Cuts hurt as Analy deals with its deficit
The high school district's layoffs proposed to reduce a structural deficit
One speaker referred to March as “layoff season” at Wednesday night’s board meeting for West Sonoma County Union High School District. This kind of March Madness, when the board meets twice in the month, is not a lot of fun for the school board, but it’s especially hard on the certificated and classified employees as well as the community. The high school district is one of the largest employers in the area.
The State’s Education Code dictates that a district must announce possible layoffs by March 15 for the coming school year and then finalize those cuts in May. Some positions that are cut at the end of this school year may be re-instated in the new school year, depending on enrollment.
“It’s a process that creates crabby staff and students who don’t get the classes they want (when classes are cut),” warned Lily Smedshammer, a teacher and president of the West County Teacher’s Association. Across campus, morale is low, said a message from an anonymous school employee sent to Sebastopol Times.
“It’s a dastardly situation how education is funded in this State” said Board President Lewis Buchner. The District has a structural deficit, he said, and the Board must deal with it by making cuts that are painful all around.
At the March 5 meeting, there was a strong turnout to support the Dance Program and its popular teacher, Jolene Johnson, which Sebastopol Times covered here. Although the board voted at that meeting to put some dance classes on the tentative cut list, that decision was rescinded at the March 15 meeting, and the Dance program and its teacher were spared.
At this meeting, Casey Jones, the head of the music department, pleaded to save the band or instrumental program from losing any teaching positions. He said that there are students who “need or want access to music programs” and he asked that “these classes remain open for those students.” He received applause from a larger than normal audience for whom this was but a preliminary bout.
Student representative Alina Peterson, a bright and bold presence in the room all night, remarked: "I want to applaud that. I want to applaud our music programs. While the school prides itself a lot on athletics, our music programs are truly exceptional. These students are making a big difference.”
Brigette De Leon Recognized
The meeting opened with a recognition for Analy’s School Account Clerk, Brigette De Leon, who is retiring after close to 20 years of service.
Academic Cuts
Dan Blake, the executive director of Human Resources, presented a new resolution to the Board that changed the number of eliminated FTE (Full Time Equivalent) faculty positions from 5.6 FTE to 7.0 FTE. These numbers refer to positions, not people (though most people not in HR might think differently).
Academic Support Instructional Services - 1.00
CTE (Arts, Music, & Entertainment - Instrumental Music) Instructional Services - 0.20
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Teacher on Special Assignment Instructional Services- 0.20
English Instructional Services - 0.40
Fine Arts Teacher on Special Assignment Instructional Services - 0.20
Mathematics Instructional Services - 1.80
Physical Education Instructional Services - 1.00
Social Sciences Instructional Services - 0.40
Special Education Instructional Services - 1.60
WASC Teacher on Special Assignment Instructional Services - 0.20
“All but 1.20 FTE of the reductions are able to be absorbed by retirements, resignations, release of temporary teachers, and leaves of absence,” said Blake. “Over the past 3 years (including this year), we have made a total of 14.8 FTE in reductions.”
You might wonder what it means to cut, for instance, .40 for English Instructional Services. Blake explained: “.40 FTE is the equivalent to two teaching sections (or classes). Each section at Analy is equated to .20 FTE increments as a 1.0 FTE teacher teaches 5 classes. Each section at Laguna is equated to .17 FTE increments as a 1.0 FTE teacher teaches 6 classes.”
So how was Jolene Johnson’s .40 Dance elimination rescinded? “After further analyzing the enrollment trends and course request data,” Blake said, “it was determined that 1.0 Physical Education would be recommended for reduction vs .40 Dance and .60 PE as recommended on March 5th. As Jolene has multiple credentials, she can teach a few different courses.”
Reviewing these cuts, Alina Peterson asked how the District could be cutting Math Services. “Haven’t our math scores plummeted?” she asked. “Don’t we need more not less help in math?” Blake responded that he didn’t believe the cuts would have a negative impact.
Staff Cuts
Two staff cuts turned out to be the main event of the evening. Most of the people who filled the room came out especially for this item on the agenda. The resolution asked the board to approve the elimination of two “confidential classified” staff: the executive assistant to the Superintendent and accountant/analyst position. This was especially awkward because Karen Lamb, the executive assistant to the Superintendent, sat next to the Superintendent at the front of the room, taking notes of the meeting.
After the resolution was read, Alina Peterson asked: “Why is the accountant/analyst position being eliminated? If the district has a budget deficit, don’t we need an accountant?” She received some applause, and then asked repeatedly: “Why? Why?” After more applause, she asked: “Are there other things that can be cut?” She offered to make some suggestions of her own.
Lily Smedshammer spoke out against the layoff as did Julie McClellan, who is the head of the union that represents the classified employees. The main spokesperson against these cuts, however, was the former HR director for the District, Mia Del Prete. Her voice quavering, she said: “I am outraged.” Like Peterson, she asked why these positions were being eliminated. In her previous HR role, she knew that the cuts could not be performance-related. She questioned why the resolution said the jobs were being eliminated “due to a lack of work or lack of funds.” She said the district should be ashamed of “how leadership presented this at the eleventh hour and plan to eliminate two people who collectively had 33 years of experience in the district.”
“I stand with Karen Lamb and Melissa Norris,” she said. Everyone who came to oppose the resolution stood with her. Del Prete urged the board to vote “no” on the resolution.
There was more than a moment of silence. Trustee Linda Helton spoke first: “Don’t assume we’re rubberstamping this decision.” She said she had done her due diligence on the matter. Jeanne Fernandes said: “None of this is easy. None of it is the fun part of being on the board.” She also said that she had done her own due diligence.
Alina Peterson spoke up. “Don’t mean any disrespect here, but can’t we get creative? I’m just a teen and you all are adults and you’re in charge and I’m not. Can we try to change this? We got creative with Ms J and changed it. ” Again, she got a round of applause. She knew that where she might be creating some discomfort for the Board, but none of the Trustees showed any displeasure, perhaps allowing that as a student member she is free to speak her mind.
Lewis Buchner expressed his frustration that the board had no choice but to address “this deficit situation.” Then the board voted, and the resolution was passed unanimously. “Terrible,” cried one voice and another repeated it. “Recall!” cried another. The supporters rose in unison and left the Analy Library in disgust.
Budget Numbers
Andrew Soliz, the chief business officer of the district, presented a current view of the district budget for this year based on numbers through January 31 of this year, and he provided a projection for the next two years that the district would remain fiscally solvent. (This is called the Second Interim Budget.) Outside of the meeting, Soliz answered some questions of mine and clarified some points. The term “structural deficit” is used frequently in these meetings. In simplest terms, it means that the district’s expenditures exceed the revenue from funding. But it’s a bit more complex because of funding formulas. This is an attempt to explain the numbers behind the deficit. (Any errors are mine, not Andrew’s.)
Where Funding Comes From
The district’s revenue can be divided into two types: unrestricted and restricted funds. “Unrestricted funds are dollars generated through the Local Control Funding Formula, which is a combination of funds from property taxes, Education Protection Account Entitlement, and State Aid,” Soliz explained. Funding from the state through the LCFF amounts to over $20 million, not quite two-thirds of total funding for the district. “Additional unrestricted dollars also include the additional home-to-school transportation funding, above what is included in the LCFF.” The biggest component of LCFF is the amount that the state pays for the Average Daily Attendance of students in the district — this number reflects not enrollment but a three-year rolling average of actual attendance, which is 1,463 students in 2024-25.
Restricted funds must be spent on specific programs. “These dollars are generated through various federal and state programs, such as Title I, special education - Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) - and mental health, Career Tech Education, various block grants, parcel tax, and donations,” said Soliz. One budgeting technicality is that restricted funds are not budgeted for future years unless the grant or program is already set and thus the actual number in future years might vary.
Funding from the State Lottery systems comes in as both restricted and unrestricted funding.
“In 2000-21, districts started receiving one-time COVID funds, which are now fully expended this year,” said Soliz. “The last of the Learning Recovery Block Grant will be fully expended at the end of this year.”
Combined unrestricted and restricted funding for last year and this year are about flat, around $32.5M with a 1% growth projected for next year. Note that $1M of funding comes from the Federal government and $10M also comes from the State and Local taxes apart from LCFF.
How the Expenses Add Up
The budget expenditures consist of district salaries, benefits, supplies, operating expenses and contracted services. The big changes in the budget were on the expenditure side, as one can see from the last school year, this year, next year and the year after that. In some ways, districts don’t really have much control over how much revenue they get from the state, except by growing enrollment; they have more control over expenditures, but the salaries and benefits—as well as costs of the goods that they purchase—continue to rise in cost.
Total expenses went up 18.41% from last year to this year—about a $6 million increase.
“Only $1.05 million of that is in unrestricted funds. The remaining increase in expenditures is based on restricted funding with specified purposes on how funds can be spent,” explained Soliz.
For the current school year, with revenues of $32.5 million and expenditures at $36 million, the deficit is about $3.5 million. The budget that was presented aims to reduce but not eliminate this budget deficit in future years. (Last year, the budget was a net $1.9 million positive.) When looking at the current projected deficit, the unrestricted deficit is $1.2 million, and $2.3 million is restricted. Next year, the deficit is projected to be $2.1 million ($1.5 million unrestricted and about $600,000 restricted) and $1.1 million the year after that ($940,000 unrestricted and $193,000 restricted).
There is enough in the General Fund to cover these losses but the district must reduce costs (or increase revenue) before the fund balance is exhausted in future years. The balance is now at $10 million ($8.2 million unrestricted and $2.1 million restricted), and it is projected to drop to $7 million ($5.7 million unrestricted and 1.5 million unrestricted) in 26-27. The unappropriated fund balance, which is presumably available to address a future deficit, is actually much lower: $6.3 million in 24-25, $4.9 million in 25-26 and $3.9 million in 26-27.
Reserves
Soliz recommended that while the district does carry a 3% reserve, the minimum amount required, the Board of Trustees should consider increasing the reserve to better position itself to handle any future economic uncertainties. He pointed out that the current reserve does not even cover one month of the district’s payroll costs.
“On average, the monthly payroll salary costs $1,525,000, and all employer-paid benefits, including retirement contributions, payroll taxes, and medical, dental, and vision insurance, add, on average, an additional $750,000 per month,” he explained. The Board agreed with him about increasing the reserve, and Superintendent Chris Meredith said that he’d look into best practices of other districts and bring a recommendation.
Uncertainty Ahead
Trustee Jeannie Fernandes expressed concern about what is happening at the Federal level. “Just today, we heard that the Education Department is being gutted,” she said. “I think we could find ourselves in a real world of hurt, and it bothers me tremendously.” She said that the other big concern is special education, which has 8% of its funding coming from the federal government. If that 8% goes away, it would have to come from the district’s General Fund.
“I found that the news coming from Santa Rosa [City Schools] felt frightening as a board member,” said Board President Lewis Buchner. “I don’t know the details there, but I would imagine that the board kicked the can down the road, which is the easy thing to do.” The SRCS $20 million deficit has led to the closing of schools and the merger of middle schools and high schools in the district, as well as laying off 300 people. “I would really like to see us end the structural deficit in the next two years,” he said. Buchner asked that the board come to an agreement that they wanted to work on eliminating the deficit and make more hard decisions, if needed, in the future.
Video Recordings of WSCUHSD Board Meetings in March
The District is on spring break this week.
Excellent reporting, a vital contribution to the community.
The district, as most school districts in the state, are required to make cuts by March 15th to account for estimated enrollment and a tentative budget. I applaud the administration and board for making cuts that affect the students the least. It is rare for school districts to cut administrative positions but this one did. So the budget is not being balanced on the backs of the teachers and those that affect the students the most. Teacher positions are based on enrollment. More students equal more teachers. Unfortunately, small class sizes are not supported by the state budget.