SMMUSD Public School Finance Education 2012 Presented by the Financial Oversight Committee

Agenda  California Education Spending  Poor Ranking in Nation  Why is this?  SMMUSD Revenue Breakout  SMMUSD Expenses Breakout  Why do we care?

California Education Spending  California public schools, unlike those in many other states, receive a majority of their dollars from the state budget, and the largest share of spending supports K- 12 schools.

Poor Ranking in Nation California’s public schools are ranked:  46 out of 50 states in K-12 spending per student in (CA: $8,908, US: $11,764)  50 out of 50 states in K-12 students per teacher. (CA: 20.5, US: 13.8)  47 out of 50 states as a % of Personal Income. (CA: 3.27%, US: 4.29%)  46 out of 50 states in K-12 students per administrator. (CA: 301, US: 203) *California Budget Project, School Finance Facts, October 2011

Why is this? 1. Serrano v Priest 2. Passage of Proposition California State Budget Cuts

Serrano V. Priest  1976 California Supreme Court Decision.  Schools should be similarly funded.  Court found that schools’ dependence on local property taxes violated equal protection rights of students in districts with relatively low property wealth.  The State’s response was to establish limit on the combined state and local revenues received by a school district to equalize the funding available to high and low property wealth districts.

Passage of Proposition 13  Passed in 1978, Prop 13 capped local property tax rate at 1%. As a result overall revenue potential decreased.  Prop 13 shifted how schools received their dollars. State started providing funding to School District at the established revenue limit based on socio-economic indicators.  Provided 2/3 vote requirement to increase taxes.

California Spending Per Student vs. Rest of Nation Proposition 13 enacted in Approx. $2,856 less

California Fiscal Condition  California State Budget Cuts - The State Legislature has cut overall General Fund spending by 20% since  Potential cuts continue for school year. Governor is proposing a $370 cut per student equating to $4MM for SMMUSD if tax initiatives fail.

SMMUSD Revenue Per Student (Total General Fund including Restricted) *SMMUSD Unaudited Actuals › State › Revenue Limit Funds (General purpose) 5,400 › Categorical (Temporarily unrestricted) 1,000 › Special Education – SB › Lottery 130 › State $ 7,150 67% › Federal › Title Funding, No Child Left Behind 750 › Special Education – IDEA (83% deficit) 225 › Federal $ 975 9% › Local › Joint-use Agreement with City of Santa Monica - $7.8MM 700 $24mm › Measure Y&YY - $5.5MM 500 › Parcel Taxes - $10.5MM 950 › Income From Assets - $3.7MM 300 › Charitable (SMMEF, SOS, etc) - $1.8MM 165 › Local $ 2,615 24% › Total Funding Per Student $ 10,740

Revenue Break-out *SMMUSD Unaudited Actuals

Where does the $ go? Out of the general fund,  Salaries and Benefits accounts for 87%,  Books and Supplies 3%,  Operating Expenses 10%.

The data sliced a different way: Of the general fund,  Instruction accounts for 82%,  Building & Facility costs account for 10%,  General Administration accounts for 8%.

Other Factors Affect Spending  Staffing Ratio History  Teacher Placement  Special Education Underfunding  ~ $1,000 per student

Staffing Ratio - Primary SMMUSD - 2/9/12 Years Grades All Other Title I / Jams All Other Title I / Jams All Other Title I / Jams All Other Title I / Jams All Other Title I / Jams K

Staffing Ratio - Secondary SMMUSD - 2/9/12 Years Grades All Other Title I / Jams All Other Title I / Jams All Other Title I / Jams All Other Title I / Jams All Other Title I / Jams

Highly Trained & Experienced Teachers *SMMUSD J-90  57% of SMMUSD Teachers are on the top of the salary scale based on their years of experience and education level.  Less than 8% are in their early years of teaching.  As a result, SMMUSD pays out more $$ for salaries than a district with less experienced teachers.

SMMUSD’s Depth of Educational Opportunities  Specialized Reading Teachers  Physical Activities Specialists  Comprehensive Special Education Programs and Services  Honors and Advanced Placement Courses  Summer School  Visual, Performing Arts, Music and Dance Programs  Progressive Professional Development  Technology infrastructure and classroom upgrades  Site-based Specialized programs (Magnet, SPARK, Valued Youth, etc.)

Why do we care?  Budget outlook continues to be grim and grimmer for the future.  SMMUSD cannot rely on the State or Federal government for additional support….in fact just the opposite.  The community of SMMUSD needs to continue to pull together to bring much needed additional support into the District through fundraising and taxes.