Board Trustee Evans shares insights into 2014-15 budget creation process

IN THE NEWS: At Superintendent Cindy Marten’s recent press conference, reporters seemed genuinely surprised that she could present a balanced budget with some good news while filling a shortfall first estimated to be $106 million. How is this possible after one board member has repeatedly said that the district is paying the price for years of financial mismanagement? What happened to one claim that the board’s earlier plan was a “ticking time bomb” destined to blow up right around now? Read more from Voice of San Diego

Board approves $1.2 billion operating budget for 2014-15 school year

Completing her first year as superintendent, the San Diego Unified Board of Trustees unanimously approved Cindy Marten's $1.2 billion "students first" spending plan Tuesday night.

"When the Board hired me last year, my task was to reevaluate every dollar to ensure we are focusing expenditures on proven methods to create quality schools in every neighborhood, improve student achievement and close the achievement gap," said Marten.

At the same time, the Board approved the district's LCAP (Local Control and Accountability Plan). It now goes to the San Diego County Office of Education for final approval.  See documents approved»

Despite lingering effects of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, the 2014-15, $1.2 billion operating budget has no layoffs, reduces class sizes in lower grades, redirects staffing to classrooms, implements Common Core and focuses on English-language learners.

"I have always believed that however much money we have, in both good times and bad, we have a responsibility to improve the quality of education while serving as good stewards and promoting student achievement," she said. "I am confident that we will meet the needs of our students and support our educators and employees, while living within our means."

Facts

• No layoffs.
• Reduces K-3 class size from current school year from 27:1 to 25:1.
• Fully funds the implementation of the Common Core curriculum.
• Restores the school calendar to 180 instructional days.
• Stabilizes school staffing including improved front office allocations.
• Fully funds professional development for educators ensuring the best trained staff for our students.
• Transitions "non classroom" support teachers into the classrooms.
• Initiates an early retirement plan for approximately 472 educators, resulting in a net savings of approximately $8 million dollars next year.
• Supports biliteracy programs and implements Superintendent's English Learner Action Plan for Long-term English learners.
• Maintains classroom Gate and Seminar funding.
• Ensures open library hours at every elementary school.
• Maintains current level of services in arts, athletics, school safety, custodial, nursing and counseling.
• Maintains the nationally recognized i21 program, giving students and educators the latest technology.
• Maintains graduation coaches.
• Implements Transitional Kindergarten at all elementary schools.
• Meets contractual salary increases.
• Maintains existing level of health benefits for all employees.
• Phases out real estate sales to fund budget shortfalls.
• Initiates a multi-year real estate strategy to generate new real estate revenues.
• Includes approximately $223 million in facility upgrades and expansions in Prop S/Z funds.

Questions, answers about 2014-15 budget: Prop. 30 funding, strategic staffing, 3-year budget strategy

Proposition 30 turned the corner on education funding, but we still have a long way to go. It will take us three years after Prop 30 to have the state funding come up to the level of our current school operations. We are bridging the gap with property sales and an early retirement incentive. We will direct our limited funds to those budget lines that improve student achievement. Dr. John Lee Evans, Subdistrict A Trustee on the Board of Education, has prepared this information.
 
I understood that Proposition 30 would put a lot of money into our schools. Why do we still have budget problems?

Proposition 30 stopped the hemorrhaging of state budget cuts to education. But the current plan increases funding so slowly that we will take us until the year 2020 to reach the 2007 level of funding.

Doesn’t the Local Control Funding Formula give a lot more money to San Diego?

The LCFF addresses the issue of equity in funding across the state, but it does not address the issue of adequacy of funding. What does this mean? Governor Brown acknowledged that a district like Compton needs more resources than one like Beverly Hills to create a level playing field of opportunity. The formula does give us an additional grant for students from low income families, English Language Learners and foster children to meet all of their needs. So we are receiving more than some other districts, but the problem is that the base grant for all of the schools across San Diego and across the state is woefully inadequate. That’s why California has ranked between 46th and 49th place among states in per pupil funding for the past several years.

So where is this “extra money” that we have been hearing about?

There is no “extra” money. Last July we acknowledged that it would take three years to stabilize the budget to meet our current operations, staffing levels and class size. We adopted a three year budget plan (13-14, 14-15, and 15-16), which was the amount of time it would take for the income to catch up with our current expenses. If we could stabilize over these three years, we could begin to invest new revenue to improve our schools in the fourth year.

What is the shortfall and why are the numbers always changing?

When the preliminary budget was developed the shortfall was $115 million for 2014-2015 and the projected shortfall for 2015-16 was $69 million. The actual money the state gives us can change. It can go up or it can go down. If more revenues come to the state, our income can go up. On the other hand, it can get worse if the state decides to suddenly increase the district’s pension contribution. It can also go up or down depending on enrollment. These numbers are constantly updated, but the state would have to give us an extra amount equal to each of these shortfalls to begin to have extra money. That is not going to happen.

So how are we supposed to survive these three years?

The board adopted a School Stabilization Fund with proceeds from the sale of properties that the district is no longer using. This provides us money for these three years to avoid making harmful cuts. But it is not sustainable to continue selling properties that generate annual income for the district. This was a short term solution to bridge the gap.

How did we survive all of the state budget cuts the past five years?

We had concessions from all staff in terms of unpaid furlough days for a few years. At this point it’s not reasonable to ask our employees to make any more financial sacrifices. We had federal stimulus money paid to us over three years designed to avoid major layoffs. Of course, those funds are no longer offered. We used up reserve funds in every department to keep our schools successfully operating and there are no more reserve funds to tap.

Does the early retirement incentive for teachers help?

Yes. Because the state is not giving us enough money to employ all of our current staff, we save money by not replacing some of the teachers who retired. Of course, this cannot be done in every case, because we may lack the needed number of teachers with a particular subject credential. The board offered the early retirement incentive to avoid mass layoffs, which create instability in our schools for our students, especially in high poverty schools.

We had Vision 2020 forums to discuss how to spend LCFF funds, as required by the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP)? Weren’t we talking about how to spend all of the “new” money?

The LCAP is a method for the district to work with the community to set priorities for improving student achievement across the district and we must also show how the supplemental and concentration grants will be used to help the students with the highest needs. The district must show how our budget aligns with our goals for student achievement across the district with the limited funds that we receive. The Superintendent must creatively work with her staff to improve educational outcomes while living within our means. Just as a family must live within its budget, so too must the district. The only difference is that we cannot get a credit card for our operating budget that would allow us to borrow money this year and pay it back in future years. In spite of the budget limitations we will continue to improve student achievement, as we have successfully done for the past five years.

What has the board asked the Superintendent to do in developing our budget?

1. Complete a budget for all three years of the original plan that is balanced and demonstrates that there will be no shortfall by the following year.
   
2. Develop a budget that is student-centric, a budget that places the highest priority on student needs in the classroom.
   
3. Following the official adoption of the 2014-15 budget enter into a joint advocacy plan with the Board of Education calling for our state to address the inadequacy of public education funding in California, so that we can again become a national leader.
   

Board Member Evans discusses school funding in extended interview

IN THE NEWS: New Local Control Funding Formula, Local Control and Accountability Plan discussed by Dr. John Lee Evans, Sub-District A Board of Education representative. Watch video from NBC 7»

School funding for 2014-15 and beyond with Board Member Evans

IN THE NEWS: What parents, community members and taxpayers need to know about changes in California school funding. Watch video from Fox 5 San Diego»

Stakeholder engagement guides development of district's draft Local Control and Accountability Plan

Since January, San Diego Unified has been actively engaged in the development of our three-year Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP). The LCAP is a new requirement by the state of California, in which district’s identify annual goals, specific actions, and measure progress for student subgroups across eight performance indicators. This document implements the new Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), which reduced the number of requirements tied to state funding and put more control in the hands of local school boards. LCAPs must be adopted by districts by July 1, 2014.

San Diego Unified has held more than two-dozen public meetings to gather input to create the LCAP. Parents, students, staff, community members and other stakeholders have had the opportunity to give feedback at the Vision2020 Forums and Cluster LCAP Workshops as well as through surveys conducted by the District Advisory Committee on Compensatory Education (DAC), School Site Councils, and the San Diego Unified Council of PTAs.

This robust stakeholder engagement has helped inform the process for developing the draft LCAP. The meetings and surveys have provided a great deal of input and helped to refine what each of our communities has set as priorities. The development of the plan has provided the opportunity for the district and stakeholders to work together to focus on what is best for students. This teamwork is vital to the implementation of our Vision 2020 long-term plan.

The draft of the district’s LCAP will begin its required 30-day public review period on Thursday, May 1. For more information, visit at www.sandi.net/lcap .

Message from Supt. Marten about Vision 2020, upcoming important decisions

Dear San Diego Unified Community:

In recent months, students, parents,employees, and community members have provided valuable input and feedback in our mission to accomplish our Vision 2020. We have come together to discuss what we believe is working, what we feel should be improved and how we will work together to accomplish the implementation of our vision, all with the common goal of creating quality schools in every neighborhood. We have heard from hundreds of you, our stakeholders, and I personally am appreciative, honored and energized by your commitment to our students and our schools that this input demonstrates.

The feedback collected is now being used to shape the draft of our Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP), our 2014-15 and beyond budget solutions, our legislative priorities and our collective bargaining proposals with employee groups. Several of those proposals will be considered by the Board next week.

The district’s focus in the development of the initial collective bargaining proposals is to continue to implement our Vision 2020, support student learning and propel our path towards quality schools in every neighborhood.

At the Board meeting on April 29, you will have the opportunity to provide further input into the district's initial collective bargaining proposals. (To read the proposals, check the April 29 Agenda, which will be posted at 5 p.m. Friday, April 25.) These negotiations provide an opportunity for the district and the employee organizations to come together in an environment of mutual respect, collegiality, and a focus towards developing a world-class school system for all of our students. We look forward to substantive discussions at the bargaining table with our employee organizations, who we value as important partners in our shared efforts to serve all students.

Sincerely,

Cindy Marten
Superintendent
Work Hard. Be Kind. Dream Big! No Excuses.

2014-15 budget solutions include teachers’ early retirement incentive

San Diego Unified has agreed to a Supplemental Early Retirement Program (SERP) for teachers and other members of the San Diego Education Association bargaining unit as a budget solution for the 2014-15 fiscal year.

On March 11, the Board of Education approved the resolution to initiate the SERP. Final Board approval will take place at their May 13 meeting. The program is an incentive for eligible employees to retire from the district at the end of this school year.

If fully subscribed, it will save the district $8.3 million in 2014-15, helping to close the $115.6 million projected shortfall. Read more from UT San Diego»

Common Core challenges students, budget solutions proposed, Supt. Marten says

IN THE NEWS: In television interview with NBC 7, Superintendent discusses challenging students with Common Core State Curriculum, budget proposals and successes of "Dream Big" meetings. Watch video from NBC 7»

2013-14 school calendars add another day for instruction

Supt. Marten and the Board of Education are pleased to announce that the district has partnered with the San Diego Education Association (SDEA) to restore an instructional day to the 2013-14 school year, bringing the total number of instructional days to 179. This restoration assures that our students receive maximum educational impact and have increased opportunity for success.

Additionally, another instructional day has been added to the 2014-15 school calendars, bringing the total number of instructional days to 180. This number represents that instructional days will be fully restored to the pre-budget crisis level, a priority of the superintendent, board members, staff and parents.

Below is the restoration plan for the 2013-14 school year.

Traditional Schools: June 13, 2014, is now an instructional day and the last day of school for students.

Year Round Schools: June 23, 2014, will become an instructional day. It was previously a non-school day.The last day of school for Year Round sites remains Monday, July 21, 2014.

Please Note: Schools have the option to change their graduation/promotion to Friday, June13. If sites have already planned their promotion/graduation on Thursday, June 12, they may keep that date as planned. Students should return for a final instructional day on Friday, June 13. Parents should check with their principal on the status for their child’s school.

Working Together for Quality Neighborhood Schools

The Board of Education and Superintendent Cindy Marten invite all stakeholders to a series of neighborhood meetings to Dream Big together for the future of our schools.  We are committed to having clear, long-term priorities based on our Vision 2020.  We believe that when our priorities are inspired and informed by our parents, students, and teachers, we will have important information for long-range planning with students at the center.  These forums will yield a clear and collective sense of our District-wide long-term priorities.

The "Vision 2020 Forums: What Kinds of Schools Do We Want" series offer parents, staff, students, and community members an opportunity to give input to the superintendent and the board members on priorities for our students and schools.

Meeting schedule

• Friday, Feb. 7, 5-7 p.m., Sub-District D, Memorial Preparatory for Scholars and Athletes, 2850 Logan Ave. (92113)
• Tuesday, Feb. 18, 5:30-7:30 p.m., Sub-District B, Patrick Henry High School, 6702 Wandermere Dr. (92120)
• Monday, Feb. 24, 7-9 p.m., Sub-District C, Mission Bay High School, 2475 Grand Ave. (92109).
•  Monday, Mar. 3, 7-9 p.m., Sub-District A, Mira Mesa High School, 10510 Reagan Rd. (92126).
• Event in Sub-District E is yet to be scheduled.

For more information, follow the district's daily news feed and website front page calendar and the Vision 2020 Forums website, as well as the district Twitter and Facebook pages.

Please RSVP.



For further information or questions, email vision2020forums@sandi.net.

Budget process for 2014-15 "puts students and schools first"

Planning for the 2014-15 school year "reflects our collective vision" and is being shaped by a multi-disciplinary team, Superintendent Cindy Marten told the Board of Education when she presented her proposed 2014-15 budget on Jan. 21. The team approached the process, Marten explained, by reviewing the district’s vision for equity and excellence in all schools and classrooms rather than asking how much money is available and how much needs to be cut. The proposed budget puts the priorities squarely on students with improvements and enhancements to educational program, including:

• Lowering class sizes for grades K-3;
• Full restoration of the instructional school year to 180 days;
• Improving school allocations that will make sure all schools are fully staffed and ready for students on the first day of school;
• Closing the achievement gap by the end of first grade;
• Investing in essential programs like Gifted and Talented Education (GATE), International Baccalaureate (IB), biliteracy programs, specialty arts programs, early literacy intervention and transitional kindergarten.

The Board of Education unanimously approved the superintendent's proposal.

"Our balanced budget proposal for 2014-15 puts students first with smaller class sizes, opening libraries, and supporting GATE, visual and performing arts, IB programs, graduation coaches and professional learning communities," said Board President Kevin Beiser. "The focus on reducing class size next year is great news for kids."

While budget challenges remain, the fiscal outlook is changing. San Diego Unified has a multi-year approach towards closing the deficit due to the scale of the recession of the past six years. San Diego Unified will work to implement the new budget model, the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) with equity as a central tenet. Stakeholders will have more opportunity to give input at five forums the district will hold in February and March. The first forum is scheduled for Friday, Feb. 7, from 5 to 7 p.m., at Memorial Preparatory Middle School, 2850 Logan Ave. (92113).

Watch the video of the superintendent's board presentation.

New laws affect education in 2014

Here's a rundown on new laws that affect education in California.

SB 73 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Chapter 29) Energy: Proposition 39 Implementation. Effective immediately.

This is the budget vehicle for the allocation of Proposition 39 energy efficiency funds for local educational agencies and community college districts. Stipulates the minimum required information the recipients of the funds must submit in order to receive the funds. Makes LEAs subject to front-end verification and back-end public tracking and reporting.

AB 86 (Committee on Budget, Chapter 48) Education Finance: Education Omnibus Trailer Bill. Effective immediately.

Implements various statutory changes needed to implement the 2013-14 Budget package for the states public schools and community colleges, including reduces outstanding K-14 inter-year payment deferrals by $4.3 billion in 2012-13 and 2013-14; allocates $1.25 billion in one-time Proposition 98 funding in 2013-14 to assist K-12 schools in implementing the new Common Core standards; allocates $250 million on a one-time basis in 2013-14 to establish the California Career Pathways Trust for competitive grants to support K-14 education career pathways programs; and makes various changes to the special education funding formula. Extends provisions of existing law another two years to allow school districts to use proceeds from selling surplus properties for one-time operating expenses, and extends provisions of existing law another three years that requires school districts to first offer surplus instructional property for lease or sale to charter schools prior to any other entity. Contains other related provisions and laws.

SB 91/AB 97 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Chapter 49) School Finance and the Local Control Funding Formula. Effective immediately.

Replaces the old revenue limit and categorical funding structure with LCFF beginning in the 2013-14 fiscal year. LCFF is comprised of a base grant, supplemental grant and concentration grant. Provides an additional 2.6% base grant augmentation to be used on students enrolled in grades 9 to 12 for any purposes or programs that support a school district or charter school in achieving its goals for college and career readiness, and a 10.4% base grant augmentation for K-3 grade class size reduction. Legislation describes all components of LCFF and role of the state in supporting and intervening.

SB 97 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Chapter 357) School Finance: Local Control Funding Formula Education Budget Clean-Up Bill. Effective immediately.

Makes various technical and clarifying changes to the education budget trailer bills related to the new LCFF adopted as part of the 2013-14 Budget package. It clarifies that a budget cannot be approved for a school district or county office of education before a LCAP is adopted and clarifies terms under which a budget review committee shall be formed, requires school districts to ensure that all written notifications related to the LCAP are available to parents in languages other than English, and adds local bargaining units to the groups that school districts must consult in the development of the LCAP.

AB 110 (Blumenfield, Chapter 20) Budget Act of 2013. Effective immediately.

Contains the 2013-14 Budget Act as reported out by the 2013 Conference Committee on the Budget. The 2013-14 Budget Act authorizes General Fund expenditures of $96.3 billion, and assumes nearly $98 billion in total General Fund resources and a $1.1 billion reserve.

ASSESSMENTS, CURRICULUM AND STANDARDS

SB 247 (Liu, Chapter 479) Pupil Assessment: Grade 2 Diagnostic Assessments

Requires the California Department of Education, by November 1, 2014, to identify and make available to school districts information regarding existing assessments in language arts and mathematics aligned to the adopted Common Core academic content standards for pupils in grade 2 for diagnostic use by classroom teachers. The savings realized from the elimination of the grade 2 testing would be used by school districts for the administration of diagnostic assessments for identifying students' knowledge or skills, but the assessments would not be valid measures for purposes of accountability.

SB 490 (Jackson, Chapter 482) Early Assessment Program: Common Core Academic Content Standards

Existing law recognizes the establishment of the Early Assessment Program (EAP) at the California State University to enable pupils to learn about their readiness for college-level English and mathematics before their senior year of high school. This bill would instead encourage those courses to be sequenced to the common core academic content standards for language arts and mathematics.

AB 484 (Bonilla, Chapter 489) Pupil Assessments: Measurement of Academic Performance and Progress

Suspends nearly all STAR tests and provides districts the option to participate in one portion of the field/practice test of the new Smarter Balanced computer-adaptive assessments. The only STAR tests that will be administered in Spring 2014 are the science tests at grades 5, 8 and 10, CAPA at grades 2-11, and ELA and mathematics tests at grade 11 to support the voluntary participation in the Early Assessment Program. AB 484 has no impact on CAHSEE, CELDT, or the Physical Fitness Test. In addition, the calculation of API scores would be suspended for two years. It is not yet completely clear how these changes will affect federal accountability (AYP).

AB 123 (Bonta, Chapter 476) Instruction: Social Sciences: Farm Labor Movement

Requires that the State Board of Education ensure that the state curriculum and framework, where appropriate, include instruction on the role of immigrants, including Filipino Americans, on the farm labor movement in CA. Provides that it shall not be implemented unless funds are appropriated by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act.

AB 137 (Buchanan, Chapter 225) Pupil Instruction: Civics

Requires the Instructional Quality Commission, when revising the history-social science framework, to ensure that these course requirements are included in all history and social science course and grade levels, as appropriate.

AB 166 (Hernandez, Chapter 166) Pupil Instruction: Financial Literacy

Requires the State Board of Education to integrate financial literacy, including, but not limited to, budgeting and managing credit, student loans, consumer debt, and identity theft security with specified academic areas.

AB 424 (Donnelly, Chapter 484) Pupil Instruction: Social Sciences: State and Federal Constitutions

Requires the Instructional Quality Commission, when revising the history/social science framework, to do so based on the subject matter of the course in addition to appropriateness, to consider incorporating the Magna Carta, the Articles of Confederation, and the California Constitution, and to encourage instruction that promotes an understanding of the governments of California and the United States.

SB 330 (Padilla, Chapter 481) Instruction: Health Framework: Mental Health Instruction

Incorporates, upon the next revision, instruction on mental health into the Health Curriculum Framework. Requires the Instructional Quality Commission to consider developing, and recommending for adoption by the State Board, a distinct category on mental health instruction to educate pupils about all aspects of mental health.

SB 552 (Calderon, Chapter 497) Pupil Instruction: Social Sciences: Violence Awareness

Allows all required areas of study, as deemed appropriate by the governing board, to include grade-level appropriate instruction on violence awareness and prevention, including personal testimony in the form of oral or video histories.

AB 700 (Gomez, Chapter 483) Social Sciences: Voter Education

Requires the Instructional Quality Commission, when the history-social science framework is revised, to ensure that voter education information is included in the American government and civics curriculum at the high school level, including, but not limited to, information on the importance of registering to vote in local, state, and federal elections, and where and how to access the voter information pamphlet and other materials to become an informed voter.

AB 547 (Salas, Chapter 703) 21st Century High School After School Safety and Enrichment for Teens Program

Expands the academic assistance component of the 21st Century High School After School Safety and Enrichment for Teens (ASSETs) program to include career exploration and also authorizes the California Department of Education to consider other criteria that CDE may identify as critical for a high-quality program when awarding grants.

INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

AB 133 (Hagman, Chapter 157) Instructional Materials: Digital Format

Requires publishers and manufacturers submitting printed instructional materials to the state board or local governing board for adoption, or on after January 1, 2014, to ensure that the printed instructional material is also available in an equivalent digital format during the entire term of the adoption.

SB 185 (Walters, Chapter 174) Instructional Materials: Digital Format

Authorizes school districts and county offices of education to negotiate the price of standards-aligned instructional materials and supplemental materials in a printed or digital format if the negotiated price complies with certain requirements. Requires instructional materials to be offered by a publisher or manufacturer as unbundled elements. Authorizes a school district to use instructional materials in digital format that were purchased by the school district to create a districtwide online digital database for classroom use.

SB 300 (Hancock, Chapter 480) Instructional Materials: Revised Curriculum Framework: Science and English Language Arts

Requires the State Board of Education to consider the adoption of a revised curriculum framework and evaluation criteria for instructional materials in science on or before January 31, 2016, and requires the revised curriculum framework to be based on specified science content standards and to include English language development strategies, as specified, and strategies to address the needs of pupils with disabilities. Extends the deadline for the State Board to adopt revised curriculum frameworks and evaluation criteria for English language arts until July 30, 2014.

ENGLISH LEARNERS

SB 201 (Liu, Chapter 478) Instructional Materials: Academic Content Standards: English Learners

Current law requires the California Department of Education, with the approval of the State Board of Education, to establish procedures for conducting the assessment and for the reclassification of a pupil from English learner to English proficient. Current law requires a school district to annually conduct the assessment during a period that commences on the day upon which 55% of the instructional year is completed through July 1 of that calendar year. This bill applies the above requirements to initial and summative assessments. Authorizes the State Board of Education to adopt, by November 30, 2015, K-8 instructional materials that are aligned to the Common Core English Language Arts Standards and the Common Core-aligned English Language Development Standards.

AB 899 (Weber, Chapter 709) Academic Content Standards: English Language Development Standards

Requires that the standards for English language development for pupils whose primary language is a language other than English be comparable in rigor and specificity to the academic content standards to which they are aligned, including specified standards for English language arts and mathematics and specified science content standards. Requires the Superintendent, on or before January 1, 2015, to recommend modifications to the English language development standards to align with the state board-approved academic content standards for math and science.

CHARTER SCHOOLS

SB 379 (Hancock, Chapter 372) School Attendance: Early/Middle College High Schools

For the purposes of calculating average daily attendance apportionment at an early college or middle college high school operated by a charter school, this bill will require that at least 80% of the instructional time be at the school site. Requires that the charter school require the attendance of the pupil in grades 11 and 12 for a minimum of 50% of the required instructional time. These requirements will be added to annual audits.

AB 588 (Fox, Chapter 423) School Athletics: Concussions

Current law requires, on a yearly basis, a concussion and head injury information sheet to be signed and returned by the athlete and athlete's parent or guardian before the athlete's initiating practice or competition. This bill would apply these provisions to athletes attending charter schools and private schools.

SCHOOL FACILITIES

AB 182 (Buchanan, Chapter 477) – School Districts and Community College Bonds

Limits Capital Appreciation Bonds (CABs) to 25 years and establishes other requirements for CABs: maximum interest of 8 percent; limits debt device to principal ratio of 4 to 1; bonds longer than 10 years must be allowed to be refinanced; and additional public disclosures will be required in Board agendas. Current Interest Bonds will be allowed for up to 40 years as long as the governing Board makes a finding that the useful life of the facility will be equal or exceeds the maturity date of the CIBs between 30 and 40 years.

SB 581 (Wyland, Chapter 91) School Bonds: Bond Accountability

Requires the Proposition 39 annual, independent financial and performance audits to be submitted to the citizens’ oversight committee at the same time they are submitted to the school district or community college district. Requires the governing board of the district to provide the citizens’ oversight committee with responses to any and all findings, recommendations, and concerns addressed in the annual, independent financial and performance audits within three months of receiving the audits.

SB 584 (Wyland, Chapter 167) School Facilities: Financial and Performance Audits

Requires the Controller, by January 1, 2015, and in consultation with the State Allocation Board, the Department of Finance, and Department of Education, to submit content to the Education Audits Appeal Panel to be included in the audit guide, Standards and Procedures for Audits of California K-12 LEAs beginning in the 2015-16 fiscal year, that is related to financial and performance audits required for specified school facility projects.

AB 308 (Hagman, Chapter 496) Sale or Lease of Surplus Real Property: Return of State School Facilities Funding Program Funds
Authorizes the State Allocation Board to establish a program to require a school district that sells or leases real property that was purchased with or modernized with, or on which improvements were constructed that were funded with any moneys from a state school facilities funding program, to return to SAB the moneys the district received from the state school facilities funding program for the purchase, modernization, or construction.
AB 56 (Weber, Chapter 475) School Facilities: Carbon Monoxide Devices

Requires, by July 1, 2015, the State Fire Marshal to propose for adoption by the California Building Standards Commission, appropriate standards for the installation of carbon monoxide devices in public and private school buildings.

AB 120 (Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials, Chapter 632) Underground storage tanks: school districts

Requires the State Water Resources Control Board to waive the underground storage tank permit requirement for claims reimbursed from the School District Account in the Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund if the Superintendent of the school district receiving the reimbursement certifies to the Board that petroleum was not delivered on or after January 1, 2003.

EMPLOYEES

AB 10 (Alejo, Chapter 351) Minimum Wage: Annual Adjustment

Increases the minimum wage, on and after July 1, 2014, to not less than $9.00 per hour. Increases the minimum wage, on January 1, 2016, to not less than $10 per hour.

AB 226 (Atkins, Chapter 73) Classified Employees: School Police Workweek

Authorizes the governing board of a school district or county superintendent of schools to establish a “3/12” workweek schedule (12-hour-per-day, 80-hour-per-2-weeks) for school police departments, subject to a collective bargaining agreement. Requires the payment of overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of the required workday.

SB 590 (De Leon, Chapter 723) Professional Development for Classified Employees

Requires a LEA, if it expends funds for professional development, to consider the needs of its classified school employees to update their skills and to learn best practices in various optional areas, including pupil learning and achievement, campus safety, and special education.

SB 5 (Padilla, Chapter 171) Teacher Credentialing

Authorizes inclusion of up to 2 years (currently 1 year) of professional preparation within credentialing programs. Allows for BA degrees in education for credential candidates.

SB 368 (Pavley, Chapter 717) Teachers: Added Authorization in Special Education

Current law authorizes the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to grant an added or supplementary authorization to a credentialholder who has met the requirements and standards of the Commission for the added or supplementary authorization. This bill authorizes program sponsors to offer comparability and equivalency for a special education credentialholder seeking to add a special education authorization to his or her special education credential in accordance with specified guidelines and criteria.

AB 449 (Muratsuchi, Chapter 232) Certificated School Employees: School Superintendent Reports to Commission on Teacher Credentialing

Requires the Superintendent of a school district or county office of education, or the administrator of a charter school, to report to the Commission on Teacher Credentialing any change in the employment status of a credentialholder working in a position requiring a credential not later than 30 days after the credentialholder's employment status changes in one of specified ways as a result of an allegation of misconduct or while an allegation of misconduct is pending. Makes the Superintendent’s failure to make the report of unprofessional conduct a misdemeanor.

SB 546 (Wright, Chapter 90) Education Employment: Termination: Hearing

Renames several forms required by school districts to use during certificated layoff proceedings. Changes the names of the following documents: (1) "Notice of Defense" to "Notice of Participation in Reduction in Force Hearing" (2) "Accusation" to "District Statement of Reduction in Force."

AB 267 (Chau, Chapter 123) Lawyer Referral Service-Client Evidentiary Privileges

Provides that a person who consults a lawyer referral service for the purpose of retaining a lawyer or securing legal advice has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from disclosing, a confidential communication between the client and the lawyer referral service if the privilege is claimed by a specified person or entity. Establishes the circumstances in which the privilege does not apply.

AB 1381 (Committee on Public Employees, Retirement and Social Security, Chapter 559) State Teacher’s Retirement Law: Pension Reform

Makes various changes in the Teachers’ Retirement Law to conform with the provisions of PEPRA. Revises the definition of creditable compensation and salary, and specifies exclusions from the definition of creditable compensation and salary for purposes of the Defined Benefit Program and the Cash Balance Benefit Program. Defines a member subject to PEPRA and excepts from that definition a member who is also a member in certain other retirement systems prior to January 1, 2013. Revises provisions prescribing the amounts that members are required to contribute to the retirement fund for the Defined Benefit Program, and that participants in the Cash Balance Benefit Program contribute to reflect the requirements of PEPRA. Makes other changes.

SB 13 (Beall, Chapter 528) Public Employees’ Retirement Benefits

This bill serves to "clean up" the California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2012 (PEPRA) (AB 340, Chapter 296). Excepts from PEPRA certain multiemployer plans authorized under, and regulated by, specified federal law. Excepts from PEPRA public employees whose collective bargaining rights are subject to specified provisions of federal law until a specified federal district court decision on certification by the United States Secretary of Labor or until January 1, 2015, whichever is sooner. Provides that if a federal district court upholds the determination of the United States Secretary of Labor, that application of PEPRA to those public employees precludes certification, those employees are excepted from PEPRA. Clarifies the application of PEPRA to employees who were employed prior to January 1, 2013, who have service credit in a different retirement system or who change positions for the same employer without a break in service, as specified. Authorizes a public retirement system to adopt regulations and resolutions in order to modify its retirement plan or plans to conform with PEPRA.

MISCELLANEOUS

AB 643 (Stone, Chapter 80) Schools: Pupil Records: Confidentiality

Makes various changes to state provisions to conform to federal law. It creates an exemption to the general rule that a school district shall not permit access to pupil records without written parental consent or under judicial order. Allows caseworkers or a representative of a state or local child welfare agency, or tribal organization to access transcripts and report cards to avoid problems of inappropriate course placement and lost credits when a foster youth changes schools.

AB 1068 (Bloom, Chapter 713) Pupil Records: Homeless Youth

Prohibits the release of directory information for homeless students, and requires schools to permit access to pupil records to a pupil who is at least 14 years old, homeless and unaccompanied, and to an individual who has completed and signed a Caregiver’s Authorization Affidavit for purposes of enrolling a minor in school.

AB 216 (Stone, Chapter 324) High School Graduation Requirements: Foster Care Pupils

Requires a school district to exempt a pupil in foster care who transfers between schools any time after the completion of the pupils 2nd year of high school from all coursework and other requirements adopted by the governing board of the school district that are in addition to the statewide coursework requirements, unless the school district makes a finding that the pupil is reasonably able to complete the requirements in time to graduate from high school by the end of the pupil’s 4th year of high school.

SB 177 (Liu, SB 491) Homeless Youth Education Success Act

Among other things, expands current law which requires a foster child who changes residences, pursuant to a court order or decision of a child welfare worker, to be immediately deemed to have met all residency requirements for participation in interscholastic sports or other extracurricular activities to students who are homeless and meet that definition under federal law.

AB 1266 (Ammiano, Chapter 85) Sex-Segregated School Programs and Activities

Requires that students be permitted to participate in sex-segregated school programs and activities, including athletic teams and competitions, and use facilities consistent with his or her gender identity, irrespective of the gender listed on the pupil's records.

AB 570 (Jones-Sawyer, Chapter 365) Continuation Schools: Policies and Procedures for Voluntary Transfer

Requires school districts that choose to voluntarily enroll high school pupils in a continuation school to establish and adopt policies and procedures regarding the voluntary transfer of students including the identification, placement and intake procedures for these students. Requires approval for the voluntary transfer to be based on a finding that the placement will promote the educational interests of the pupil. Students have the right to return to their previous school if the transfer does not meet the pupil’s educational needs.

SCA 3 (Leno, Chapter 123) Public Information: Public Request Acts on 2014 Ballot

This measure will appear on the 2013 State Ballot to require each local agency to comply with the California Public Request Act and the Brown Act, or amending any successor act which contains findings demonstrating that the statutory enactment furthers the purposes of the people’s right of access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business. If passed by the voters, this initiative would no longer require the state to reimburse local agencies, including school districts, from complying with PRA requests.

School Safety

AB 256 (Garcia-D, Chapter 700) Grounds for Suspension and Expulsion

Authorizes schools to suspend or recommend for expulsion a pupil for bullying by electronic means that originated off of school grounds. Modifies the definition of “electronic act,” related to the act of bullying, as the creation and transmission originated on or off the schoolsite, by means of an electronic device, including a telephone, wireless telephone, or other wireless communication device, computer, or pager.

AB 514 (Bonta, Chapter 702) The Safe Schools for Safe Learning Act of 2013

Would require the Superintendent to post on the California Department of Education's Internet Web site a list of statewide resources for youth who have been affected by gangs, gun violence, and psychological trauma at home, at school, and the community.

AB 549 (Jones-Sawyer, Chapter 422) Comprehensive School Safety Plans: Mental Health Professionals and Police Role on Campus Guidelines

Encourages schools to include in school safety plans, when plans are reviewed and updated, clear guidelines for the roles and responsibilities of mental health professionals, community intervention professionals, school counselors, school resource officers, and police officers on the school campus, if the school district uses these people. Specifies the guidelines may include primary strategies to create and maintain a positive school climate, promote school safety, and increase pupil achievement, and prioritize mental health and intervention services, restorative and transformative justice programs, and positive behavior interventions and support.

SB 326 (Beall, Chapter 279) Sex Offenders

Current law makes it a misdemeanor for any person who is required to register as a sex offender to come into any school building or any school ground without lawful business and written permission from the chief administrative official of the school. This bill requires that the written permission indicate the date or date range and time for which permission is granted. Authorizes the chief administrative official of the school to grant a registered sex offender who is not a family member of a pupil who attends that school, permission to come into a school building or the school grounds to volunteer at the school, provided that the chief administrative official notifies the parent or guardian of each child attending the school of the permission at least 14 days prior to the first date for which permission has been granted.

School Lunch Program

AB 422 (Nazarian, Chapter 440) School Lunch Program: Health Care Notice

Current law authorizes the sharing of the school lunch program application with the county agency administering the Medi-Cal program for use in making an accelerated Medi-Cal eligibility determination for pupils eligible for free meals. Current law provides for the sending of a Healthy Families Program application to pupils determined to be ineligible for Medi-Cal coverage. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2014, require the notices to include prescribed advisements about the availability of free or reduced-cost comprehensive health care coverage through Medi-Cal or the California Health Benefit Exchange.

AB 626 (Skinner, Chapter 706) School Nutrition

Requires an entity that applies to operate a program to agree that meals made available by the program conform to specified federal nutrition standards. Includes as an authorized expenditure of the cafeteria fund expenditures for the lease or purchase of additional equipment for the kitchen or central food processing plant. Authorizes governing boards to make expenditures from the cafeteria fund for the purchase and installation of additional preparation, cooking, or service equipment for a kitchen or central food processing plant, including necessary alterations as specified, and for the lease or purchase of vehicles used solely in connection with the kitchen or central food processing plant. Repeals the authority of the governing board to allow as an expenditure from that fund a share of money generated from the joint sale of items between the cafeteria and an associated student body store and to create one or more cafeteria revolving accounts. Makes other changes.

Find out about California's new way of funding schools at upcoming meetings

Leadership from the San Diego Unified School District will be visiting Cluster Committee and other parent meetings over the next several months to discuss California's new school budget plan, called the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF).

LCFF shifts the focus from funding dozens of state-mandated programs to funding based on local district control and student needs,” said Superintendent Cindy Marten, “with extra dollars allotted to low-income children, foster youth and English learners.”

According to the state Department of Education, each district creates a three-year plan not only for funding but for accountability; under the old budget system, district plans covered only funding. The California Department of Education is expected to issue guidelines in January for creation of the Local Control Accountability Plan, which ties student achievement to program funding.

“The funding formula and the local accountability plan in many ways bring the rest of the state into compliance with our district's Vision 2020,” said Dr. John Lee Evans, Board of Education President. “As we have outlined in the Vision 2020, we're making staff more accountable to ensure annual improvement in the education of our students.”

According to Vision 2020:

• Staff will develop both quantitative and qualitative measures to measure the broad range of achievement.
• Such measures will incorporate an individual growth model.
• Such measures will facilitate the improvement of instruction.
• Such measures will be readily available and understandable by students, parents and community members.
• Student achievement will also include measures of personal development and citizenship development.

The community meetings will give San Diego Unified residents the opportunity to hear about the new funding formula, its impact on the district budget and the expectations for the budget development process. If you want to learn more about the Local Control Funding Formula, visit the website at www.sandi.net/lcff or email lcff@sandi.net.

Find Out More

• Schedule of upcoming meetings on the new funding formula and the Local Control Accountability Plan»
• California Department of Education information on Local Control Funding Formula»
• Find out about your local cluster»

School districts gain flexibility in governor’s budget proposal

Big changes may be afoot for school districts if Gov. Jerry Brown’s proposed 2013-14 budget comes to fruition. Read more: San Diego Community News Group - School districts gain flexibility in governor’s budget proposal

Latest state budget proposal shows increase in school funds

Adjustments to Gov. Jerry Brown's 2013-14 state budget proposal, commonly known as the "May Revise," may mean more funds for San Diego Unified next year.

Gov. Brown’s May revision to his proposals for the 2013-14 State Budget were released on Tuesday, May 14. It reflects changes in the national and state economic outlook and the corresponding effects on revenues generated from the passage of Proposition 30 and the state’s obligation to schools.

“We appreciate the Governor’s continued commitment to supporting our neediest students by maintaining his plan for the Local Control Funding Formula in his May budget proposal," said Superintendent Bill Kowba. "The new investment to support the transition to the Common Core with one time funding will also be very helpful to our district.

"Since ongoing funding for 2013-14 will change only slightly, San Diego Unified will need to stay the course on our budget strategy to balance our structural deficit next year with property sales and attrition based staff reductions. In future years as additional funding materializes, the district can begin to restore education programs that have been lost over the last five years of education budget cuts.”

The Governor’s proposed Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) funding model fixes the state's outdated and broken school finance system with a formula that allow schools maximum flexibility in allocating resources to meet local needs. It will be phased in over several years as funding increases for K‑12 education from Prop. 30 and will include accountability measures for academic and fiscal outcomes.

According to a preliminary analysis by San Diego Unified staff, the May revision proposal includes:

• An increase, over the original January proposal, in the repayment to district of previous year "deferrals," funds owed to school districts but held back by the state.
• A one-time expenditure statewide of $1 billion to help schools implement Common Core Standards, California's conversion of curriculum to a new national standard. Possibly an additional $18 million for San Diego Unified.
• Funds to make up for federal cuts in special education funding.
• The fundamental components of the Local Control Funding Formula proposal remain essentially unchanged from January, with an emphasis on providing additional resources to school districts with the highest concentrations of English learners, low-income students, and foster youth, and a commitment to ensuring there is local flexibility and local accountability.

The state Legislature faces a June 15 constitutional deadline for adopting the state budget for 2013-14. For more information on the Governor's plan, visit his website.

Superintendent testifies before state legislature on budget issues

Superintendent Bill Kowba testified before the California Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee 1: Education on April 18. Here are his remarks on the topic of school district perspectives on local control funding formula.

Good morning Chairman Block, Senator Wyland, Senator Wright and Senator Leno:

Bill Kowba
Read coverage
from UT San Diego»

I am Bill Kowba, Superintendent of the San Diego Unified School District. Thank you for the opportunity to address you today to share my perspective on Governor Brown’s proposed Local Control Funding Formula and its impact on school districts.

Let me begin by giving the members of the committee an overview of San Diego Unified to provide context for the diverse student population we serve. As the second largest school district in the state, we serve more than 130,000 students in pre-school through 12th grade. Approximately 65 percent of our students are free and reduced lunch recipients and 27 percent are English learners. In an urban setting as large and diverse as ours, with 223 schools, enhancing a district’s ability to design programs that best meet the needs of our students is of high importance. It is of equal significance that students with the greatest needs are provided adequate and even additional resources required to succeed in the classroom. These are two goals the Governor’s LCFF proposal is trying to achieve, and two of the reasons why San Diego Unified fully supports the proposal.

Support for LCFF: Focus on Local Decision Making, Flexibility and Accountability

I commend Governor Brown for his determined advocacy for public K-12 education and for his visionary leadership in restructuring an archaic education finance system.

I believe Governor Brown’s proposed new formula will address many problems inherent in the state’s existing K-12 funding structure. This major overhaul in education finance is a significant improvement relative to the current system. The existing distribution of state funds is convoluted and based on dozens of categorical programs with many restrictions and reporting requirements to the state.

With equity and flexibility as two of the core principles in the Governor’s proposal, the San Diego Unified Board of Education unanimously passed a resolution on April 9, explicitly stating the district’s support for the LCFF proposal with its focus on local decision making, local accountability and extended flexibility. We support the goal of developing a new state school finance system that is simple and transparent, one that focuses on local control and results in increased community engagement.

We enthusiastically back the Governor’s commitment to ensuring our education system is equitable and fair. Regardless of a school district’s student population or its geographical location in the state, school districts with the highest number and largest concentration of low-income and English learners deserve supplemental resources to help our neediest young people meet state standards and graduation requirements.

Maintaining the concentration thresholds of 50 percent at a district average, as currently proposed by the Governor's plan, will enable school districts to target supplemental resources to EL and low-income students. In the case of English learners, our district leadership and parent advisory committees may decide these students need supplemental services such as tutoring and smaller class sizes.

The specific strategies we would pursue will depend on whether the English learner is an elementary or secondary student. Best practices are linked to grade level. Having this local discretion in allocating resources is essential as districts create school budgets.

Given the scale, multi-community diversity and sizable continuum of student needs in San Diego Unified, we believe the district leadership is better suited to make decisions on how to allocate the resources appropriated by the state as we are the ones working closely with our students to reduce dropout rates, increase high school graduation rates and advance preparation for college and career.

By shifting decision making to the local level, school districts will better allocate resources to programs and school-site initiatives that have demonstrated positive academic results at our campuses. We are committed to continuing to place emphasis on programs currently funded through categorical revenues, yet our evaluation of school needs’ may encourage the district to focus funds on some areas more than others.

This proposal of extended flexibility is an opportunity for school districts to assess what strategies are working at our highest performing schools, consider replicating promising pilot initiatives and shifting the allocation of state resources for particular interventions we see working well in our schools. Our district staff, in consultation with the School Board and our stakeholder advisory committees composed of parents and community leaders will be better positioned to allocate the resources and prioritize initiatives.

A case in point, San Diego Unified may choose to fund additional Advance Placement and Career Technical Education courses as we continue to prepare our high school students to be career- or-college-ready. Some of our schools may benefit from additional instructional support for the language immersion and biiteracy programs.

We may decide to reduce class size at our high need sites and hire counselors or librarians since these positions are the ones we’ve had to eliminate or reduce during the painful years of budget cutting. As we prepare to implement the Common Core Standards, we may consider providing additional support for our teachers in the form of professional development, which has been dramatically reduced since the onset of the recession in 2008.

In the recent California Department of Education’s release on the 2012 graduation and drop-out rates, San Diego Unified proudly exceeded all of the state averages by increasing graduations and decreasing drop-outs. In fact, we attained the lowest drop-out rate among California’s large urban districts and the second highest graduation rate among our peer districts. This is validation that we are pursuing strategies that work and that are helping our students graduate from high school with the necessary skills and knowledge to enroll in college or compete in the workforce.

We also support the Governor’s plan to maintain the Targeted Instructional Improvement Block Grant (TIIBG) as an add-on to the formula. It has been a critical, stand-alone integration fund that has benefitted many of our students for decades as San Diego Unified was one of the districts subject to court desegregation orders. The court has acknowledged the district has remained committed to achieving the integration goals, and to that end, San Diego Unified has continued to use TIIBG resources for transportation activities attributed to desegregation.

We have also applied these funds to other integration strategies, including increasing enrollment options for our students who live in racially isolated areas, decreasing class sizes for high needs schools, transporting our students to magnet schools across the district, and increasing parent involvement.
I am confident that the proposed finance system will allow local educators and communities to adapt, innovate and respond to changing student needs. Under LCFF, district and school staff will spend far less time navigating the cumbersome bureaucracy created over decades by layers of restrictions and requirements and instead focus on improving educational outcomes in response to being held accountable for raising student achievement across the board.

More Clarity on Role of COE and What New Accountability System Means

Before I conclude, I would like to make a few remarks in the area of accountability. We look forward to receiving additional direction on what the proposed accountability system will look like, and we encourage the Governor’s office, the Legislature and Department of Education to engage school districts in developing an accountability plan that is not cumbersome, but one that is simple, straight forward and implementable.

The accountability proposal currently envisions that each County Office of Education to review the local accountability plans for all school districts within its county concurrently with its review of district budgets. We are concerned about the implications of this approach because of the broad diversity of County Office capabilities around the state. Each County Offices of Education in the state conducts a variety of activities depending on the size of the county and the characteristics of the districts they serve. Before implementing this accountability review approach, school districts and County Offices of Education will need to be informed on the responsibilities County Offices of Education will have under this new system and what the consequences will be, if any, if districts fail to comply with their plan.

While it is important that County Offices of Education to review the District Plans on an annual basis, this examination should be limited to a fiscal analysis, not one based on evaluating whether schools have met academic progress. This separation of fiscal review versus academic performance review is very important as many school districts across the state believe student achievement and academic progress should not be part of the County Offices of Education.

While the accountability structure is further defined, the state should consider convening a stakeholder advisory group to assist with the development and adoption of the Local Control and Accountability Plan so the county's superintendent role in reviewing district's plan is clear.

One final point on accountability. I am aware that concerns have been raised that the proposed local decision making and flexibility granted to school districts does not factor in an accountability system that will ensure the supplemental funds are being spent on the neediest students: English learners, low-income and foster care youth. I disagree with and challenge these concerns, as I believe the proposed formula will empower parents and community members to hold school districts accountable for ensuring the funds are being used for the most disadvantaged students.

Conclusion: Education Finance Reform is Needed Now

In conclusion, how best to improve upon the existing K-12 funding system has been discussed by stakeholder groups for many years, San Diego Unified believes that the need for action grows increasingly urgent.

Not only does a strong rationale exist for restructuring the current flawed system, but the passage of Prop 30 and projected annual growth in Prop 98 minimum guarantee serves as a unique opportunity to transition to a more rational funding system that is equitable and one which allocates a share of new funds in a way that more closely aligns with current student needs.

School districts have suffered more than $20 billion in reductions and deferred payments from the state since 2007-2008, and our school district has had its own share of these cuts. Thanks in large part to Governor Brown; the passage of Proposition 30 will serve to stop additional cuts to schools. California¹s public schools must be funded at a level that allows them to meet the state¹s expectations, and to serve all students while providing them with the skills and knowledge needed to succeed in today¹s society.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide you San Diego Unified’s perspective. I welcome any questions from members of the committee.

County Superintendent discusses Prop. 30 changes

Voters passed measure in November; Dr. Randy Ward gives his views on funding changes. Watch video from the San Diego County Office of Education and Cox Communications/Cox 4.

From Supt. Kowba: The path to a balanced budget

On Tuesday, Jan 22, the Board of Education held a budget workshop where I presented the reality of the district’s projected $84 million deficit for 2013/14. We outlined two alternative scenarios for balancing next year’s budget. One alternative is to initiate a large layoff process similar to the one we followed last year. The second alternative is to reduce staffing levels through attrition combined with a significant increase in property sales to generate one-time revenue.

Both alternatives are difficult. The massive layoff strategy creates great turmoil, destabilizes staffing and increases class sizes. The attrition approach will result in an uneven and challenging staffing pattern. But it is the best approach to safeguard stability and student supports. Consequently, the Board directed staff to prepare a balanced 2013/14 budget using a combination of attrition savings and property sales.

Outlook for 2013/14 – The Path to a Balanced Budget

Over time, the recently approved Proposition 30 taxes will generate more revenue for the state for education funding. This new revenue does not immediately return the district to the funding levels of 2008, but it is a first step toward that goal. We are in a transition period to a better funding environment but our current budget shortfall must be addressed now.

Over the past several years, the district has spent down reserves, made permanent operational cuts, and used one-time funding solutions to balance budgets during the state’s financial crisis. These budget balancing strategies of previous years still leave a 2013/14 budget deficit of $84 million.

Since last week’s board direction, I have initiated a two-pronged budget strategy of personnel reductions through attrition and planning for additional real estate sales. The following is a summary of these two key deficit reduction strategies. 

Attrition-Based Staff Reductions

Each year, 500-600 staff members leave the district stemming from retirements, leaves or separations. Typically, these are budgeted positions that are refilled with temporary contracts for approved leaves, probationary contracts or new hires for separations. Teaching positions that become vacant during the year are filled in the same manner. Certificated management at school sites are also replaced with interim appointments until permanent appointments are made. Classified positions are similarly filled based on function and situational need.

The attrition-based deficit reduction program will require a significant change to this standard operational approach. Beginning immediately and throughout the 2013/14 school year, every vacancy created in any manner at all school sites and support departments will be reviewed by a position review committee and the appropriate senior management leader.

More detailed procedures for implementation will be developed to support the following general guidelines:

1. A reduction of a minimum of 300 staff positions not replaced from attrition is targeted for a savings of approximately $30 million. This target will be adjusted in response to the evolving state budget development.
2. All teaching and other certificated positions and classified positions WILL NOT be automatically filled to replace leaves, retirements and separations.
3. All hires will require senior management approval. Positions will not be automatically filled unless absolutely needed. 
4. Schools may be required to adjust class sizes upward and add combo grade classes to accommodate for staff reductions from anticipated attrition.
5. Unassigned qualified teaching staff at other locations may be moved to fill positions.
6. Temporary contracts and subs will only be used if absolutely needed for critical positions.
7. School sites and departments will have to support flexible staffing and staffing variations. 
8. Business operations will be asked to adjust by not filling positions vacated through attritions unless the position is deemed critical.
9. Principals will communicate to school site staff and their parent community that as an alternative to destabilizing layoffs that there will be a potential for mid-year class size and configuration adjustments as a result of attrition at any point.

Real Estate Sales

The second critical element of our 2013/14 deficit reduction strategy is to increase the revenue from real estate sales. The Board of Education has committed to proceeding with real estate sales as an alternative to a massive layoff. To accomplish that goal, the district will need to sell $50 million of surplus property in 2013/14. In addition to these sales, I will also pursue the implementation of a program to optimize short and long-term lease revenues from district real estate assets.

Summary

I believe that 2013/14 is a critical bridging year for San Diego Unified. We will need to solve our budget deficit as we await the fufillment of significant new revenues from Prop. 30 in subsequent years. This challenge will require more collaboration and support than ever. We face a stark choice for a balanced budget, massive layoffs or the path selected by the board, attrition reductions and real estate sales. Staff reductions from attrition will not be easy but it will give us more stability. In the weeks ahead, we will develop more details to guide this strategy and will consult with employee groups to ensure implmentation of this approach in the best way possible. As we move forward, I value and appreciate the understanding and cooperation from all employees.

School Board President talks about vote to avoid employee layoffs

IN THE NEWS: Board President Dr. John Lee Evans discusses budget. See more from KPBS»