Main Ideas: National and State economies improving, but very, very
slowly. Some gains in jobs, but not enough to counteract the 1.3
million jobs lost because of the recession
Flat funding for 2012-13 vs. large cuts: Tax proposal approved = flat funding at the 2011-12
level (But costs keep going up! We’ve still lost 20% of our
funding since 2007-2008)
Tax proposal fails = approximately $441 cut per ADA! ($356 in revenue limit, plus $85 per ADA cut for state-wide loss of all transportation funding)
Money Matters in Student Performance (SSC)
Test Scores vs. Dollars Per Student
Highest-Performing States
Lowest-Performing States
Maine New Jersey Rhode Island Vermont Wyoming
California Arizona Nevada Idaho Mississippi
$23,000
$6,700
$8,700
$16,000
$22,000
$0
1-30
California’s Spending Lags the Nation (SSC)
California’s Schools Lag Behind Other States on a Number of Measures
California
Rank
California Rest
of U.S.
K-12 Spending Per Student (2009-10)* 44 $8,826 $11,372
K-12 Spending as a Percentage of Personal Income (2008-09)* 46 3.28% 4.25%
Number of K-12 Students Per Teacher (2009-10)* 50 21.3 13.8
Number of K-12 Students Per Administrator (2007-08) 46 358 216
Number of K-12 Students Per Guidance Counselor (2007-08) 49 809 440
Number of K-12 Students Per Librarian (2007-08) 50 5,038 809
*Estimated
Note: “California Rank” and “Rest of U.S.” exclude the District of Columbia. Spending per student and number of
students per teacher are based on average daily attendance (ADA). Number of students per administrator, guidance
counselor, and librarian are based on statewide enrollment.
Source: National Education Association, National Center for Education Statistics, and U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis
1-31
Risks to the Revised Budget Proposal (SSC)
Even if the Legislature adopts the Governor’s May Revision as proposed, the State Budget would face huge risks in 2012-13
Voter approval of the Governor’s tax initiative is uncertain at best
The measure has yet to qualify for the November ballot
While more than one million signatures have been submitted, more than 800,000 must be found valid in order for the initiative to be placed on the ballot
The latest poll found that about 54% of those surveyed supported the measure, a slim margin at this stage of the campaign
A competing measure sponsored by Molly Munger and the Parent Teacher Association (PTA) could confuse voters and draw support away from the Governor’s initative
The Facebook IPO could fall short of expectations, resulting in a loss of General Fund tax revenue
1-20
Education Funding Initiatives (SSC):
Proponent and
Title
Total
Revenues
Generated
Education Revenues
Generated
Source of Additional
Revenues Duration
Governor
Jerry Brown –
“The Schools and
Local Public
Protection Act of
2012”
$8.5 billion
in 2012-13;
$6.5 billion
thereafter
Limited – additional
funds offset State General
Fund (GF) obligation;
$2.9 billion increase in
Proposition 98 first year
Quarter-cent sales tax
increase; up to 3% increase
in personal income tax rate
for high-income earners
($250,000 and above)
4 years
sales tax,
7 years
income tax
* Molly Munger
(PTA supported)
“Our Children,
Our Future: Local
Schools and
Early Education
Investment and
Bond Debt
Reduction Act”
$5 billion
in 2012-13;
$10 billion
thereafter
First 3 years:
60% K-12 schools
10% Early childhood
education (ECE)
30% State GF bond debt
Remaining years:
85% K-12 schools
15% ECE
Increase in personal income
tax for all but low-income
earners, from 0.4% for
lowest income individuals to
2.2% for individuals earning
more than $2.5 million
12 years
* The Munger initiative provides K-12 funds on a school specific, per-pupil basis, subject to local control, audits, and public
input. It also prohibits the state from directing or using these funds.
2-6
No New Funding for Schools (SSC)
Despite claims of:
$6 billion more for schools!
16% increase for schools!
Your district, your schools, your classrooms do not get one more dime whether the Governor’s taxes pass or not!
Our gain is the absence of yet another cut
The public is confused
The state says Proposition 98 is growing
But local schools are making massive cuts and affirming layoffs
The state has not provided a single new dollar to local schools since 2007-08
1-5
Proposition 98 Minimum per-pupil funding guarantee
Has risen, but schools don’t directly see the benefit
Increases in Proposition 98 used to “pay back” deferrals, debt service on school bond funds, etc.
Confusing for voters—hear that Prop 98 is “going up,” but no increase to funding
…so what if the tax proposal fails?
May Revision proposes school district authorization to reduce school year by up to a total of 15 days over the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school years.
We are currently authorized for 5 days per year through 2014-15 (from 180 down to 175)
Allows for another 15 days over two years (maximum of 16 days in any one year)
Doesn’t totally get the job done of addressing big cuts.
“this will allow schools to use a combination of reserves, reductions in the school year, and other savings options to absorb this cut”
Weighted Student Formula: New funding formula proposed to fix the state’s current
school finance system. January proposal-formula proposed, but flawed May revision—new Weighted Student Formula proposal: --Base grant = $5,421 per ADA --Suppl. Grant for EL’s, Free/Reduced: 20% --Concentration grant for districts with > 50% of above --Phase-in period: 7 years, with 2012-13 held harmless --Includes CSR funds, and about 40 other categoricals --Fully flexible funds Now tied to tax initiative; will not take effect if the
initiative fails.
Categorical Programs Flexibility—no change, but these will be incorporated
into the Weight Student Funding Formula (WSF)
Home-to School Transportation funding eliminated in 2012-13, but districts will receive the same amount will be included in the WSF (about $21,000 for MUSD)
Funding from all the categorical programs that will be included in the WSF can be used for any educational purpose
Categorical Programs Included in the Weighted Student Formula (SSC)
Adult Education Civic Education
Adults in Correctional Facilities Community-Based English Tutoring
Advanced Placement Grant Programs Deferred Maintenance
Agricultural Vocational Education District and county office of education
revenue limits
Alternative Credentialing Economic Impact Aid
Apprentice Programs Educational Technology
Arts and Music Block Grant Gifted and Talented Education
California High School Exit Exam Grade 7-12 Counseling
California School Age Families Education
Program
High School Class-Size Reduction
Certificated Staff Mentoring Instructional Materials Block Grant
Charter Schools Block Grant K-3 Class-Size Reduction
3-2
the Weighted Student Formula (SSC)
National Board Certification School and Library Improvement Block
Grant
Oral Health Assessments School Safety Block Grant
Partnership Academies School Safety Competitive Grant
Physical Education Block Grant Specialized Secondary Program Grants
Principal Training Staff Development
Professional Development Block Grant Student Leadership/California Association
of Student Councils
Professional Development Institutes for
Math and English
Summer school programs
Pupil Retention Block Grant Teacher Credentialing Block Grant
Regional Occupational Centers and
Programs
Teacher Dismissal Apportionments
3-3
Weighted Student Formula Exclusions (SSC)
The only major programs excluded from the weighted student funding formula in addition to transportation and TIIG, are:
Program Rationale
After-School Programs Proposition 49 requires a ballot initiative
approved by the voters to make any changes
to after-school funding
Necessary Small Schools Funding needed to maintain schools in
sparsely populated areas
Preschool Program Program/funding is not a K-12 program
QEIA Part of a legal settlement
School Nutrition Federal accounting and maintenance-of-effort
requirements
Special Education Federal program requirements and
maintenance-of-effort issues
All programs listed above must use funding for intended purpose – they are not flexible.
3-4
Federal Funds Essentially “flat” funding in 2012-13—maybe
a slight increase to Title I (which is funded on a per-ADA formula, based on 2010 Census).
State applied for a waiver to the U.S. Department of Education for relief of certain sanctions for the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school years
Federal ESEA Waiver Application (SSC)
In May, the State Board of Education (SBE) voted to submit a state-defined waiver to the United States Department of Education for relief of select provisions in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) for the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school years In summary, the waiver requests permission to:
End the requirement that schools in program improvement set aside funds for Title I professional development, Supplemental Educational Services, and choice-related transportation activities Would free up funds for activities that LEAs determine to be most
effective Revise the current state accountability system to a single accountability
system End over-identification of low-performing schools and districts
Public comment on the waiver application will be accepted until May 25 For more information, visit: http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/pn/pn/
Waiver is scheduled to be submitted in early June
3-15
Transitional Kindergarten: SB 1381:
changed the eligible birth dates for enrolling students in Kindergarten
2012-13 = From December 2 to November 1
Results in about 40,000 fewer Kinders state-wide
Loss of students = loss of funding = less resources
Established a “Transitional Kinder” program
To start in 2012-13 by law
May Revise: Eliminates requirement to offer TK and funding –becomes an optional, local decision.
State savings used to support pre-school programs
Districts can receive funding for TK students once they turn 5
District Planning A look two years out (Multi-Year Projection) is necessary to
help districts stay solvent. It is also required by law.
Multi-year projections are the mathematical result of today’s decisions based on given assumptions
Projections change as underlying factors change.
Ending fund balance—challenges:
State threatens cuts
Management prepares by making cuts (lay-off ’s, etc.)
Cuts are delayed, resulting in big fund balance as if cuts weren’t needed
Results in a credibility problem
District Planning, cont. New reality of threatened cuts/mid-
year triggers impacts employer-employee relations
Both sides lose if the district goes bankrupt
Employers/employees must work together-the real conflict is with the State of California.
District Planning, cont. $441 per ADA cut would be devastating (about $1,759,000 in
2012-13), and ongoing.
Measure B Parcel Tax: Bringing in over $500,000 annually through 2013-2014.
2014-15: Deficit of over $2.2 million if the tax measure fails, and the parcel tax expires.
Measure B: “Supports high academic achievement for local
students by "maintaining small class sizes, updated textbooks and classroom materials, improved access to modern technology, science education, art, music, band programs, library services and school counselors to help students prepare for college and work."
Final Thoughts (SSC) The Governor is faced with a tough problem and it won’t be easy
to get his solutions adopted and implemented
School agencies have not had any new revenues since 2007-08 and there won’t be any this year
None of the cuts made to education in the prior five years are restored
California remains at the bottom of the nation in both student performance and education funding
Despite our best efforts, that won’t change this year
This will be another difficult year for all of California’s families and it will have an impact on the readiness of our students to learn
It is more important than ever that our schools provide a safe sanctuary for the minds of our children
6-8