The District staff (Audrey Kilpatrick) presented a revised list of ways to service the loan. Here were the changes Audrey presented:
- ROP would now be cut $11,000 (up $3,000)
- School Safety and Violence Prevention would now be cut $1,500 (up $500)
- CAHSEE would now be cut $1,500 (up $500)
- GATE would now be cut $3,000 (up $1,500)
- STAR would now be cut $10,000 (up $6,000)
- School Improvement Block Grant would now be cut $1,379 (up $1,379)
- Restricted Lottery funds would now be cut $16,103 (up $1,000)
- Arts & Music Block Grant cuts were reduced from the original $15,00 to $7,500
- (see attachements for more details)
Some of the key discussions of the Board revolved around the idea of possibly dipping into the district's JPA funds. Currently, the JPA fund account has $4000,000 in it. Several Board members suggested to use $80,000 of that for the next two years to avoid having to use any unrestricted funds, thereby avoiding any encumberment on the general fund for two years. Other members spoke about using more unrestricted lottery funds, sell the Sousa property, and/or dip into district reserves. The District will issue its final draft at the Board meeting on Monday and vote on it. It is critical that all of you attend in order to speak on behalf of yourself, your department and your academic program.
While the GFCCE appreciates the effort of the Board to reduce the impact on the general fund, the position of the GFCCE is still in opposition to the loan. Here are the concerns as I see them from the perspective as president of the GFCCE:
- When will the state pay the money it owns us? (Our state is bankrupt and headed into another $28 billion of debt. There is too much risk in taking the loan premised on the idea that we will get our money from the state in a short period of time. We need to be prepared to shoulder this loan for 15 years.)
- After three years the unrestricted funds will become restricted again. All of this loan will be saddled on the general fund. We cannot afford that.
- Department leaders and other stakeholders have not been involved in the decision-making process (although the Board discussed moving in this direction.)
- The Board has not adequately analyzed the alternatives to a loan including a bond, schools of choice, etc. Remember, the Board voted in January 2008 not to go into debt to complete this project. If the situation has changed, let's re-examine the whole project.
- The servicing of this loan will occur on top of the budget cuts that will happen this spring. What else will the District cut?
- The District is still not in compliance with contractual class size averages and has increased freshmen class sizes at the September Board meeting. Why is the District unable to muster the funds for policies that clearly support all students but now wants to go into debt for the next 15 years?
- What will the District do for Galt High deferred maintenance and district-wide students outside of the AG program as a result of this loan?
- Too many students across the academic spectrum may suffer as a result of this loan.
In the final analysis, the cons still outweight the pros but if the district can reduce the reliance on the general fund, then that will make this idea seem more palatable. Keep in mind, come the new year, the district will still ask to cut up to $1.5 million in costs in order to balance its budget. How can we afford to go into further debt at this point? There are too many uncertainties to take this financial risk.
(Please find attached the District documents the District made available to the public at Saturday's meeting.)