Why does District 34 need to make budget reductions for next year’s budget?

The current year budget for Glenview District 34 reflects a deficit of $2.6 million and faces projections for another $2.6 million deficit for next year. Projections show the District’s expenditures will continue to outpace revenues for the foreseeable future. It is necessary to address this imbalance to ensure the financial health of the district for current and future students.

What is causing the projected deficit?

The deficit is due to the fact that expenditures are increasing at a rate that outpaces growth in revenue. Local property taxes account for 86% of district revenue and are capped by state law and cannot rise faster than the rate of inflation as measured by the national Consumer Price Index. The increase in CPI has averaged 2.35% over the last five years while expenditures have grown an average of 7%. As a result, there is a structural deficit. Salary and benefit costs are 77% of the district’s expenditures. What other factors are adversely affecting district finances? Unfunded mandates from federal and state governments are numerous and are primarily paid by the local taxpayer through property taxes.

What opportunities do community members have for input?

Input opportunities include the sessions listed below and a feedback form on the district website.

· Tuesday, Feb. 7 at 4 p.m. at Attea (Staff only)

· Tuesday, Feb. 7 at 7 p.m. at Attea (Parents only)

· Saturday, Feb. 11 at 10 a.m. at Attea (Staff/Community/Parents)

· Wednesday, Feb. 15 at 4 p.m. at Springman (Staff only)

· Wednesday, Feb. 15 at 7 p.m. at Springman (Staff/Community/Parents)

Are reductions in staff being considered?

Yes, reductions in staff are being considered given the fact that 80% of our expenditures are personnel related.

Is student enrollment expected to increase and do we have the classroom space to meet our needs?

Student enrollment is projected to increase for the next two years and then level off or decline slightly. Given the current projections, we do not anticipate classroom space challenges.

Are class size changes being considered?

Yes, class size changes are being considered. Is the district considering boundary changes for schools? No, boundary changes are not currently being considered.

Are reductions in staff development being considered?

Yes, reductions in the use of substitute teachers for staff development work are included in the potential reductions. Also, the potential building and central office budget reductions will likely result in other reductions in staff development.

How can the district reduce the use of substitute teachers?

Reductions in the use of substitute teachers for staff development purposes and district committee work are included in the proposed reductions.

Can the district reduce its energy costs?

As a district, we have been engaged in trying to reduce our energy costs through reducing our consumption for the past three years, accomplishing more than 25% reduction in consumption.

Will student field trips be eliminated?

Part of the initial scenario includes a reduction in field trip transportation costs by 45%. We anticipate that this will likely reduce the number of field trips but not eliminate field trips.

Will student fees for textbooks and activities be increased?

Student fees are recommended to be increased by 10% for the 2012-13 school year.

Will after school activities and clubs for students be eliminated?

The initial scenario does not include the elimination of activities and clubs.

Can the district increase revenue by increasing the rates charged for building rentals?

Building rental fees are recommended to be increased by 10% for the 2012-13 school year.

Is the state of Illinois making its payments to the district on time?

No, the state is currently four months behind on some payments to the district.

If we reduce the budget in 2012-13 by $3.2 million, will more reductions be needed in the future?

A reduction totalling $3.2 million will result in the district being able to maintain the required level of fund balance through at least the 2016-17 school year using the base set of assumptions from CFAC.

Why didn’t the District pre-plan for this budget challenge? Didn’t the projections show deficit spending on the horizon?

While projections have shown deficit spending would occur in the future, the actual deficit spending occurred for the first time this past year. Prior to last year, it had been 6 years since the last deficit spending budget.

Doesn’t the District have reserve funds it can spend to solve this challenge?

The District currently has approximately 50% of its annual expenditures in reserve (savings). Board policy mandates that 30% reserves are maintained and the State of Illinois recommends at least 25% reserves be maintained. The reason reserves are needed is so that school districts can avoid short-term borrowing to maintain operations between revenue payments since the District receives two main property tax payments each year.

The District has been spending money in recent years - why hasn’t that been controlled to help solve this situation?

Actually, last spring the administrative budgets were reduced by $600,000. Additionally, as part of the boundary committee recommendation last spring, class size was increased starting this year, which saved approximately $700,000. Additionally, 80% of the total budget goes toward salaries and benefits for its nearly 700 employees.

What was considered for reduction when this list was created? Were administrative cuts considered?

Any budget item that is not mandated was considered for reduction. The cabinet utilized the work of the BAAC committee to inform its work, as well as knowledge of the programs and services provided across the system. The initial scenario being shared includes $840,000 in administrative reductions.

Why are you adding staff through this process?

This was a strategic budgeting process so we looked at restructuring as well as reductions. The proposed psychologist increase was specifically referenced by BAAC. As outlined in our Strategic Plan and as highlighted by Senate Bill 7, teacher effectiveness is our district’s strongest factor related to student learning. Part of our proposed restructuring during this strategic budgeting process is meant to further strengthen teacher effectiveness.

Why doesn’t the Board go for a referendum?

That is a Board decision. Last summer, the Board directed the district to implement this strategic budgeting process.

How would it work if staff reductions would need to be made?

It is good to remember no decisions have been made at this point. If a reduction in force becomes necessary, the language in the Constitution (our agreement with certified staff) and the Glenview Professionals Association (support staff) agreement will determine how that will happen. For certified staff (teachers), this means if a reduction becomes necessary that non-tenured (those in their first through fourth year) would be non-renewed before tenured teachers. There is no seniority among non-tenured staff. The process for how non-tenured staff would be non-renewed has not been determined at this point but will be shared once decided. Reduction in force for support staff is by seniority within the category of employment.