1. 1 Budget Committee 2009-2010 Budget 05 March 2009

2. 2 2009-2010 Budget Projection In $Millions

3. 3

4. 4 2009-2010 Preliminary Grant and Non Grant Revenue In $Millions

5. 5 Cause of $8.0 million Shortfall

6. 6 2008-2009 Teacher Grids

7. 7 Salary Grid Comparison

8. 8 Salary Grids for Non Teaching Staff Majority of salary grids for non teaching staff are 7 steps Select grids are 4 steps Ministry does not provide any funding for progression on grid Estimated cost of progression for 2008-2009 is $1.1 million

9. 9 Staffing Based on 2008-2009 Revised Budget

10. 10 Spending Based on 2008-2009 Revised Estimates

11. 11 RESTRICTIONS ON BUDGET DECISIONS Information based on 2008-2009 Approved Budget In $Millions

12. 12 Uncommitted costs for 2009-2010 include the following: In $Millions

13. 13 Risk Factors Average Daily Enrolment projection contingent on construction of new schools Retirement gratuities and salary differential Cost of benefits and type of coverage Expected utility savings Expected increase in refuse and recycling costs Insurance premiums and claims Funding in addition to Grants for Students Needs Expected revenue from Qualifications and Experience grant Expected revenue from Declining Enrolment grant

14. 14 EMERGING BUDGET PRESSURES Benchmark for salaries and benefits Special education funding model Incremental grants for high risk students New school construction, renovations and building maintenance Schools in high growth areas Transportation Research and analysis Client services, communications and consultation Amount of reporting Changing student demographics Changing expectations Class size: grades 4 – 8 Full day kindergarten implementation Cost of running new schools without closing existing space

15. 15 Fixed versus Variable

16. 16 Scenario 1 In $Millions

17. 17 Scenario 1 The in year projected deficit of $8.0 million is a permanent annual problem. Costs go up by this amount each year. Solving 2009-2010 does not solve 2010-2011 This permanent ongoing shortfall will reappear in 2010-2011 (and each following year) and has been increased by 3.0% to reflect contractual obligations for a total of $8.3 million One time available reserves of $5.0 million could be used to balance the 2009-2010 budget As reserves are a one time source of funding, expenditures will have to be reduced by $5.0 million to stay within available funding unless new revenue is found for 2010-2011 Projected shortfall for 2010-2011 includes: cost increase of $8.3 million for 2010-2011 plus $5.0 million of spending that no longer has a funding source for a total of $13.3 million – if there is no funding source, expenditures must be reduced to stay within available funding

18. 18 Reserves In $Millions

19. 19 Scenario 2 In $Millions

20. 20 Scenario 2 This scenario assumes the same $8.0 million shortfall and use of reserves for 2009-2010 “Phantom cuts” means ignoring the funding problem and approving reductions to balance the budget that would likely not actually be able to happen Doing this would likely result in a $3.0 million deficit in 2009-2010 which have to be repaid in the 2010-2011 budget year Projected shortfall for 2010-2011 includes: cost increase of $8.3 million for 2010-2011 plus $5.0 million of spending that no longer has a funding source plus $3.0 million for the 2009-2010 deficit recovery for a total of $16.3 million

21. 21 Scenario 3 In $Millions

22. 22 Scenario 3 This scenario assumes the projected shortfall for 2009- 2010 is revised to $5.0 million Projected shortfall for 2010-2011 includes: cost increase of $5.2 million for 2010-2011 plus $5.0 million of spending that no longer has a funding source for a total of $10.2 million

23. 23 2009-2010 BUDGET PROCESS  Budget Projection  Students, staffing, programs and projections  Consultation  Grant Announcement  Budget Proposal  Consultation  Budget Debate  Consultation  Final Budget

24. 24 BUDGET SCHEDULE Assuming Ministry grant package is received by mid March BUDGET SCHEDULE Assuming Ministry grant package is received by mid March