to have the dollar amount.”
Pusatere explained that it would be difficult to estimate the savings of cutting jobs because of the varying pay rates due to seniority. “It might not be accurate because you might be looking at the cost of a senior position, but bump a less senior position in your cuts,” she said.
“The budget numbers are not exact,” said Baird. “The missing component is staff recommendations. We will get the hard numbers for any recommendations and put them on the list for subsequent meetings.”
“I would like to know grade-by-grade class size reductions,” said clerk Rikki Horne.
“Also how many staff would be affected, if we eliminate it,” President Linda Taylor added.
Possible strategy plans presented to the board included one-year, two-year and quick-response plans. Baird said that, at this point, administration is recom-mending a two-year plan because it would be the least disruptive to the curriculum. “In a one-year plan, you essentially make all the cuts you need to make, but you have nothing left to cut the next year,” he said. “In a two-year plan you say let’s do some nasty cuts, but not all in year one and go into the reserves, knowing we still don’t have the end to the two-year solution, but in case something else could be done. But you have to refill your reserves the next year. Right now, I’m leaning toward the two-year plan because the one-year looks really devastating and you’ve used one-time monies.”
The quick response plan involves negative certifications that bring in the state and help districts qualify for 20-year emergency loans. That method results in loss of board control and, usually, the superintendent, substituting a state manager to make decisions based on financial assets and not necessarily the students’ best interest.
In the information packet, Baird included some sample plans of other California school districts going through similar struggles and that have submitted negative cert-ification budgets this year.
“Some districts are looking at rolling back salary schedules and reductions of work days,” Baird said. OUSD currently has 184 work days and must have at least 180.
Two public speakers were critical of the way OUSD has handled the budgeting process. “I feel you are completely unrealistic to use the governor’s October budget,” said Bill Gilbreth. “If you don’t really look at what is likely to be, you’re likely to make the wrong decision.” Gilbreth pointed to that opinion as why he did not support Measure P in the most recent election. The measure proposed a seven-year tax of $89 per parcel in the OUSD boundaries.
Pusatere said that the district was awaiting an update from the state sometime next month, which is why some of the estimates are unknown.
“If you don’t cut salaries, you’re not showing the public that you’re taking honest cuts,” said Ron Wilson. “I think overall your service is outstanding, but it’s a very, very difficult process for the public to understand.”
“I can appreciate what Bill and Mr. Wilson have to say because we know this is dire,” said Kathleen Smith, “but we have to look at everything.”
“What’s upsetting me is that my kindergartner is not going to get the same education that I received,” said parent Marianne Ratcliff. “Ojai should be ashamed of itself for not passing the parcel tax. Mr. Gilbreth’s letter to the editor made me angry and I wasn’t angry tonight until I just heard it again. I’m dedicated to raising the $7,000 to put another parcel tax on the ballot and swaying Mr. Gilbreth to write another letter to the editor encouraging support.”
“I appreciate your efforts and that you are continuing to work on this,” district employee Chuck Crawford told the board. “I understand categorical funding, but it’s hard to explain that to someone who’s just lost their job.”
Meiners Oaks teacher John Hook boiled down the emotions associated with the meeting. “What is going to happen to the children, with no support services for students who are struggling?” he asked. “We need to realize what we’ll be losing in human terms.”
“And as we shed employees, it impacts the economy here,” said vice president Smith.
“As a union, I think it’s time to put our differences aside and work together in these difficult times,” said Martha Ditchfield, president of the Ojai Federation of Teachers .
“In January, we will find out about our midyear cuts,” said Taylor. “On Jan. 13, we’ll have a continuation of our budget discussion and have more specific numbers. School funding is very complicated with all its categoricals and how it’s spent and how we need to get loans every year because we don’t get the money we’re supposed to. I appreciate people who keep coming to these meetings.”
“I want to thank John Hook and those people who talked about the faces of our employees,” said Horne. “All of these people represent our students and that’s why we’re all here. The thought of obliterating the school district that my daughter still attends is devastating.”

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

still absolutely no evidence of the powers that be taking any responsibility at all for declining enrollment (flight out of OUSD) or the lack of community support for the bond measure -- is it impossible for any of these folks running our school district to look at their part in all this??? don't see much hope unless there is clear view of the issues here and a full changing of the guard.

Anonymous said...

This must be some kind of joke. The Superintendant and the Assistant Superintendant of business come to a meeting about possible budget cuts and the dollar amounts are not attached to the specific proposals.
This is exactly why the parcel tax failed. This district is dysfunctional, it is time to clean house to restore the public's confidence.

Anonymous said...

This was a preliminary meeting with a lot of dollar figures reported. The board directed administration on what it would additionally require next month, which is proper.
OUSD is not causing declining enrollment, birth rates and real estate prices are. That tired old claim is rotten and reeking and I'm sick of seeing that posted over and over, assumably by the same vengeful person.
Get over your grudge and go blog the website of whatever school you allegedly transferred your kid to so the rest of us can concentrate on the budget crisis. That and the governort's lousy, big business, rich buddies, tax breaking priorities are the true culprit here.
OUSD is a high-achieving district full of Distinguished Schools and the envy of this county's public school system. Is Ojai really ready to lose this great asset? If so then I agree with Ratcliff and say "shame on you!"

Anonymous said...

Declining enrollment has been going on for 10 years according to the OVN article. But has the district done anything ie downsizing? The OUSD is top heavy, but what happens is they always cut a few "lunch ladies" who work hard and make $8/hr. to try and balance the budget.
As far as the cause of declining enrollment there are no factual studies of OUSD that have accurately shown why enrollment has been going down.
So everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but no one is entitled to their own facts. We need change, not more of the same.

Anonymous said...

In my opinion, if all of the people who voted for the parcel tax don't send $89 to the school district each year in spite of the fact that Measure P failed, then they're being hypocritical.

Start sending that money in. If and when you ever do send it in, then maybe the rest of us will actually have a good reason to start paying more attention to whatever it is you have to say. Until such time as you do make your contributions without worrying that perhaps you're the only one doing it, then all you're doing is editorializing, pontificating, and being generally full of hot air.

Anonymous said...

Declining enrollment, to some extent, and this is just factual, is not "vengeful" its that a lot of residents have chosen to pull their kids out of OUSD and send them to private school. That is simply a FACT. To continue to deny that reality is to further the decline. Pull your head out of the sand and get out of denial and stop blaming the people that post here and are trying to help the district by being honest in what we need to do to improve it. Denial is a big part of the problem, this is not sour grapes, or revenge or whatever you stupidly want to define it as, these are REALITIES we all need to face to improve the situation.

Anonymous said...

Some of the negative individuals on this blog have not considered that declining enrollment is an outcome of the enormous jump in housing costs over the last ten years within Ojai and the rest of California. Ojai has been dealing with this for a longer period of time but now, combined with the state budget crisis, we have a situation that will definitely impact the possibilities available to our students.

Our schools provide a high quality education and to say anything but that is dismissive - go look elsewhere in the public arena in our county and see what looks better. Sure, if you can afford to send your kid to private school, no doubt, go for it. (So many people cannot afford it.) But please don't complain when the impact of the decline of our schools adversely affects your property values.

Think about it - when private schools charge what they do (anywhere from three to five times what our public schools receive in funding per year per student), it is understandable that they can easily compete with public schools. If our public schools received such funding, imagine the possibilities for California's children.

No administration is perfect and the public will look for a scapegoat. Meanwhile, it is Ojai's kids who will suffer with potential cuts to class size reduction, arts, athletics and much more. Very sad, indeed.

I have already sent my $89 to my closest public school, have you?

Anonymous said...

I will not contribute to this board and this administration and that is my choice. I do not believe their leadership has enhanced the quality of our educational system. People have a right to their opinion and to vote with their pocketbook and their feet. Those of us who feel we need to put our kids in private school are paying there and our tax dollars are also taken for the public school system. Thats enough, thank you very much.

Anonymous said...

It seems as if many people would like to see a change in leadership. But a good alternative would be for the existing Board and Supt. to actually address the unpleasant task of getting us out of the ditch. Don't blame anyone, stop talking about the failed parcel tax and do your job. It will not be pretty and it will take some time, but there have been many options of reform put forward on these blogs and they have merit. Please take the time to review them and shows us that you deserve to lead the OUSD.

Anonymous said...

Santa Ynez School district is not experiencing the crises because they are "basic aide schools." How is is that they managed to pull this off and Ojai did not? Does anyone have any insight into this?

Santa Ynez School District had this to say:

“We’re going to withstand this attack,” said Ray Kirchmier, business manager at the high school.

Because a number of schools in the valley are basic aid schools, their funding is determined by their districts’ property taxes, and not by the state’s fixed income per-student allocation.

Santa Ynez High, Ballard Elementary, and College Elementary are among the basic aid schools in the valley.

“We’re really fortunate and thankful that we’re a basic aid school, as is College and the high school, which means our local property taxes exceed the revenue; we’re buffered…,” said Ballard School District Superintendent Allan Pelletier.

Anonymous said...

excellent question .. did you call the brainiacs in our dist office and ask them??? My guess is the answer, as per usual will either be BS or they will say they don't know. Your tax dollars at work