# # #

General Info > Budget Crisis

We have, unfortunately, had confirmation from both Barney Finley, the Associate Superintendent of Business from the County Office of Education, and Senator Simitian, that the State budget is continuing to progress into a deeper deficit. Both individuals expressed caution about how much money districts would actually receive from the Federal Stimulus Funds. They also both encouraged districts to expend any of the federal moneys with extreme caution, since they are one time monies. Mr. Finley explained the potential severity of the situation by stating that if the district were to receive a potential 11 million of stimulus dollars, and if that funding was used to augment the district’s existing budget with 11 million of “on-going” expenses, that given the potential of the projected State deficit, the district would be looking next year at the reduction of the 11 million from the stimulus “returns” plus an additional 11 million potential state reductions, a total of 22 million. If and when the district does receive any federal dollars, we will have a major dilemma about how to spend the dollars wisely, not creating a future crisis.

 

Response to new questions or concerns:

 

Negotiations update:

 

PVFT

  • The Union and the District have come to an agreement about the specifics of Binding Arbitration language, so that issue is no longer a point of contention. Even though there have been many statements made about not having an “enforceable” contract, as the Union has agreed, there have been very few grievances around contract language, of any kind, in the district’s history. Looking back in the district records, there hasn’t been any contract language disagreement that had to go to mediation or arbitration since sometime in the ‘80’s. We hope that that continues to be the case. In this economic situation, any disagreement that cannot be resolved locally at the table, will involve attorney expense for both sides, and would be an expense that neither the union or the district can afford, whether the arbitration is binding or not…
  • Given that there are basic agreements about all of the PVFT language proposals, we are hopeful that negotiations can move forward with other agreements that will have a positive financial impact on the budget and thereby retain some of the teaching positions that have received notices. The final version of the approved budget is posted on the district’s web site and can be viewed to see how much would be needed to bring back any specific positions. I agree 1000% that the impact that individual teachers have in the classroom, is where the potential success for students really happens. I think that anyone who has ever been a teacher will tell you that the greatest reward they will ever receive comes when a student returns to share what a difference you made in their life.

CSEA

  • The Union and the District are moving forward to negotiate issues regarding classified lay-offs. It is the district’s hope that their can be an agreement about the impact of the lay-off process that will minimize that impact to fewer employees. Most districts do not have a practice of allowing the bumping of “less” senior employees, but instead, restrict choices of positions to the “least” senior. It is important to honor employee rights and their seniority, but it is also important to not have the process be any more traumatic for employees than necessary. I think we can all agree that everyone’s main objective, in the end, will be to retain as many positions as possible.
  • CSEA & the district are also negotiating regarding other possible agreements that would positively impact the budget and enable additional classified positions to be retained. Even though positions have been noticed, the district can remove positions from the lay-off list if additional dollar savings are realized before June 30th. CSEA and the district have agreed to a “Retirement Incentive” plan that will be going to the Board for approval this week. Since the ability to offer a Retirement Incentive is time sensitive, the district also took forward for approval by the Board, a potential Retirement Incentive plan for teachers as well, although that will still need to be negotiated with PVFT.

Accurate “Pink Slip” Data:

  • There have been many comments and editorials regarding the actual numbers of positions that received “pink slips” for the March 15th deadline. Here are the accurate numbers and percentages of positions noticed:
    • 57 administrative positions (43% of the total number of administrators in the district)
    • 193 certificated (18% of certificated employees)
    • 220 classified positions (30% of classified positions).

Even though these massive numbers of positions were noticed to enable a balanced budget to be presented to the County, the final determination about positions that are actually eliminated won’t be finalized until the end of June. Any additional agreements that are negotiated, would enable some of the noticed positions to be rescinded. The actual number of positions noticed reflects the reductions made in the district budget, but also reflects personnel reductions made by sites as a result of the State’s reduction of site categorical funds.

 

Does the District have $20 million that they are hiding?:

  • Other than the rumor that the District purchased the house I’m currently living in, that my husband & I built in 1976, this is the one of the strangest rumors I’ve heard so far. It’s hard for me to imagine what motivation anyone could come up with about why the district would “hide money” that would result in the reduction of their own salaries and the budget of their own departments. Interesting….
    • The confusion seems to be centered around the “instructional materials” budget. I’ll admit that school district budgets are incredibly complicated, but here’s the short version. Within that one budget item, there are various “kinds” of dollars. Examples of some of those dollars follow: district dollars allocated from the State for textbooks; district dollars allocated from the State for instructional supplies; school site categorical dollars that are “held” until individual sites spend them; site carry-over funds from the previous year from the various categorical programs that are “held” there until they go back to the sites, and grant funds. Given all of the categories within this particular budget item, you will see this area of the budget “change” considerably more than any other area of the budget. I believe that the actual “print-out” of the expenditures out of this one particular category is over 500 pages long! I would invite anyone that still has concerns about what is in this “mystery fund” to let me know and I will arrange a “walk through” with Mary Hart, our Associate Superintendent of Business, so that folks will not think that there is “hidden money”! In this time of State wide economic crisis, we cannot afford to work against each other.
    • Mary Hart & I have discussed starting a “Budget Committee” that would be identified with representation from across the district’s community that will review the district budget on an on-going basis, in much the way that the Benefit Committee does. Unfortunately, this economic crisis is going to be something we are dealing with for a long time and I think that creating an on-going budget committee would serve us well as we make future decisions.

I will continue to say that more than anytime in our district’s history, we need to all work together toward a resolution that will meet the needs of PVUSD’s students in the best way possible and save the jobs of as many PVUSD employees as possible.

 

Dorma Baker
Superintendent