Community Meeting Budget, Resources, and Policy for Walking to School
Purpose Share information on why the change Share information on the process utilized Discuss options
Understanding the why Equity issues Re-evaluation process Impact of resources Understanding the funding
Explanation of funding categories
Prior Cuts Reduction of 21 Discontinue Reduced Assistant 11% Reduction in all Reduce librarian Outsourced ground Instructional attendance Principal work district level work calendar maintenance Coaches incentives calendar budgets Federal Projects and Funds Shifted from 20% Reduction in Reduced after Salary calendar for Community Elimination of Capital to M&O Intramural K-12 school activity bus school site support Education combined signature bus (Funding no longer Sports service staff – Director service exists) eliminated Eliminated Assistant Planning Career Ladder Reduction in district Superintendent Department in eliminated (monies Decreased Human and school capital Administrative Business Services paid directly to Resource Staff budgets Assistant eliminated teachers)
Operating and Capital Expenditures per pupil Per ADM % Change Per ADM % Change % Change From Operating From Prior Capital From Prior Fiscal Year ADM Prior Year Expenditure Year Expenditure Year 1.35% 2016 * 25,003 $6,937 -1.38% $207.34 -34.39% 0.08% 2015 ** 24,670 $7,034 0.31% $316.05 30.80% -0.02% 2014 24,651 $7,012 1.01% $241.63 -6.10% 2013 24,656 4.52% $6,942 -1.55% $257.34 0.69% 2012 23,589 2.42% $7,051 -3.33% $255.57 -69.96% 2011 23,031 0.97% $7,294 1.77% $850.71 -16.14% 2010 22,809 -0.16% $7,167 -1.86% $1,014.50 -63.24% 2009 22,845 3.84% $7,303 5.66% $2,759.70 -52.52% 2008 22,000 12.02% $6,912 3.57% $5,812.61 32.47% 2007 19,640 16.89% $6,674 12.47% $4,387.81 -10.75% * Adopted budget estimates ** Charter
M&O Transportation Expenditures to TRCL 10,000,000 9,000,000 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 M&O Transportation Expenses 5,000,000 Transportation Revenue 4,000,000 (State) Control Limit 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 - 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
Buses, Buildings, Facility Maintenance, Textbooks… Capital Outlay (Non-Construction) Expenditures $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
DAA “Capital” Funding Cuts District Additional Assistance Base Funding FY16 $ 12,140,345 State Reduction $ 10,187,202 FY16 Formula Funded $ 1,953,143 9
Inflation Adjustment to Base Level Legislative What Base Level Year Base Level Inflation Should Have Been FY 2009-10 $3,267.72 2.0% $3,357.25 FY 2010-11 $3,267.72 1.2% $3,397.54 $3,267.72 FY 2011-12 0.9% $3,428.11 $3,267.72 FY 2012-13 2.0% $3,496.68 FY 2013-14 $3,326.54 1.8% $3,559.62 FY 2014-15 $3,373.11 1.4% $3,609.45 FY 2015-16 $3,426.74 1.6% $3,667.21 Inflation Lawsuit + $ 54.31 N/A $3,667.21 Adjustment
Per Student Spending Since Budget Cuts State, Local State $ State and Local and Federal $ Fiscal Year Per Student $ Per Student Per Student 2008 $4,951 $8,584 $9,578 2015 (est.) $4,216 $8,069 $9,318 Reduction ($735) ($515) ($260) Source: JLBC (Joint Legislative Budget Committee)
Additional Budget Cuts Resulting From 2015-16 State Funding Cuts In order to meet Legislative “Intent” Language in the adopted State Budget additional non-classroom cuts of 60.5 positions totaling $1.3 million were approved Career Ladder Eliminated for another $2.1 million cut District Additional Assistance was also cut by $5.5 million 12
2015-16 Budget Adjustments in Response to Legislative Funding Reductions and Legislative Intent to Reduce Budgets in Non-Classroom Expenditures FROM: SB1476/HB2683 Budget Bill: K-12 education; BRB; 2015-2016 Sec. 11. District additional assistance for school districts; reduction for fiscal year 2015-2016; classroom spending A. For fiscal year 2015-2016, the department of education shall reduce by $352,442,700 the amount of basic state aid that otherwise would be apportioned to school districts statewide for fiscal year 2015-2016 for district additional assistance prescribed in section 15-961, Arizona Revised Statutes, and shall reduce school district budget limits accordingly C. The governing board of a school district that has been assigned a letter grade of A or B, or an equivalent successor classification, pursuant to section 15-241, Arizona Revised Statutes, shall hold a public meeting to discuss the school district's plan for proposed reductions pursuant to this section. The governing board shall include the percentage of classroom spending in the school district's adopted budget on the page of the budget that the governing board members sign. E. It is the intent of the governor and the legislature that school districts increase the total percentage of classroom spending over the previous year's percentages in the combined categories of instruction, student support and instructional support as defined by the auditor general. 13
2015-16 Budget Adjustments in Response to Legislative Funding Reductions and Legislative Intent to Reduce Budgets in Non-Classroom Expenditures Number of Positions $ Dollars Reduction of District Office Administrators 2.0 $ 165,000 High School Office Staff 4.0 $ 159,000 Reduce High School Security Guards 1) 8.0 $ 174,000 Eliminate Elementary OCR Positions 19.0 $ 410,000 Contracting Grounds Maintenance 2) 17.0 $ 212,000 Reduce Transportation Routes to conform to existing 3) 10.0 $ 175,000 Board Safe Walking Distances Eliminate .5 Building Manager position at one K-8 4) 0.5 $ 16,245 School Cuts to address "Intent" Language in the Budget Bill 60.5 $ 1,311,24 5 14
Summary Budget Reductions FY16 Budget Reductions $ 1,311,245 to Meet Legislative “Intent” Language Career Ladder $ 2,099,424 Elimination Override Reduction (1/3) $ 6,004,046 DAA “Capital” Reduction $ 5,482,793 (without Carryover) Proposed Reductions for $ 14,897,508 FY16 Budget 15
2014 Override Results Teacher Positions 2014/2015 2015/2016 Difference 1351 1186 165 Eliminated Full – Day Kindergarten (1/2 Day funded by the State) Increased Class Size all grade levels Reduced Elementary Band Athletic Reductions in both Elementary Sports and High School Athletic Support 16
Maintenance and Operation Override 2016 (Voted on Nov. 2015) 100% of these Override $ will be spent to support classroom spending Retain highly qualified teachers and keep class size $2.2 M manageable 12% Student programs including Art, Music, Band, Physical $4.9 M Education and Athletics; 26% $11.8 M Additional support for Math 62% and Reading Provide all-day Kindergarten at no additional cost to parents
AG Report
2014 Cost Measures Relative to Peer Averages Operational Area Measure District Peer State Average Average Cost per pupil $609 $630 $757 Administration Students Per 86 81 68 Administrator Cost Per Square Foot $5.77 $5.83 $6.04 Plant Square Footage Per Operations 130 143 153 Student Cost Per Meal $3.07 $2.72 $2.69 Food Service Equivalent Cost Per Mile $4.00 $3.79 $3.62 Transportation Cost Per Rider $1,107 $977 $1,036 Very Low Low Comparable High Very High
Districts Grouped by Transportation Peer Group and Ranked by Cost Per Mile and Cost Per Rider FY14 Description District Name Cost Per Mile Cost Per Rider Districts in Cities and Peer Group Average $3.79 $ 977 Suburbs traveling 211- Fountain Hills USD 2.72 657 269 miles per ride Catalina Foothills USD 3.25 796 Litchfield ESD 3.45 753 Apache Junction USD 3.26 842 Queen Creek USD 3.53 843 Tempe UHSD 4.07 963 Chandler USD 4.06 996 Kyrene ESD 3.94 1,046 Wilson ESD 3.71 1,126 Dysart USD 4.00 1,107 Prescott USD 3.81 1,252 Washington ESD 4.51 1,082 Pendergast ESD 4.90 1,270
PROCEDURES FOR WALKERS AND RIDERS SECTION 5.15 - WALKERS AND RIDERS Designated School Crossings (Safe Walking Routes) on highways and streets must be authorized by the jurisdiction having authority over the roads and streets where crosswalks are to be established. All necessary approvals will by obtained by the district and any requirements established by the authority with jurisdiction for the streets and roadways will be fulfilled prior to the implementation of a designated Safe Walking Route. The District shall submit a written request to the appropriate local authority requesting review and approval for all new school designated crosswalks. The authority will review these applications against specific criteria they identify such as the Arizona Department of Transportation Traffic Safety for School Area Guidelines. Use of newly designated school crosswalks will only begin after all conditions included in the approved jurisdictions have been met. These conditions may include stripping, lighting, and the requirement for crossing guard(s) at the approved crosswalks.
Time
Registered Offenders Dysart Elementary School
Registered Offenders Dysart High School
Recommend
More recommend
