|
|
|
Uploaded: Monday, June 1, 2009, 10:03 PM
Palo Alto schools prepare for a 'flat' budget year
District officials propose draft budget with just a 1 percent increase in funding for 2009-2010
|
|
by Chris Kenrick
Palo Alto Weekly Staff
Palo Alto schools will get a less than 1 percent increase in their budgets next year under an "aggressively conservative" approach by Palo Alto Unified School District officials.
Yet they will be spared the worst of the state budget ax of billions of dollars.
Palo Alto, as a "basic aid" district under state funding guidelines, so far is shielded from the worst of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's billions of dollars in threatened cuts to education, including the governor's suggestion to reduce the school year by up to seven days.
But concerns about the economy are prompting a virtually flat budget.
The Palo Alto Board of Education will hold public hearings tonight (Tuesday) on a staff-proposed $153.9 million operating budget for 2009-2010.
Required under state law to be adopted by July 1, the budget is still tentative because it is based on assumptions for state revenue, enrollment growth, health-insurance-premium increases and next year's pay levels -- yet to be negotiated with employee unions.
Palo Alto is one of only 85 "basic aid" districts out of roughly 1,000 school districts in California. Relics of a 1970s California Supreme Court decision on school finance, basic-aid districts rely less on revenue from Sacramento and more on local property taxes.
The largest single source for Palo Alto's school operating budget -- 68 percent -- is local property-tax revenues. State funds constitute 12 percent. Other sources include local parcel-tax funds, federal funds and income from leases, including from the City of Palo Alto for the Cubberley Community Center.
School officials conservatively project a 3 percent rise in property-tax revenues for next year, but that figure will not be final for months and could well rise. For the current school year, property tax receipts were up 11 percent over last year despite the economic downturn, according to district officials. But other funding sources are expected to decline.
The parcel tax, passed by voters in 2005 and running through 2011, generates $493 per parcel, or about $9.2 million.
Income from the state lottery is projected to be $121 per pupil.
The proposed budget assumes a 7 percent decrease in combined state and federal funding, including cuts in federal funding for low-income children and state funding for instructional improvement and special education.
It does not include prospective revenue from federal stimulus funds, although the district believes it will be eligible for some of those funds, primarily in the special-education area.
On the spending side, the bulk -- 86 percent -- goes to employee salaries and benefits. The budget for administrators, clerical and instructional aides is somewhat reduced, as is spending on instructional supplies and materials.
Proposed expenditures are based on medium-range forecasts for enrollment. They also are based on 20 students per classroom teacher in grades K-5, although officials recently said some early grade class sizes could rise to 22, and to 24 by fourth grade.
In grades six to eight, the calculations are based on 24 students per class in sixth-grade core subjects and seventh- and eighth-grade English and math classes, and 28.5 in all other classes. Middle-school students take seven classes and teachers teach five classes.
In grades nine to 12, calculations are based on 22 students per class in ninth-grade English and math classes, 24 in 10th-grade English and 28.5 in all other classes. Calculations assume students take 6.13 periods and teachers teach five classes.
In other business tonight, the board will decide on whether to postpone changes in elementary-school boundaries to carve out an attendance area for the planned re-opening of Garland School on North California Avenue. Those boundary adjustments are likely to affect Addison, Duveneck, El Carmelo, Fairmeadow, Palo Verde and Walter Hays elementary schools.
School officials have said that unexpectedly flat or possibly declining kindergarten enrollment for next year could postpone the Garland reopening from 2011 to 2012.
The board also will decide on a proposed $55.3 million budget for Measure A facilities bond funds for middle schools and discuss schematic architectural plans for renovations at Garland and Ohlone schools.
The board will meet at 6:30 p.m. tonight in the board room of school district headquarters, 25 Churchill Ave., Palo Alto.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by Can You Believe it, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Jun 2, 2009 at 7:43 pm So with revenues flat, what does the community think of the cost the local high school, Paly, is going to implement SWAT to catch kids who cut a period to study for a test in a college level competitive class?
|
|
Posted by More Fund Raising?, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jun 2, 2009 at 9:00 pm Well ... I can see tons and tons of "fund raising opportunities" coming our way from the school next calendar year. How else is the school going to fund the aides, special programs and other such events ...
Don't get me wrong - we value these programs. But the money is tight with a job loss in the family. I don't think I am speaking only for our family with respect to the tight budget .. hence we are going to have to say "no" to pretty much every fund raising that is thrown our way ... sigh.
|
|
Posted by What?, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Jun 2, 2009 at 9:12 pm Please say what SWAT is. Please say how much it costs.
|
|
Posted by Nope, a resident of the Ventura neighborhood, on Jun 2, 2009 at 9:13 pm Know what? With that devil may care adoption of the most expensive math program in the history of elementary math (maybe I exaggerate) in the face of this obviously pending news, I think we'll just keep our money and use it to teach our own children thank you very much. We have nothing to spare in our family as it is and I am not at all impressed with the stewardship I've seen thus far. No way is that program so much better it's worth the price. Skelly, please come to your senses and do your job.
I really, really don't want to have any more crocodile tears from this financially cavalier district.
Figure out the budget, make it transparent, and then we'll talk.
|
|
Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jun 2, 2009 at 9:42 pm I reckon fundraising will be flat next year too as we all get to find out just how much the library bond is going to cost us. People are not going to be able to pay for the bond and donate to PIE. Hope the library can take up the slack, pay for lunch time supervision, aides, etc.
|
|
Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jun 2, 2009 at 9:46 pm Yeah, it's flat, but the board's all excited about approving millions of dollars in construction at Ohlone even as enrollment at the elementary level is slowing down.
Why is this happening again?
|
|
Posted by Nope, a resident of the Ventura neighborhood, on Jun 2, 2009 at 10:20 pm What's funny, OP, is that you were all set to trust the district when it came to implementing a ridiculously expensive elementary math curriculum that are truly expensive and lavish, but here you go wigging out about expenditure when it expands Ohlone. Do you really not see the connection between these and the other fiscally irresponsible decisions this district makes?
I do agree with you about not expanding if we won't have the student population. And realistically, we may have a lower population not just because we have increased unemployment in the area but because people would rather go to other districts that won't experiment with their kids -- or just go private.
|
|
Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jun 2, 2009 at 10:49 pm Nope,
To me it's an issue of levels and expertise. I don't teach math. The teachers do--and,yes, I do trust them to have some idea of what they need to teach math.
Expansion, boundaries, shoving in extra strands of choice programs that involve bumping kids from their own school to make way for kids from other ares, ignoring size restrictions--all that's public policy and, no, I don't see any particular expertise by the super, the board or administrators regarding this.
Unfortunately, I think many Ohlone parents like and trust Susan Charles and this has led to a certain passivity in public. There are all sorts of changes people don't like at Ohlone, but loyalty to Susan and the general Ohlonian bent toward getting along has resulted in something that's quite destructive to the school.
Ironically, if you look to the pre-Charles period, you see some seriously fiesty parents and teachers. Time for the Ohlone community to wake up.
|
|
|
| |
2007 Awards from the California
Newspaper Publishers Association
Palo Alto Weekly
First Place
Local News Coverage
Local Breaking-News Story
Feature Story
Second Place
Feature Story
Environmental Reporting
Sports Coverage
General News Photo
Photo Essay
Freedom of Information
The Almanac
First Place
Environmental Reporting
Editorial Pages
Lifestyle Coverage
Second Place
Environmental Reporting
Mountain View Voice
Second Place
General Excellence
Editorial Comment
Front-Page Design
|
|
|
Send this story
Print this story
