In broad strokes, it appears the May revision to the proposed State budget will not cut as much from education as previously projected. But the State Legislature has yet to discuss, vote and adopt an actual budget. So we still have to wait and see.
The revised budget has reductions and no provision for a Cost Of Living Adjustment, COLA.
COLA is an interesting concept, one the various union groups comment on often in public discourse.
As with most budget items in education, it is not straight forward. The amount of COLA varies among school districts, based on an outdated formula established post-Prop. 13 when education funding changed in California.
First, the Bad News
The Culver City School District gets less than the average. COLA is not provided for all employees in the District. So even when received, it cannot just be passed onto salaries at the same percentages.
Often the state gives a COLA, but then withholds a percentage reducing the actual distribution.
Sigh…
And increased fixed costs come out of this figure as well. Not to worry. No COLA for next year anyway.
The bad news is, there is no money available for wage increases for anybody.
This year, the School District had to reduce the budget by $850,000 before the governor’s cuts, due to the decline in overall enrollment.
Ninety percent of the District’s unrestricted budget goes to wages and benefits.
But with fewer students, fewer teachers are required.
At meetings of CBAC, the Community Budget Advisory Committee, union representatives voted a high priority for teacher layoffs as the adjustments due to lower enrollment would occur even without the additional reductions the state budget required.
Lower enrollment was the reason for teacher layoffs.
And Now the Good
The good news is, School District teachers, through the good efforts of their union many years ago, have a built-in raise each year and the ability to obtain an additional raise if they further their education.
This “step and column” increase insures that teachers, unlike most private sector employees, will receive a guaranteed raise in salary up to a negotiated number of years and educational level.
That means the majority of teachers will make more money next year, regardless of budget reductions.
Alas, this does not address the rise in healthcare costs we all face nor does it suggest teachers are paid according to their value in our society.
But we all know the earning limitations of our occupations, and our District employees entered education aware they could not expect high wages.
Enrollment and the volume of “permit” students, now 21 percent of total enrollment, is a policy discussion for our new School Board.
The Way It Works
Recent Board discussions suggest that some Board members wish to restrict the number of new permits allowed into the District as a means of gradually reducing enrollment.
The result of any reductions in enrollment will be a further reduction to the District budget and additional teacher layoffs.
Still to come is an $11 million retirement fund exposure and additional enrollment declines projected by the state (which is why there is room for the volume of permit students in the first place).
For these reasons, it might be prudent for our School Board to bite the proverbial bullet now and suffer deeper cuts at once, squirrel away all of the savings in an untouchable account until the “7 years of famine” have passed.
The School District will better weather future financial contractions and emerge stronger in the long run with a manageable student population, a retirement program that is funded and perhaps the ability to again increase compensation to employees in another year.
Alan Elmont is a parent and Community Budget Advisory Committee member.
