Budget Work Session, Round Two

 The Board had the second part of budget discussions last week with staff.

They will be voting at this week's Board meeting - again, Into and Action on the same night - to approve the use of the Economic Stabilization Account (Rainy Day Fund) for next year's budget. They will also vote to approve the Fiscal Stabilization Plan for the 2023-2024 school year budget, Intro and Action. 

I can only say that the Board and the Superintendent appear to have zero interest in any input from families on this budget. However, as they are closing schools, they are going to be keenly interested to hear from "community" "about the vision for a system of well-resourced schools." I'll throw up a post soon and you can give input there. 

The presentation says the Superintendent will have recommendations for closures by October 2023. But their public engagement will start June 2023. So that's the last month of school and September 2023 is the first month of the next school year. Are those busy times for parents and teachers and staff? They are but the district - true to form - wants to be able to say they DID have engagement.

I confess to not listening into the entire session but here's what I got from the part I did tune into. 

Staff said at this Work Session:

We have listened and adjusted the plan:
• No school consolidations in 2023-24
• No athletic fees
• No three-tiered transportation solution
• Prioritized Central Office reductions and adjustments, minimizing cuts at the school building level

Yes, but they are changing bell times for about a dozen schools in order to not go to a 3-tiered transportation plan. 

Their presentation states that SPS is receiving "increased legislative funding" to nearly $15M and Special Education "safety net" increase at $5M. 

There was quite an involved discussion about Special Education and "SPS Inclusionary Services Vision & Transition." It was explained that their "Universal Design Implementation" was in process with "early adopter cohort of schools this spring and another cohort in the Fall." 

It looks like SPS will be spending almost $20M more on Sped next year than this year. 

I do want to note the push towards more spending on Sped and here's the question to the Board from staff in this presentation:

What is your vision for our implementation of inclusive practices as we face fiscal challenges?

Sarju, normally silent, called this out, asking why would it be a question. Jones tried to cover his tracks, saying it was a guardrail and they wanted to see if the Board truly wanted to back it up. I think he was throwing it out there to see if any directors would balk at these costs. 

Just like negotiating a teachers contract that they KNEW they didn't have the funds for, I think SPS wants to throw the directors under the bus for insisting that more money go to Sped when the funding is not a huge amount.

To be clear, I absolutely support more spending on Sped. But I'm not sure I believe this district truly does.