Schools

Huyett: Sadness and shock over need for BUSD cuts

Berkeley Unified School District Superintendent Bill Huyett sent an email to families today outlining the cuts proposed by his Budget Advisory Committee. The proposed cuts will be considered by the school board which needs to pass a balanced budget by the end of June.

Among the cuts proposed are over $1 million in non-salary items, the elimination of six positions, and major cuts and fee increases at the Adult School. The cuts total $3.1 million from the General Fund budget, and come after $11 million in cuts over the last two years.

Huyett writes, “It is with a real sense of sadness that I watch the continuing economic crisis being compounded by a lack of resolve in Sacramento to prevent the financial collapse of school districts across the state.” Berkeley schools are spared some of the worst consequences of the state cuts, Huyett notes, because of Measure A (BSEP) and Measure BB (Facility Maintenance) funding, which provide additional local resources.

Huyett also describes his “shock” at Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger’s proposal to eliminate almost all funding for pre-school programs. About $3.6 million of the $5 million spent in Berkeley on these programs would be cut if the governor’s proposals are passed.

The full text of Huyett’s statement comes after the jump:

Dear Berkeley Schools Community Members,

For the third straight year I am writing to you about significant cuts to Berkeley Unified, and all California public schools. Over the last two years, we trimmed $11 million from the budget, and now more reductions are required.  For the next school year the Governor’s proposed reductions, coupled with our increasing costs force us to reduce the General Fund budget by $3.1 million.

A couple of years ago, California was 47th in per student funding for education; now, after of two years of severe cuts, the state ranks even lower. In many districts, kindergarten through third grade classes, once 20 students, are now 30. Average high school class sizes of 36 to 40 are becoming commonplace. Thanks to Measure A (BSEP), we are not planning to reduce the number of classroom teachers next year or to increase class size. Berkeley grade K-3 classes will remain at an average of 20 students; grades 4-5 at an average of 26, and grades 7-12 at an average of 28.

It is with a real sense of sadness that I watch the continuing economic crisis being compounded by a lack of resolve in Sacramento to prevent the financial collapse of school districts across the state. While in Berkeley there are local resources in the form of Measure A (BSEP) and Measure BB (Facility Maintenance) to help with class size, music, library and other programs, the cuts we will have to make will severely affect the education of our students.

Compounding these difficulties, the Governor has just proposed to eliminate almost all state funding for preschool programs and some afterschool programs, such as the district’s BEARS program. (The LEARNS after-school programs are not affected by this reduction.)  Currently, BUSD runs a $5.0 million pre-school program and K-3 afterschool program (BEARS) for low-income families, funded completely by the state and federal governments. The governor’s cut would eliminate about $3.6 million of that funding.

The preschool and BEARS program reductions proposed recently by the Governor come as a shock, and no local support is in place for these programs. This proposal hits our most vulnerable population: children in low-income households. We are collaborating with City of Berkeley and other preschool providers to attempt to mitigate the damage if these reductions become part of the state budget. District preschools, and other area preschools funded by these monies, provide a valuable boost to children as they prepare for kindergarten. Kindergarten readiness is a primary goal of 2020 Vision activities, aimed at eliminating the achievement gap.

I asked my staff in February to make a preliminary list of budget reductions, and this list has been reviewed by the Superintendent’s Budget Advisory Committee which made its own recommendations to me. That committee is comprised of an equal number of employees (including all five unions) and community members.  The School Board will make all final decisions and must pass a balanced budget by the end of June. Proposed reductions include:

– Over $1 million in non-salary items, including classroom furniture, textbook money, state school-targeted funds, high school exit exam support monies; and transportation department cuts that will require changes to funding field trip and athletic team transportation;

– Elimination of six positions, including a middle school vice principal;

– Adult School programs cuts of $325,000, including fewer classes, higher fees, and higher class sizes;

– Elimination of $500,000 of operating costs with the opening of our new transportation facility (half of this reduction was built into this year’s budget).

I have proposed a one-day furlough of all district staff in order to reduce the number of positions to be laid off. A furlough would need to be negotiated with our unions, and my proposal is for the furlough day to be on a staff development day when no students are attending school.

Three straight years of budget reductions are extremely demoralizing for our hard-working teachers and staff, especially those who are receiving notices of possible layoff. I appreciate the community’s support of teachers, staff, and administrators, so I want to continue to keep you informed you about these budget reductions. You can sign up for email updates at the website, www.berkeley.net.

Sincerely,

William Huyett
Superintendent of Schools

Print Friendly
Tagged ,
  • Justin Lee

    If the Unions would agree to an across the board 15% paycut, then no one would lose their jobs. But unions eat their young I hear and circle the wagons around their pensions and salaries and seniority.
    I hear the private sector is cutting salaries and/or staff. WELCOME to PLANET EARTH and the legacy of spending beyond your needs

  • http://www.sippey.com/ Michael Sippey

    I’ve been looking for the whole of the budget on the BUSD site, but I can’t find it. Anyone have any pointers? I’d love some context on the size of these cuts — what percentage of the budget are they?

  • BHS Parent

    The elephant in the room are the approximately 20% of BUSD students who are non-Berkeley residents. Their parents do not pay property taxes and do not support the school system. Why won’t anyone address this? Have you ever thought about why BHS sells discounted BART tickets on campus? If all students were required to either be Berkeley residents, or cough up the different between the real cost and the state subsidy, there would be sufficient funds for science labs, freshman athletics and obscene union pensions, as well as maybe a little left over for our “struggling” students. On the other hand, we may be not have many “struggling” students to worry about without all those freeloading Richmond and Oakland residents.

  • http://twitter.com/tereneta Tim

    I often hear people complain about non-Berkeley residents in Berkeley Public Schools, but always because they know of a handful of students at their child’s school. What’s the evidence that 20% of the student body at BHS is out of district?

  • Alastair

    Seems to me that seen as Sacramento is not able to address why only a 1/3 of our Ca representatives force continued cuts, then if we want education for our kids, then we should step up to another local tax – Measure Ed.
    Public education is good value for money to a certain low funded point. As we approach this point I am fortunate to be able to opt out from the public system, but I would prefer to just pay more taxes. Will this US system offer me this choice or will the minority prevail?.

  • lifelongberkeleyan

    If Superintendent Huyett or one of his staff (or a BUSD School Board member) has the real numbers on out of district students at BUSD schools would you please provide them here?

  • elmwood neighbor

    This is from a Daily Planet article By Riya Bhattacharjee publised Tuesday October 28, 2008 “Berkeley School Board Candidates Face-Off in Debate”

    http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2008-10-23/article/31428?headline=Berkeley-School-Board-Candidates-Face-Off-in-Debate

    I realize the issue, really, is about students who enroll without the interdistrict transfer. But is a not-too-old number of legal transfers. It is one of the few times I seen an actual number from an official source.

    “Selawsky said that contrary to common belief, the district did not have a massive number of out-of-district students.

    According to current information provided by district officials, Berkeley Unified has 550 out-of-district transfers, with 20 out-of district transfers registering this year, the majority of them children of Berkeley Unified employees and a couple who transferred through appeals to Alameda County.

    “There’s a lot of statutes that people are unaware of they can legally enroll in our schools,” Selwasky said.

    Leyva-Cutler pointed out that Berkeley Unified had issued a moratorium on out-of-district kindergarten registrations for the third year.

    District officials have said in the past that a lack of space in Berkeley’s elementary schools prevents them from relaxing this rule.

    Leyva-Cutler added that although it was important to keep a check on illegal transfers, it was important not to disrupt the continuity of an out-of-district transfer student’s education.

    “I think the issue is about illegal transfers,” Myrick said. “I think what people are asking about is people who are borrowing addresses, that’s something very difficult to detect. I think there’s an impression of it being large. People don’t know the facts and reasons behind the transfer.”

  • Berkeley Parent

    If California just taxed oil companies like Alaska does, that would cover a lot of school costs. 8 billion dollars of school costs, according to the L.A. Times:

    http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/15/business/fi-hiltzik15

  • BHS Parent

    No one one knows the real numbers of non-residents because BUSD won’t release that info, but I’m quite confident to say that the numbers are vastly more than 550 (about 6%). And even if 550 is a realistic number, that’s costing the district millions of dollars annually that could be better spent elsewhere in the system. Having sent two kids through the Berkeley schools I know that very large percentage of their friends live outside the city. Try asking the staff of any school about the high quantity of report cards sent to Berkeley addresses which come back as undeliverable, or the quantity of BART tickets sold. Twenty percent may be a bit high, but not unrealistic. This wouldn’t be an issue if funding was adequate funding was available, but its clearly not.

  • http://basiscraft.com Thomas Lord

    BHS Parent:

    That 550 number is for legally registered transferred students and BUSD gets extra money for each and every one of them. (I’ve read but can’t quickly cite the figure of an extra $5K along with the claim that BUSD basically makes a profit from them.)

    The issue that people grouse about over the years is the number of illegal transfers – e.g., kids that register under a misrepresentation of where they live. Nobody in any report I’ve found has presented any evidence of the size of that problem.

    It’s also a bit tricky to define, as far as I can tell. Registration requires some documentation. Perhaps that documentation should be checked more frequently. Beyond that, what are you going to do, bed checks? There are a lot of grey areas and “non-traditional” family arrangements out there – what are the rules supposed to be besides the basic documentation that’s already required?

    In any event: I’ll be impressed (not surprised other than pleasantly) if someone, anyone, can offer more than rumor and innuendo in support of the hypothesis that BUSD has a serious, budget-breaking problem with illegal registrations. It doesn’t sound implausible and at the same time I haven’t found anything other than vague anecdote and speculation to support it. I’m confident (from what I’ve read) that the problem isn’t non-existent. I’m just skeptical that it is anywhere near the the scale of a problem that is sometimes suggested.

  • EBGuy

    I’ve read but can’t quickly cite the figure of an extra $5K along with the claim that BUSD basically makes a profit from them.
    Thomas, this money comes (mostly) from the state per (non truant) pupil. All things be equal, it shouldn’t matter. But they are not. BSEP parcel tax dollars (a fixed amount paid by property owners in Berkeley) are diluted by out of district transfers. If those out of district transfers paid a per pupil ‘BSEP fee’, I would welcome them with open arms. Well, even that is probably untrue; at this point the Berkeley schools are starting to face crowding issues.

  • http://basiscraft.com Thomas Lord

    EBGuy: No, what I recall is an *extra* $5K for legal transfers. Here is one source of references for it (sketchy, I admit – but the whole debate on the issue is poor for lack of definitive information):

    http://parents.berkeley.edu/recommend/schools/BHS/outofdistrict.html

    There is (at least per claims like that) a pretty decent fee per legal transfer. Do tell me if you know better. Hard information on the topic is so far eluding my attempts to find it.

  • http://basiscraft.com Thomas Lord

    EBGuy: Gah. Nevermind. I see what you are saying there and what I said doesn’t quite contradict it. Sorry. My still pending question is whether this $5K exceeds what BUSD gets from the state for non-transfer students but I made the mistake of inferring that it surely did and now I’m not so sure.

  • laura menard

    The district avoids data collection on illegal transfers. Educating out of district elementary and middle school students is less expensive than high schools students. The district has never done more than a cursory review reporting that in general they believe they make money on K-8 students and lose money on high school students.

    Out of district families do not pay BSEP taxes nor any of the additional maintenance taxes, that is one source of inequity.

    Students who are out of district including any combination of the following chronically truant, discipline problems or special education cost the district considerably more than the average student and there are in violation of district policies.

    Years ago when the district reauthorized BSEP under Jack McLaughlin, they held a large community meeting at MX library. It was the first time I heard district administrators speak frankly about the impact and cost associated with the poorly regulated process of enrollment and student services. District officials and school board members speculated publicly 20-25% of students were illegal. Like I said, this was one of few meetings where I felt the district was being more honest than usual.

    Chris Lim, former associated supt BUSD, is now Supt in San Leandro. When she asked San Leandro voters to pony up with a parcel tax she was quoted in the Chronicle saying she would not ask residents to shoulder a tax burden for out of district students, that the district student services office must first control for an accurate accounting of legal and illegal transfer in order to be accountable to voters. The person responsible for tracking in San Leandro is a friend of my best friend. It can be done.

    That does not seem like too much to ask for. Berkeley voters have a history of accepting excuses and lack of information.

    The cost of dealing with out of district kids that cause disruption and crime is magnified by the cost of staff providing intensified individual attention and the impact on the environment. I wonder how many of the kids in the 3-4 special day classes at BHS are actually Berkeley residents.

    I know for a fact that the vast majority of students processed for theft and extortion at BHS are from out of district, many currently on probation. Without proper integration of probation supervision at a high school the result in not only costly but a disaster in terms of intervention services.
    BHS and Alameda County is far behind most high schools in providing multi-agencies support services.

  • EBGuy

    Anybody else catch this on the news last night: SFUSD kicks out 80 kids due to address fraud. They used a pretty simple solution to ferret out the instances of address fraud: District officials found out about a lot of these cases from a hotline they set up as part of their crackdown.

  • Pingback: Adult Education Cuts Recommended in Berkeley « SAVE YOUR ADULT SCHOOL

  • Priscilla Myrick

    Supt. Huyett recently announced $3.1 million in cuts on an annual operating budget of $110 million, a 3% cut. Berkeley Unified receives about $13,000 per student in state, local, and Federal revenues…$6,000 per student from the state is based on student attendance (known as ADA). Because of Berkeley’s local parcel taxes (Measure A, BSEP, and Measure BB, Facility Maintenance), BUSD has been spared the program cuts that most California school districts are currently experiencing. (source: Education Data Partnership http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us)

    Berkeley could increase revenue to our district by improving student attendance. Each day a student is absent results in a loss of $33.43. In the past two years BUSD has lost $3.4 million per year in state ADA funding due to poor attendance of students enrolled in the district.