PUSD Already Receives From The State $4.0 MM Each Year To Pay For Class Size Reductions K-3 Around Town, posted by frank, a resident of the Pleasanton Heights neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2009 at 10:38 pm
The actual cost is $5.6 MM to run the program. Why would PUSD threaten to cut the difference of $1.6 MM and therefore lose the guaranteed $4.0 MM in order to balance their budget? You guessed it. To extort votes for passing a PARCEL TAX! If you don't believe this is the case, then find on the PUSD web site the following question and answer.
"Isn’t class size reduction funded by the state?
Since its inception, class size reduction (CSR) has never been fully funded by the state. The number of teachers it takes to meet the requirement of 20 students per teacher has always cost more than the funding received from the state. In Pleasanton, we receive about $4 million to support the program for grades K through 3. The actual cost is $5.6 million. By eliminating CSR for these grades, we would save $1.6 million from the general fund. The unfortunate part is that we would also lose the access to the $4 million from the state. At this writing, in order to realize a savings, we would have to eliminate CSR at an entire grade level—there is no option to increase class sizes a little (like to 25) and still receive funding. "
Now here is what SavePleasantonSchools writes on their web site about this issue:
"I’ve heard that the district gets millions of state dollars for the Class Size Reduction (CSR) program. Why is the district cutting it? Is this a scare tactic to get a “YES” vote on Measure G?
It is true that annually, Pleasanton Unified receives $4 million dollars from the state for the CSR program. However, it requires approximately $6 million dollars to adequately fund the CSR program. PUSD provides the remaining $2 million dollars. This $2 million is equally divided amongst K-3 and 9th grade to the tune of $400,000 per grade level. Since the state’s cuts to education are so severe, it is necessary to make cuts to all programs beyond the basic required classroom ratio come Fall of 2009."
If you throw out the $400,000 for the 9th grade (everyone is emotional about K-3), you get the same numbers as the PUSD website FAQ, $1.6 MM must be added to the $4 MM from the state. Nowhere is there stated that the $4 MM from the state is not coming into the district because of funding cuts.
SO WHY IN THE WORLD OUT OF A BUDGET OF $120 MM IS PUSD THREATENING TO PULL $1.6 MM (1.3 percent) AWAY FROM CLASS SIZE REDUCTIONS FOR K-3?
The answer: to extort votes for passing a parcel tax. No one in their right mind in business in the private sector would cut contribution to a co-funding arrangement where the co-funder supplies such a high proportion of the funding. (Note the SPS web site answer begins with "it is true".)
Posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2009 at 10:48 pm Stacey is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
Frank wrote: "SO WHY IN THE WORLD OUT OF A BUDGET OF $120 MM IS PUSD THREATENING TO PULL $1.6 MM (1.3 percent) AWAY FROM CLASS SIZE REDUCTIONS FOR K-3?"
Posted by Practical Parent, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on May 1, 2009 at 1:15 am
And the district information also states that if CSR is eliminated at the elementary level, 75 teachers will be cut. (Remember all the pink-slip drama a month ago?)
So for $1.6 M, 75 jobs could be saved. That seems like a no brainer to me. And talk about local economic stimulus effect!
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of the Vintage Hills Elementary School neighborhood, on May 1, 2009 at 7:03 am
Send out pink slips to the least senior staff--pink shirts, teachers in tears, students crying . . . paint a picture of "overcrowded" classrooms at 30:1, Johnny and Susie aren't learning anything, some child sneezes . . . So, let's repeat, the biggest emotional hammer in the district's toolbox.
I'd like to think this community is smart enough to see past the bs and hold this district accountable for past fiscal practices and the drama they are intentionally creating. There is $2 million in the budget they can cut and still keep CSR (and I'm leaving out that they can move classes to 21:1 or 22:1, etc. and save money). That's about $8 million over the life of this proposed tax . . . what do they need the other $10 million for . . .
Posted by Community of Character, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on May 1, 2009 at 9:05 am
Dr. Casey and the school board members considered all possibilities before putting CSR on the chopping block. There are no better alternatives. I suggest that you educate yourself in this issue.
Moreover, the board members and Dr. Casey held multiple public hearings prior to putting the tax on the ballot. This topic was covered on numerous occasions. Never once did I hear a voice of opposition. Hmm...
Do the right thing and support our children, our schools, and our community.
Posted by John Adams, a member of the Amador Valley High School community, on May 1, 2009 at 9:06 am
what do they need the other $10 million for . . .
Kathleen, they don't NEED it, they WANT it for a "stable funding source." (Does this imply the parcel tax will become a permanent fixture on our tax bill?)
Instead of working to fix a broken tax allocation system, they just ask for MORE MORE MORE. It's easier to use that emotional hammer than to negotiate real change.
View in an RSS Reader
E-mail this topic.
Print this topic.
