Message from Superintendent Patrick Godwin Regarding the State Budget Crisis

June 12, 2009

Still no good news from the legislature

There is still no resolution or good news about the budget crisis coming out of Sacramento.  The possibility of adding to revenues remains bleak, and as each day passes the deep cuts to education and other social services seem more likely.

The Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) has issued a report calling for more flexibility in certain specially funded programs (commonly called categoricals).  However, the LAO also suggests reducing those funds while providing that flexibility, a combination of ideas that generates limited help for schools. 

It is also interesting, perhaps disturbing, to note that the legislative leadership is not proposing that school districts be allowed to permanently or temporarily reduce the mandatory reserve of three percent (3.0 %) that we must keep for economic emergencies. 

If there was ever a time . . .

The "flexibility" that schools are being offered is analogous to informing us that we need to cut off an arm or leg, but our legislative leaders are willing to loan us a knife and to allow us to choose the arm or leg.  The "fat" in education budgets disappeared long ago,  thanks to California being funded significantly below the national average for over two decades.  

Updated list of proposed reductions

Those that have been following the progress of the Folsom Cordova Unified School District's budget development know that on June 4, I provided our Governing Board with a preliminary list of reductions to balance the budget for the 2009-10 school year.  Information about that list and the status of our budget, including a budget overview and multi-year projections, is posted on this website.  (June 5, 2009, Budget Update)

At the June 4 Board meeting, I indicated that we still needed to identify $4.3 million in additional cuts to reach the target of $14.7 million in expenditure reductions required to balance our budget for 2009-10.  As discussed on June 4, the list of options for finding $4.3 million in additional reductions has direct impacts on classrooms and services for students.

An updated list that includes recommendations for balancing the budget and reducing the 2009-10 budget by $14.7 million can be found at a link below.   

The list comes in three parts. 

The first section, titled February reductions, identifies the reductions proposed based on the state budget that was passed in February.  This list reflects $6.4 million in reductions generate by the "compromise" budget passed by the legislature in February.  This budget proposal was dependent on the passage of the ballot measures that appeared on the May 19 ballot.

The second section, titled May revise, lists the initial reductions developed after the May 12 "mid-year" revision the governor issued in anticipation of the failure of Measures 1A-1E.  These reductions were first presented to the Board on June 4, and (as stated above) were $4.3 million short of meeting the $14.7 million target.

The third section, titled June proposals, reflects the reductions that have been added since the May reductions were presented at the June 4 Board meeting.  While all of the reductions prior to this list were painful, this final list has an even greater impact on the opportunities and services we provide to our students. 

There is nothing to like on this list.  Every reduction reduces the opportunities and services we provide to our students.   (Click Here for Superintendent's Recommendations)

Among the many regrettable reductions on this updated list are: 

• Eliminating electives at middle schools.  Students would take only math, science, language arts, social studies and physical education. 
• Shortening the school day for high school juniors and seniors.  Students would have access to courses needed for graduation and to complete the basic requirements for college admission or for a career academy.  Other options would be severely limited, and many juniors and seniors would be on a reduced school day.
• Reducing counseling services by thirty percent.  Students would have less personal contact with counselors and many functions would need to be done in group settings.  Assistance for completing college and scholarship applications would be reduced.
• Eliminating staffing for all school libraries.  Libraries would be available for use by classroom teachers, but materials would not generally be available for checking out unless arranged by individual teachers.
• Eliminating funding for athletics, except for junior varsity and varsity girls volleyball, football, girls and boys basketball, and boys and girls track.  Frosh teams would not be funded in any sport, and all other sports would be considered as “club” sports, dependent on outside funding.

You will note that the list of reductions does not include increasing 1^st and 2^nd grade class sizes above the 24-to-1 ratio that was recommended on the first (February) list.  However, class size reduction could be revisited if the state restructures the funding as part of the ongoing budget discussions. 

Being forced to make the reductions on these three lists seems unimaginable.  The cuts fundamentally alter what we have come to think of as basic opportunities and services for our students.      

Other options

There is still the ever-fading possibility that the legislature will find a way to provide more funding for education.  However, unless the "no taxes" pledge is pulled off the table, deep reductions appear to be the only other solution.  I encourage you to let the state's leadership know your thoughts. (Click Here for Additional Options and Considerations)

The District Board and administration will continue to monitor the budget developments and seek and accept ideas for further reducing our expenditures. 

The only other remaining significant option is to negotiate a change in the compensation and/or work year for our employees. (Click Here for Items to be Negotiated)   

The administrators in the District have agreed to a two day furlough, and additional days will be considered.   

We continue to have discussions with the Folsom Cordova Education Association (FCEA), the union that represents the teachers and other certificated staff members, and the California School Employees Association (CSEA), the union that represents support staff such as bus drivers, administrative assistants, custodians, and campus monitors.  CSEA has indicated that it will participate in discussions this month to work on how a furlough program could be implemented.  At last night's Board meeting (June 11) the FCEA vice president stated that they would also meet with the District.  District staff will follow up this morning (June 12) to arrange to meet in the next few days.  We must reach an agreement quickly to avoid laying off more certificated and classified positions.   

It should be noted that each furlough day, if all employees participate, generates $600,000.  Four furlough days would generate $2,400,000, enough to save a significant number of jobs and programs.  The District has promised that any dollars generated by either the FCEA or CSEA would be used to save jobs and programs in their respective employee groups on a dollar-for-dollar basis.  

The Rocklin Unified School District has reached an agreement for four furlough days.  One day is a day when school is in session, and the other three are non-instructional days.  Our District could implement a similar furlough reduction with the agreement of FCEA and CSEA.   

Our promise (as repeated from previous budget updates) 

The Governing Board has vowed to be transparent in all of its considerations.  We will keep you informed of all of our considerations and recommendations.  The most accurate and complete information will be posted at this location on our website, and we will keep it up to date.     

As we add new ideas and/or add details to existing ideas, we will share those with you to the extent possible.  In some cases, because of privacy rights and to protect individuals from unfair criticism, I may withhold names or other pieces of information until it is appropriate to make an announcement.  Please also keep in mind that we may consider and study many possibilities, but that does not necessarily mean that the idea will become part of the final recommendation.   

As I stated in the May 29 budget update, the most damaging aspect of the budget crisis is the potential to harm relationships.   

With fewer adults in schools, there are fewer opportunities for students to find the adult(s) that will influence and guide them.  Schools in the nation funded at the national average have 64 teachers and 3.4 administrators per 1000 students.  In California the average school has 48 teachers and 2.2 administrators, and that is before this round of cuts and reductions.      

With decisions being made to reduce positions and services, there will be strong disagreements about the choices. 

I would suggest that now is a time for us to exercise patience and understanding.  In particular, please do not participate in circulating rumors and conjecture.  These are difficult times, and we do not need to add to our challenges by succumbing to unwarranted FEAR (False Expectations Appear Real). 

If you have a concern or question, ask the person most responsible, or ask me.  Together we will get through this mess. 

I look forward to what I believe will ultimately be a ground swell for public education, if not for next year, then very soon.  People who care about children and our future will eventually demand better from our state.     

 

Patrick Godwin