Old Adobe school district draws line in the sand

<p>The superintendent of Sonoma County schools says he understands why the Old Adobe Union School District’s Board of Trustees refused to submit a balanced budget for the 2011-2012 school year, but hopes that his office will be able to work with the board within the next few weeks to accomplish the state-mandated task.</p><!-- Nothing to do. The paragraph has already been output --><p>“I’m not in disagreement with the board’s frustration at having to be held to criteria that goes three years out when the state can’t even balance a budget for one year,” Carl Wong said. “But I also understand the stated responsibility that county superintendents have to maintain the integrity of the budget process.</p><p>“Once the state budget is approved, we will have 45 days to make final adjustments to school district budgets, so this will provide a little time for the board and superintendent to work with the Old Adobe district and other districts. I would prefer to not be in an uncomfortable position with the Old Adobe district, so I will work with it to come to some sort of conditional approval.”</p><p>Russ Wigglesworth, a member of the Old Adobe board, thinks that it is unlikely that a balanced budget for 20011-2012 will be attained in that time frame.</p><p>“It’s possible, but it would depend on some major revelation. I don’t anticipate having any additional information during the 45-day period that would help us to balance the budget,” he said.</p><p>On June 29, the Old Adobe board submitted balanced budgets for the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school year to the Sonoma County Office of Education, but the 2011-2012 budget was some $600,000 to $700,000 short of being balanced. The board attached a resolution to the budget, stating, “We believe we have a responsibility to, and will not abandon, our students during California’s budget crisis.”</p><p>“The board had a lot of significant discussion before making the decision. We take our financial issues very seriously,” said Rick Parker, a board member.</p><p>Diane Zimmerman, superintendent of the OAUSD, approved of the action, Wigglesworth said. Zimmerman is away and could not be reached for comment on the matter.</p><p>The board began discussing the idea of not submitting a balanced budget after OAUSD interim financial officer Jim Maxwell told Wigglesworth that the Santa Cruz City Schools board decided to submit a budget only for the upcoming school year. </p><p>The Old Adobe board already has trimmed $1.675 million from a $14 million budget, and in a guest commentary published in the July 16 issue of the Argus-Courier, states that the latest round of cuts “grossly reduce site-controlled funds, further reduce maintenance and custodial support, limit textbook purchases, curtail staff development, threaten library services and classroom sizes and dangerously reduce our reserves.”</p><p>“The state wants us to project a budget three years away, as usual, but we don’t have much left to cut,” Wigglesworth said. “Why should we create anxiety among staff members and students by saying we will close the school or get rid of class-size reduction?</p><p>“We felt we needed to draw a line in the sand.” </p><p>The board contends that some new programs, such as Dual Immersion language classes at Bernard Eldredge Elementary School, could improve the financial situation, but it is unable to project the amounts of such revenue sources. </p><p>Wigglesworth and Parker said the board is aware that there could be repercussions from not balancing the 2011-2012 budget.</p><p>“The county could say, ‘We don’t accept this,’ but we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it,” Wigglesworth said. </p><p>Each year, school districts receive positive, conditional or negative state certification.</p><p>A positive certification is given to school districts that, based upon current projections, are able to meet their financial obligations for the next three years. A qualified certification is given to school districts that, based upon projections, will be unable to meet their financial obligations for the current fiscal year or two subsequent fiscal years. A negative certification is given to school districts that, based upon projections, will be unable to meet financial obligations for the remainder of the current fiscal year or the subsequent fiscal year.</p><p>“Old Adobe may or may not receive a positive certification, but won’t receive a negative certification,” Wong said. “To my knowledge, there hasn’t been a case of a district in Sonoma County receiving negative certification, although some have been in qualified status. This doesn’t mean they can’t do business, though. </p><p>“A qualified certification would require the Old Adobe district to make adjustments.”</p><p>School districts that are not able to meet their financial obligations during a current fiscal year can lose some control. Section 42133 of the California Education Code states, “A school district that has a qualified or negative certification in any fiscal year may not issue, in that fiscal year or in the next succeeding fiscal year, certificates of participation, tax anticipation notes, revenue bonds, or any other debt instruments that do not require the approval of the voters of the district ...”</p><p>“I promise that we eventually will have a balanced budget during 2011-2012, though,” Wigglesworth said.</p><p>Steve Bolman, deputy superintendent of Petaluma City Schools, says that he understands Old Adobe’s situation.</p><p>“I understand where they’re coming from — projections for the third year out are kind of a guessing game,” he said. “I don’t know what we would do if we didn’t have significant reserves to help with our declining enrollment.” </p><p>“I think that in the article, the Old Adobe board succinctly stated what most other boards and supervisors probably feel, and would like to say,” added Scott Mahoney, superintendent of the Waugh School District. “I respect them for taking the action they’ve taken, and can’t disagree with anything they said in the article.”</p><p>In the commentary, the Old Adobe board strongly urges the state of California to revise its budget-reduction priorities by focusing on making cuts at the state’s administrative level and by providing more financial flexibility for school districts.</p><p>“The state Department of Education is a top-heavy, administrative monster,” Wigglesworth said. “Too much emphasis is placed on bureaucratic strategy, rather than on education children in the classroom. I would be happy to see it abolish itself before eliminating another teacher.</p><p>“And the state money that is sent school districts can be used only in some very specific ways. This needs to change.”</p><p>(Contact Dan Johnson at dan.johnson@arguscourier.com)</p>