Highlights from Board Meeting Presentations on Budget and Enrollment

Kurt Buttleman, Assistant Superintendent of Finance gave the Budget presentation. 

Budget Presentation Highlights:

- Two-thirds of the district budget comes from State dollars. The presentation slides can be found at nearly the bottom of the agenda for the Board meeting. 

- Expenditure by program is up 5% from last year. I found it interesting (and good news) that there are more students enrolling in CTE courses. 

- The largest growth, by percentage, was for travel at 23.04%. Oddly, Buttleman didn't mention it nor did anyone on the Board. You can see this on slide 15. The next closest item by percentage is Supplies/Materials at 17.16%. 

- There was carry-forward money at some schools from a discretionary fund that each principal has. Personally, I think every principal should explain to their community how much money is left and why they didn't spend it for that school year. 

- As we know, the district used all the Rainy Day fund but it is still unknown when it will be paid back which it has to be by Board policy. 

- Buttleman twice noted issues around litigation. One was that there is "more litigation than there has been in the past."

- They did have $78M from various sources but said they only ended up needing to spend $23M. But he cautioned that the district is still spending more than it takes it in and it is only a matter of time before the rest of that $78M - $55M - will run out. 

- He also noted that the district provided more preschool spaces for the City's program and "that added transportation costs." So the district is giving free space for City classrooms AND paying for part of the transportation? Again, how can the district afford to do this for much longer? 

- And hallelujah! By this time next year, the bond used to buy and renovate the John Standford Center for Educational Excellence will be paid off. That thing has been an albatross around the district's neck since 2001 when the district issued $54.5M in two bonds "to consolidate headquarters and school support operations in 2002." They then used $28.6M from the sales of "surplus buildings" to pay off one bond. 

The district had been paying the larger bond off until 2004 when they needed the General Fund dollars for school programs. Some 20 years later, the district still had a $21M debt. They ended up using various Capital levy funds to pay it off which will come in December 2026. 

Questions

President Topp told the Board they could ask questions but keep in mind that they had another presentation and wanted to stop at 9 pm. 

Well again, have more than one Board meeting a month and you could allow directors to ask as much as they want and provide the necessary oversight of important functions in the district. Topp did say the directors could ask Buttleman questions off-line but that doesn't mean the public gets to hear any of that. 

Director Jen LaVallee is interested in getting more detail on the rise in Special Education spending. 

She also asked about vacancies in the district staff and would there be more cost if they are filled? Podesta said that at JSCEE, there is a hiring freeze and it's likely to continue.

Director Song complimented the team for the detailed slides. 

- She asked about "restricted revenues for carryover" that being reimbursements when a teacher or certificated person is out of the classroom. Buttleman said per the SEA contract, those dollars could be used at schools.

- On litigation, there is a line item for what Legal says they believe they might need to settle court cases. He said that some cases are from quite awhile back but are still eligible for litigation. Insurance covers some cases partially. (I'll note that the district's insurance costs have also risen because of the number of court cases again SPS.)

Director Smith had no questions but did echo LaVallee call for more information on Special Education spending. She is also interested in a "deep dive" into capital spending. 

Director Rankin also thanked staff for a good presentation. Buttleman said that the district did talk to the Strategic Plan Taskforce and the SCPTSA for input. He did mention a public survey but not by name so I don't know when that was. 

Director Mizrahi expressed interest on the "income side of things" especially around which "programs match to available funds." Buttleman said the district had spent $100M more on Special Education than what the state and feds gave them. He said they spent $6M more on transportation.

Director Briggs had no questions. 

Topp asked about a preview for January from Podesta. He said that senior leadership would be presenting their budgets. He said it will be a time of transitions. 

Buttleman also ruefully pointed out there was a slight error in calculations in one place and then said they would correct it. It was for $1B. It's unclear to me where the error was.

End of budget presentation.

Enrollment Update Highlights

Faauu Manu and Dr. Marni Campbell presented the information for this part of the meeting.

One great finding for me is that several times, Campbell references what Enrollment heard from parents. Her opening remarks about the order that will be followed now is "assign students, build budgets, assign staff and honor what families and communities are saying throughout the choice process."

This is quite the change from the past when it was hiring and THEN assigning students. 

- They moved the school choice lottery timeline from February to January.  Notification for choice seats will now be February 24th, rather than mid-April. Families get 5 choice options with waitlisting for first choice. They said the goal is for as many families as possible to get their first choice. 

- There are two enrollment fairs, one on January 10th and one the last day for choice, January 31st which is a Saturday. 

- The priorities are sibling and geozone. 

- May 31st is when the waitlist dissolves; it used to be August 31st.

- She said enrollment for Option Schools will extend to March 31st but would be part of the late application process. 

- Both staffers said they want to "work smart" in the face of stagnant or declining enrollment.

- Campbell said they are improving planning for parents/guardians of those coming from preschool and private schools. She said they are engaging with preschool providers via virtual events. 

- They mentioned school tours and that timeline moving, highly capable eligibility, dual language and preschool as items they are working on.

- They heard from families that they want clarity of timelines as well as steps in the process. 

- They preempted one likely question by answering it during the presentation. Namely, if a family enrolls January 1 will that put them ahead of others who enroll later in the month? The answer is NO. 

Questions

Mizrahi thanked Manu and Campbell for their work and "we know you are trying new things and doing your best."

- He said that the 85% building capacity issue comes up a lot and why 85%. Campbell said that's typical for Capital planning and our neighborhood schools. She said "It's a target, not a constraint." 

She went on and said that declines in enrollment impacted neighborhood schools quite a bit and they are trying to staff as much as they can. She said that even so, "some schools feel this and get smaller." They do not want to "let schools die on the vine but that no student should go to a school that isn't thriving." She said that means making decisions about small schools.

Those remarks have that whiff of school closures discussion.

I can appreciate her remarks but the district has not always supported every school during enrollment and so some schools had a harder time attracting students than others. Meaning, it isn't always the fault of the school being small; it's part of how the district treats those schools.

- Families who move to the district after the enrollment timeline is common said Manu. She said after the waitlist is dissolved, if there are any unfilled seats, those incoming students may request one. She did mention hardship appeals but didn't give an example.

Student Director Yoon noted that she had been asked to be on a panel to talk to middle school students about her high school experience. 

Rankin, for the second time that night, decided to have a mini-lecture on what they were doing. She said it was "not clear why this meeting" and "that this could be in a memo. It's not governance but operational."

She claimed that SPS doesn't have a good description "for our community or the Board about what the portfolio of schools" looks like.  I don't know about that - I see many descriptive pages under Enrollment at the SPS website. 

She claimed that those wanting to enroll in an Option Schools have "largely just been determined by vibes." She said as long as she has been a community member, people have said they are going to close them. She said she wanted to "state for the record" that she had never said she wanted to do that. 

She said she worried because "they're a different program but they are treated the same under the WSS as a regular comprehensive neighborhood school."  I think it hardly likely that all the neighborhood schools are exactly the same either. 

She said, "That's not really sustainable until we actually define what is it that this program does differently and how might it need to be staffed differently or treated differently."

She claims that the "bigger picture" is that "we have a lot of students who are not well-served and we are ignoring them." Like where? Like who? 

She said that the "ultimate and alternative education would be Interagency." Well, that's a high school that exists for a totally different reason than an elementary option school. 

She worries about schools "surviving" and "it feels like we're going to have schools compete with each other for students and I am nervous about that." But doesn't that make schools try harder? And hasn't it been that way for a long time, that parents want real choice from the district?

She said that "we are basically allowing the free market of parent choice to determine what schools lose resources." 

She said the waitlist timeline is one the district has had in the past. "But I am not clear on how we're not just exchanging current challenges for previous challenges. Are we actually solving a problem? Are we just trading, trading problems. Um, and so I, while I think this is great and I really, really, really, truly appreciate listening to families and us not sort of harming everybody by spreading everything so thin that kind of nobody has what they want. Like that's not, that's not good either. 

Podesta said he would be happy to talk with the Board about vision and school choice but this presentation was not a policy discussion. 

She said she did not "want to revisit this every year." 

She also added that there are big questions for students with disabilities and that some schools won't take them. She said that every student should have a neighborhood school. 

Those students need a regional school that meets their needs but to ask/tell the district every single neighborhood school must serve all the students in their enrollment zone would be very costly. I absolutely understand the desire from parents of Special Education students for a nearby school but I don't see how it can be done. You want to talk about spreading resources thin, that's exactly how. 

Director Smith said something odd. She seemed to be agreeing with Rankin about a "portfolio of schools" and then said "I will definitely be here in person when I can." 

Is that an option now for a director? To choose which meetings they will attend in person? Sarah Clark heard a lot of unhappiness about her needing to participate virtually and now Smith? Hmmm.

Director Song said she went to the Garfield tour and people asked her if their student had HCC designation in elementary school but the family went private for middle schools but now want to come back in high school, do they still use the HC pathway? Manu said they would need to see what classes had been taken in private school and, if deemed eligible, they can opt into an HC high school. Song said she also needed clarification on testing.

Just as an aside, I recall, decades back, how one Board director put forth the idea of a ding on families who came in and out of the district at different grade levels. He said that "parents should be rewarded for loyalty to SPS" and those who were in SPS for all grade levels should get a bump up on the enrollment list. 

Song asked about afterschool care and Campbell said they hoped that at least one-third of students could be accommodated. 

Song also said that in language immersion schools that they had not been allowed to add kindergarten classes. Fanu said the district "controls enrollment for Option Schools but not for neighborhood schools, making sure they are at 85%."

Director DeVallee asked about "metrics for evaluating this process." 

She also asked about HCC students receiving eligibility notices just a few weeks before enrollment. Campbell said the timeline had been extended for that issue. 

I noticed Director Briggs seemed to be more interested in what was on her phone than listening to the Q&A. She asked no questions.