Wednesday, June 08, 2011

Budget Work Session 6/8/11

The Board is meeting this afternoon for a Budget work session.

Here is a link to the agenda and to the handout.

Interesting items:

Levy Revenue: $15.1m. SEA CBA: $7.5, Purchase Textual Materials: $1.5m. So can it be said that the District is spending the money as promised?

WSS Committee enhancements: $3.3m, WSS Reductions: $5.8m. Net impact on WSS spending -$2.5m

Alternative Learning Experience: $1.2m For what?

Transportation Potential Overruns: $3.1m, Transportation savings: $4.1m. The savings from the new transportation plan are just a bit more than the contingencies in case it doesn't work.

STEM Analyst at Cleveland: $0.1m. Was this in the STEM budget?

Strategic Plan Adjustments: $0.6m. Really? That's all we saved?

Added Executive Director: $0.2m, Elminate 2nd principal at RBHS: $0.1m. I see no savings from the elimination of a 2nd principal at Bryant.

Child Nutrition Services revenue: -$0.6m. How's that centralized kitchen working out for ya?


Anonymous said...

There was an Executive Committee mtg this morning and capacity issues were on the agenda. Was this an open meeting and did anyone attend?


Melissa Westbrook said...

I did not attend that meeting this morning, sorry.

I did attend the Audit & Finance meeting yesterday which was interesting and I'll be posting a thread on that soon.

Anonymous said...

Am I reading this correctly - SPS makes money on the nutrition program?

- somebody who wishes we actually had a healthy nutrition program

suep. said...

The district's inexplicable plan to add a third (!) ($110,000+) principal to Lowell Elem next year will likely negate any savings gained from eliminating a principal from RBHS.


Charlie Mas said...

All of the amounts on this handout are changes relative to the previous year.

According to this handout, the District expects Child Nutrition Services to either cost an additional $600,000 in 2011-2012 or earn $600,000 less. Either way, it will remove $600,000 from next year's budget compared to this year's budget.

Anonymous said...

The handout lists increasing Full Day Kindergarten (FDK) from $207/mo. to $237/mo. as one solution for the Budget gap.


Dave said...

Yes, they make lots of money from the Nutrition Department. In addition to the explicit income (Feds, State & paying customers), commodities, etc., observers need to remember that every dollar of state & Federal funds adds to the levy capacity the District can raise from property taxes as well. For this reason, the way they do it is they draw about 9-14% off the top of the Department ("Indirect costs") until it appears to be in the red. Then they say stuff like: "Those darn workers make to much" and "Our labor costs are too high".

They rarley want to talk about the implicit levy capacity benefit.

Anyway, since represented workers in the Nutrition Department(who only work with what management buys) have'nt had a raise in years, the $ 600,000 can only be the cost of the raises ("Re-classifications") that were given to supervisory staff there June 1st.

Nice timing, huh?

Feels a lot like that old "in your face" style of play we know so well, does'nt it?

Some things just never change.

Labor costs indeed.

Charlie Mas said...

I saw the increase in revenue for Full Day Kindergarten, but I didn't see the offsetting increase in expense for it. Can someone point it out to me?

someone said...

@Charlie - could this be the expense?
High Poverty K-3 class size revenue

KG said...

Yes Charlie, with this new director
Eric Boutin getting rid of such things as smokie rolls, sweet and sour sauce for the egg rolls, amongst not following the CBA very well of course they are going to lose money.

Oh, not to mention the 4.5% that food service will receive in a pay raise. I think you may see some opposition to this at next Wednesdays board meeting.

Instead of improving the food service department the district has done everything to ruin it. Example, 2 years ago they went from cooking kitchens to bulk satelite kitchens. The board was spoken to often in public testimony but because they love failure because that is what this board is, their motto is everyone should fail of course except for their partners in crime Central admin.

Dave said...



Only the supervisors (and possibly other non-represented staff) in Nutrition got pay raises.

It has been years since the workers have goptten one.

Readers need to clearly understand. There have been no additional duties for these "supervisors". As a matter of fact the numbers of those they supervise has dwindled significantly over the last years.

Administration has given scores of raises, bonuses, reclassifications, etc., over the MGJ years. Its their way of sneaking raises past the public; rather than one for all of them as they planned in 2007, the went "underground" and did a few at a time until the record shows a consistant pattern.

The rich get richer and the workers get nothing but guff.

KG said...

Thank you Dave, you are correct.

mirmac1 said...

That's funny. Duggan Harmon characterized the $0.6M shortfall as "anticipated reduction in revenue". Figured he had a crystal ball to predict kids weren't going to buy the cardboard coming out of the satellite kitchens. He didn't mention $$raises for other admin types like him.

Oh, but he did make sure to show as a "solution" to offset gaps, $4.0M saved by not infilling for Olympia's 1.9% cut for teachers. So the "bargaining partners" like union workers are expected to eat it.

KG said...

Duggan is another cog in the ruining of public education and trust. Quit Duggan now!

Robyn said...


I like your post about the increase in expense for full-day K. I have asked repeatedly for a break-down of expenses that correlates to the amount I am being charged for my daughter in K. Of course, I have gotten zero responses. I told the Board, Enfield, etc. that as much as the district should pay for full-day K for FRL kids, they can't provide it if they can't afford it. I have a feeling those of us that don't qualify are paying for the schools with waivers and the FRL kids. That seriously can't be legal if it's true.

Anonymous said...

I'm sorry, I and new to the education system of the State of Washington in general, and Seattle schools. Are you telling me that you have to pay for your children to attend Kindergarten? Really?

Techno Mom

Jan said...

Techno mom: Long time since I have had a kindergarten kid (alas). But my understanding is -- yes. Washington State only "pays" for half day. Unless you qualify as free/reduced lunch (in which case, I think they pay for you), all parents "pay" to fund the second half of the day. (Who they pay, and how much -- well, see the archives for fun fun fun).

It used to be that you could just sign up for half day, and your child would go home early, or come late, if you were assigned to half day. But now they don't want to pay for the buses for the few kids using that option. So I think they now plan on full day for everyone (but my recollection is maybe there are a few half days left here and there?) -- with the threat that they will yank your kid out half way through the day and send him/her home alone on a bus (with a scarlet D for deadbeat on his little t-shirt?) if you DON'T pay (i.e., if you "elect" half day by not paying the bill) -- but maybe that can't be right? It seems so wrong.

IF I am right, the rationale, if I understand the whole thing correctly, is that it is all supposedly so much cheaper than daycare, which most 4 year olds attend anyway -- and would presumably attend if they weren't in kindergarten, that it is somehow just all legal and ok.

WV says "nerksag." I can do nothing witty with it, but it was such a good wv word, I had to add it.

anonymous said...

From Mr. Webers blog-

Mr. Weber challenging opponent Jack Whelan's agenda

Jack Whelan: I want to push for curricula and classroom practices that promote competency, confidence, and the ability to learn how to learn. I have a problem with the "learn how to learn."

Mr. Weber: Are K - 12 kids capable of critical thinking? Research says no so isn't more important that they just learn?

Jack Whelan: I want to push back against the corporate-driven, privatizing, anti-union, education reform agenda.

Mr. Weber: Here I have to ask. What corporations? Who is anti-union? And what is their education reform agenda and how does it differ from your's?