Board Work Session on Budget - Feb 28, 2023

 I finally did listen in on the recent Work Session. I'm not so impressed with anybody, frankly. I believe all the directors were there (Rivera Smith was virtually but she was ill and didn't say much, ditto on Sarju.) 

At one point, Superintendent Brent Jones asked the Board members for "wonderings." 

On the definition of well- resourced schools, Director Liza Rankin offered that some things should be stated out loud, even if obvious. I agree. But then she said that, "It sounds scary but what no one has said to me is that my child attends school at this specific building, no matter what." She continued saying that people are in a "place of fear" that "all of a sudden schools will be stuffed to the gills with overcrowded classrooms." 

First, who cares what random parents say to her? That's not data and I can tell her from experience - you get specific on closing certain schools and you WILL hear parents wanting a certain school in a certain place. Second, I would suggest that if you close some buildings, you will see some classes in some schools get bigger. How that gets negated, I don't know.

Jones also said that there is more administrative staff because "we fund more because of the programs we fund." Why that hasn't been broken out by costs for each program and put forth is a mystery. 

One item I do not like - they are moving basic maintenance out of the General Fund to the Capital area. That means taking BTA and BEX dollars to fund it. That's shouldn't be happening. 

Director Leslie Harris pointed out the issue of the Weighted Staffing Formula and how it needs an overhaul.

President Brandon Hersey asked about the K-3 ratio dollars that the State provides to lower class size. We might see those sizes tick up. 

This issue of schools having an underspend was troubling to Harris. She said, "We are operating way over what we are allocated for." Yes, the district does seem have greatly expanded spending in all directions. 

Director Vivian Song Maritz asked for input from principals. She wants to know what THEY see playing out for their schools. 

Staff also brought up that Bellevue is closing schools with under 300 enrollment; SPS has 30 of those which is a big number. Oddly, the biggest area with smaller schools is in West Seattle. They did let Harris know this directly but she countered about the school underspend, management issues, directors of schools and their roles. She wondered out loud if they all recognized the problem (of how they sit in this time and place)?

And then the Superintendent said the line, "We discovered we have not been actively managing budgets." I'm not sure how that big of a problem could be "discovered." Shameful.

New items of note:

- Here's the agenda with PowerPoint. (I say again - why this district can't number EVERY SINGLE page of PowerPoints is a mystery. An annoying mystery.) On page 6, there is a definition of "well-resourced schools" and page 7, there are "attributes of well-resourced schools." Remember this because the district is all-in with this slash and burn, closing schools in order to create "well-resourced schools." Why one is a definition and the other is attributes is not clear to me but it may be to protect the district down the line from cries of "you said a well-resourced school is this." Page 6 uses the word "may" in one place.

Also, page 7 read a lot like how Hampson would have written it so I'm a bit suspicious.

Another issue to "well-resourced schools" is whether ALL schools will have these attributes or will some schools have more of them than others. I suspect that the arts may fall to PTA infusions of cash as well as extra-curricular programs and activities. 

- Slide 10 - The district explains "Why Now?" Two key items here - "Student Needs Are Increasing" and "Labor costs are significantly more than state and local funding." 

District staff did say that they are now getting more Special Education students than regular education students with Special Education students being more expensive to help. I think this is a good point to pound into the heads of legislators. It might be good if staff explained WHY they think there are more Special Education students coming into SPS.

As for labor costs increasing, who negotiated and signed that SEA contract?  I think everyone who looked at what was decided on thought it too high GIVEN the circumstances that we could all see. And now the chickens are coming home to roost. 

- Staff has this new thing about "multi-year budget planning" that makes me shake my head, page 11. Was that not already happening? As well, every school is different so trying to multi-year plan for 99 schools seems daunting.

As well, page 11 has eye-rolling items like:

• Aggressively pursue new or expanded revenue opportunities 
• Streamline and incorporate efficiencies into central operations
• Enact cross-departmental operational efficiencies and automation

In case you are new, these items are ALWAYS stated when there is a budget/fiscal crisis. You'd think by now they would have had ALL that kind of work (save the first one) done. 

As I say, one new revenue stream would be if SPS closes some buildings and then leases them to charter schools. We'll see. 

- Slide 12 - Operating within our means - very funny. But they have short-term and long term ideas but I'd lay odds that the short-term ones WILL become permanent. They also include "optimize special education processes." Again, it's 2023, hasn't that already been done? 

- Slide 13 - Expenditures Compared to State Funding. That lays it out there - State is only covering 52% of Sped costs, 47% of Transportation and 59% of school administrative staff. Transportation has always been an issue but my question is - why not cut back on routes? Tell parents that their child will have to walk 2-3 blocks to a central corner. I know Seattle is a geographically challenging city but would parents rather have no transportation or transportation only for certain classes of students?

- Slide 15 - Multi-year budget planning as of Feb. 28, 2023. I see that closing schools would only result in a savings of $28M. That's not chump change but if you are going to go through such upheaval, I sure would have thought that number would be bigger. 

To contrast, above that line is "central office/programmatic reductions" that is $33M. You'll get more savings from that than closing schools?

- Slide 17 - Summary of Central Office Adjustments FY23-24 Academics. Well, this is where the rubber meets the schoolhouse door. With no specifics, it's hard to tell what it might look like on the ground. I do see that the race and equity components of the budget would take the least hit. 

- Slide 18 shows a summary of cuts to Central Office. Operations would take the biggest hit but it's a lot of low-hanging fruit like custodial, maintenance, grounds, culinary, warehouse, etc. On the other hand, Public Affairs will have a measly $10K taken out.

- I think that the reduction of assistant principals - at least at some schools - is gonna see a reduction of some programs at some schools. Most assistant principals are .5 but something will have to give without that person. It would have been interesting to ask the well-paid Executive Directors who oversee principals what they think it might look like. 

There was also some discussion about the item for School Athletic Director staffing. It seems that SPS has been hiring separate staff for that as opposed to having a teacher also get a stipend to be a coach (which happens at many other districts). This is NOT in the current CBA and would need to be negotiated.

- Slide 24 includes "Make SPS schools of choice to Seattle parents" - oh c'mon! It's a little late for that. 

- I do wonder what the role of PTA will be in this stripped down budget. Is SPS counting on PTAs that can to backfill certain things? 


Key Dates

March 20th - Community information session. First, just one? Second, "information session" but not a town hall where parents give input? During the Work Session, it was mentioned several times about asking community but when and with what? 


April 23: Regular State legislative session concludes


May 3: Budget Work Session: final work session before multi-year funding plan recommendation is introduced in a regular board meeting for Board action.


June 21: Board Action Report and Budget Resolution


July 6: Board Action to adopt school year 2023-24 budget