Cutting expenses always difficult

by GEOFF ANDREWS

Oberlin schools superintendent

The school board recently made some very difficult budget decisions. Amid the scrutiny, I wanted to add context to the reductions. Schools and other publicly funded agencies generally lag the economy by a year or so.

Readers may recall that property taxes are paid one year in arrears, and a chunk of income taxes are also paid, or at least reconciled, once a year. So the economic downturn of October, 2008 really began to impact schools this year. Layoffs in surrounding districts are a testament to the difficult times.

To balance the books for next year required gutting about $900,000 from the 2010-11 budget projection approved last October. Tonight the board will act upon a new five year forecast that not only shows a decrease in spending of $900,000 from last year's projection, but it shows a reduction in expenditures of more than five million dollars over four years when compared with the expense projection of a year ago.

And even with those reductions, the year end balance is positive only through 2012. Additionally, there is no telling what may happen to state aid next summer.

Budget cutting is unpleasant business. In an industry like education, where 80 percent of expenditures are salaries and benefits, it is difficult to reduce expenditures without impacting personnel, which in turn impacts children.

The primary consideration in any decision the board makes is to have as positive an impact on students as possible. The current round of cuts, done largely through wage reductions, some attrition, and some reassignments was able to achieve most of the savings the board sought without any RIF (reduction in force) action for teachers and classified staff, and only one RIF in administration (Langston assistant principal). That administrator will have a teaching role in Oberlin this fall. I applaud all of the staff members for their roles in helping to save jobs.

Prior to making any reductions, we asked the ODE coordinator for our area to compare Oberlin to what the state identifies as our "comparison districts" around the state. In terms of our teaching staff, we have several more teachers than other districts our size.

Oberlin has long sought to keep classes small; ours average the smallest in the county. We also have more special education and specialist teachers (art/music/PE/foreign language) than other districts our size.

In classified staff, we are similar to comparison districts, with the exception of aides, where we have many more, in the classrooms.

The administrative analysis was interesting. We have about three more principals (total of six) than our comparison districts, and two fewer central office administrators and supervisors.

This underscores part of the argument for building a campus; the district is inefficient in terms of having redundant facilities and personnel in four different buildings. With a single campus, money could be carved out of the annual budget (our treasurer projects over a million dollars).

Another piece of analysis that was done by the county ESC compared the salaries of our employees with their counterparts in other Lorain County district. We were pleased to see that our teachers, even with the reductions being enacted in this new contract remain in the top third of the county. Our classified staff is about average for the county; some are above and some are below, depending on the category (labor contracts vary, reflecting the negotiating teams), and our administrators, with the exception of the high school principal (1 percent above) are all below the county averages, generally by 5-10 percent.

As we move ahead with a leaner budget, most of the staff will be making a little more than they made two years ago. Last year, on average, the teachers received a 5.3 percent raise (all received the 2.95 percent base increase in the contract and about 2/3 received a step raise of 3.75 percent).

The classified staff received 3.8 percent on average (2.95 percent base increase and steps for fewer people). The administrative staff, anticipating what was coming this year, led by voluntarily accepting only half (1.5 percent) of their scheduled 2.95 percent raise. The treasurer and superintendent took salary freezes.

This year teachers will experience anywhere from a minimal raise to a 3 percent reduction in salary, depending on steps and how many supplementals they perform. The classified contract is still being negotiated, and the administrative staff will receive anywhere from a salary freeze to a 2 percent reduction in pay. Unfortunately, the high school busing reduction will see the bus drivers working fewer hours, because there will only be one bus run per day, not two.

There is some good financial news. The $850,000 21st century grant we received is underway, extending the school day and year for Prospect and Langston students. We have just been notified that we will receive an additional STEM grant this month, adding tens of thousands to the $170,000 already granted.

Nordson Foundation funded the remaining need for the 8th grade DC trip next week. We are getting very positive signs on our $780,000 School improvement Grant. The next steps in our $250,000 Safe Routes to Schools grant are underway. Many thanks to John Schroth and Ann Glass for their roles in securing these funds. In these difficult times it is rewarding to see our school community working together on fiscal and educational integrity.