Budget Prep 1713 by Half Hollow Hills Schools

HALF HOLLOW HILLS SCHOOL DISTRICT of Huntington and Babylon

First Community Meeting in preparation for the

2013‐14 Budget January 7, 2013

Agenda • • • • •

Welcome/Introductions Meeting Purpose/Objectives Challenges in Developing the 2013‐14 Budget State of the 2013‐14 Budget Additional Information Regarding Budget Survey Reference Guide • Survey • Questions and Answers Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Agenda • • • • •

2012‐13 Budget Basics ‐ Expenses 80% Salaries & Benefits $222 million

18% Vendor Contracts & Other* 2% Equipment & Supplies

* Includes contract transportation, outside service providers, TAN, debt service, transfer to capital and BOCES Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

2012‐13 Budget Basics ‐ Expenses 80%

Salaries & Benefits

Of this 80% of the budget: 0.88% 5.82% 70.94% 13.67% 3.02% 5.66%

Superintendent & Assistant Superintendents Administrators Teachers Clerical/Paras/Monitors Transportation Custodial/Maintenance/Grounds

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

2012‐13 Budget Basics ‐ Revenues Tax Levy State Aid Other*

82% 11%

$222 million

* Other includes PILOTs and use of fund balance and reserves Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

What is the Property Tax Levy Cap? Legislation in effect for the 2012‐13 budget year and forward whose goal was to address rising property taxes across New York State. Requires districts to complete a State formula for calculating the allowable tax levy and imposes severe constraints to maintain local control.

State Aid

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

BEFORE the Property Tax Levy Cap Educational Priorities

Proposed Budget

Key Budget Development Considerations: Educational priorities drive the process Local control over a large portion of revenues Simple majority (50% +1) means an approved budget Implications of a failed budget create unique challenges Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Property Tax Levy Cap What we heard • 2% cap on growth of property taxes • Mandate relief is coming • Districts should use their “rainy day” funds • Legislation is fair and equitable since everyone follows the same formula

What we know

How we responded

• 2% is not 2% • There is no cap, just a voting threshold • Simple majority versus super majority • New rules for Contingent Budgets will devastate programs • There was no pertinent mandate relief • Further separation of communities across Long Island: “haves” versus “have‐nots”

• We used more of our “rainy day” funds • We communicated early and often • We reduced our 2012‐13 budget by over $9 million • We began planning for the 2013‐14 budget even earlier

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

What Did “2%” Really Mean? The “2%” Calculation for Western Suffolk Districts in 2012‐13 4.50% 4.00% 3.50% 3.00%

The State formula allowed a 2.33% property tax levy increase for HHH by achieving a simple majority at budget vote time.

2.50% 2.00% 1.50% 1.00% 0.50% 0.00%

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Using More of Our “Rainy Day” Fund $10,000,000 $9,000,000 $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $‐ 2008‐09

Use of Reserves

2009‐10

2010‐11

2011‐12

2012‐13

Use of Fund Balance

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Pros and Cons of “Rainy Day” Fund Use Reduce burden on taxpayers

Minimize program reductions

Limited purpose use Local control

Respond to State and local input

Increased borrowing costs

Budget Comptroller gap in & External subsequent Auditors years Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

2013‐14 Budget Development Employment Contract Obligations

Utilizing projections and known increases or decreases to expenses, the preliminary estimated cost to keep all programs and services in place as they exist today would mean the following for 2013‐14:

Benefits Costs

Vendor Contracts

Equipment & Supplies

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

7.1% estimated budget to budget increase

8.5% estimated property tax levy increase 13

2013‐14 Budget Development • Assumptions: Use of “Rainy Day” Fund

Tax Levy Increase of 2.8%

State Aid

 State Aid remains constant  Use of fund balance and reserves remains constant  No piercing of the property tax levy “cap”  Simple majority means an approved budget

$9.5 million of reductions needed in 2013‐14 budget Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Which Brings Us to Tonight…

Engage & Educate Utilize more reserves and/or fund balance? Reduce which services?

Eliminate which programs?

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Close a building? Pierce the “Cap”?

Agenda • • • • •

Budget Survey Reference Guide • Responding to additional information on:       

Controlling Administrative Costs Closing Fran Greenspan Administrative Center Transportation Option to close Chestnut Hill Elementary School Option to close Candlewood Middle School Option to close High School West Middle School 8‐Period Day

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Controlling Administrative Costs School Year

# of Administrators

Administrator Salaries as a % of the Overall Budget

Increase or (Decrease) from Prior Year

2009‐10

3.9%

‐

2010‐11

3.8%

$58,341

2011‐12

3.6%

($312,976)

2012‐13

3.4%

($127,586)

Total Administrator salary expense has decreased by $382,221 since 2009‐10 Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Controlling Administrative Costs • Reduction of Administrative Positions  Assistant Superintendent for Research, Assessment and Special Services  Chief Information Officer  Coordinator of FACS and Instructional Computing  Elementary Assistant Principal  High School Dean of Students  Special Education Literacy Specialist

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Controlling Administrative Costs • Elimination of SBAs and Liaison stipends • Reduction in eight administrative support positions • Reassignment to Building Level from Central Office:  School Psychologist  Social Worker

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Controlling Administrative Costs • Contractual Negotiations for Administrators’ Association  2011‐12: 0% Increase  2012‐13 & 2013‐14: 0% Increase & Step Freeze Two‐year savings of over $1.2 million

• Since 2009‐10, Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent salary expenses have decreased by $287,108 Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Center for American Progress • January 2011 independent evaluation of 611 New York State School Districts ranked Half Hollow Hills:  In the 92nd Percentile in Student Achievement 50th out of 611 NYS School Districts

 In the 6th Percentile in Administrative Costs as a percentage of the overall budget 573rd out of 611 NYS School Districts

 In the 23rd Percentile in Administrator to Pupil Ratio 470th out of 611 NYS School Districts Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Center for American Progress Return on Investment: An Independent District‐by‐District Evaluation of Educational Productivity: “Doing What Works” (January 2011)

Half Hollow Hills has the highest State Achievement Index of any school of its diversity!

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Fran Greenspan Administrative Center • Why not close the Fran Greenspan Administrative Center?  Houses 107 employees and Reach/CYA staff  Contains offices of Superintendent and Assistant Superintendents, Human Resources, Special Education, Curriculum, Payroll, Accounting, Technology Infrastructure, Board Room, District Clerk, Facilities, Central Mailroom, Central Registration, School Lunch and Reach/CYA  If close building, savings are three custodians and one hall monitor  Considerations – – – –

Cost of relocating and redistribution of employees spread among 11 buildings Relocation and recreation of technology infrastructure Reduced efficiency due to loss of centralized personnel/services Loss of public meeting spaces

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Transportation • Can we eliminate 100% busing?  Changes to universal busing can only be accomplished through a public vote  Universal busing is in place due to:  Wide expanse of District’s boundaries  Main roads surrounding many of our buildings  Lack of sidewalks for student walkers

• Currently the District contracts out approximately 100 buses Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Option to Close an Elementary School • Why is this an option?  Decreasing enrollment at elementary level  2013‐14 budget reductions needed Total K‐5 Elementary Enrollments 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 June 2011

June 2012

December 2012

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

2013‐14

2014‐15

Option to Close Chestnut Hill • In choosing which elementary school to close, the considerations are to:  Create optimal feeder patterns for students transitioning to the middle and high schools  Achieve enrollment balance in all schools  Chestnut Hill’s location on the south service road of the Long Island Expressway provides potential for leasing

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Option to Close Chestnut Hill Otsego Elementary Forest Park Elementary

Paumanok Elementary

Sunquam Elementary

Vanderbilt Elementary Candlewood Middle School

Signal Hill Elementary

West Hollow Middle School

For 2013‐14 and beyond, Candlewood enrollment will be substantially lower than West Hollow. To achieve enrollment balance between buildings, more students will need to transition into Candlewood versus West Hollow. Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Chestnut Hill Elementary

Option to Close Chestnut Hill • The least disruptive option is to close a school with students who transition to West Hollow and distribute the majority of those students to schools which transition to Candlewood  Of the schools which transition to West Hollow, Chestnut Hill has the lowest enrollment, therefore effecting the least number of students  Chestnut Hill busing patterns are most conducive to a redistricting for only the effected school Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Option to Close Chestnut Hill • Chestnut Hill student relocation plan achieves:  Average class size of 22.5 students throughout the District  Balanced enrollment among remaining six elementary schools

• Relocation of 437 regular education Chestnut Hill students to five elementary buildings

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Forest Park Vanderbilt Signal Hill

Otsego Sunquam

Option to Close Chestnut Hill • 2013‐14 regular education projected enrollments by elementary building achieve balance as a result of the proposed student distribution under the closing of Chestnut Hill option

Candlewood

West Hollow

Forest Park

Paumanok

568

530

Otsego

Signal Hill

560

569

Vanderbilt

Sunquam

554

538

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Option to Close Chestnut Hill • The closing of Chestnut Hill option as proposed ensures better balancing over time of fifth graders transitioning to both middle schools

Projected number Projected number of 5th Graders of 5th Graders transitioning to transitioning to West Hollow Candlewood

2013‐14

275 students

333 students

2014‐15

321 students

372 students

2015‐16 328 students

2015‐16 297 students

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Option to Close a Middle School • Why is this an option?  Decreasing enrollment at middle school level  2013‐14 budget reductions needed  Over $3 million in potential savings from reductions in: Building Administrators Teachers Program Modifications Support Services Nurse Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Custodial Clerical Monitors/Paraprofessionals Security

Option to Close Candlewood • How is this achieved?  Sixth grade students would remain at their present elementary school  All seventh and eighth grade students would attend West Hollow Middle School

• If Candlewood were to close, enrollment at West Hollow would be:

1,423 2012‐13 Actual (Grades 6‐8)

1,607 2013‐14 Projected (Grades 7‐8)

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

1,398 2014‐15 Projected (Grades 7‐8) 34

Option to Close High School West • What does it mean?  Sixth grade students would remain at the elementary level  Ninth grade students would remain at the middle school level  All tenth, eleventh, and twelfth grade students would attend High School East

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Option to Close High School West • Projected middle school enrollments: West Hollow (Grades 7‐9)

Candlewood (Grades 7‐9)

2013‐14

1,420 students

1,039 students

• Projected High School East enrollment: Current 1,852 (Grades 9‐12)

2013‐14 2,483

2014‐15 2,531

Combined high school enrollment (Grades 10‐12)

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Option of Middle School 8‐Period Day • What does it mean?  Elimination of the following courses: Computers ‐ Grade 6 Seminar in Math ‐ Grade 7 Seminar in Social Studies ‐ Grade 8

 Modification of the following courses: Exploration of World Languages ‐ Grade 6 Music (opposite Physical Education) ‐ Grade 6 Health ‐ Grade 6

Community Meeting on the 2013‐14 Budget – January 7, 2013

Agenda • • • • •