The latest segment of the Toughest Ten asks DJUSD Superintendent James Hammond and Associate Superintendent Bruce Colby about the district and particularly its budget challenges. One point of clarification is that while these are the two top staffers in the District, they are not Board Members and thus are not the ultimate decision makers on policy matters in the district.
1. Back in March, it was suggested that if the Propositions failed and the budget picture statewide continued to deteriorate, we would face about an additional $3 million budget shortfall—what changed and could the projections presented last week still change this summer?
Colby: Yes they could change. What’s changed in the Governor’s revise is he’s put hard numbers which is approximately two million dollars in cuts. But part of what he’s covering in the reductions is through deferrals of cash payments to future years. There’s still cuts to education, it’s just what year on the ledger that it’s going on. Those will just catch up in future years.
2. The district like all governing task bodies is subject to the ups and downs of the economy as well as the ability of the state to provide for COLA. Can the district move to a system that looks to do something similar to a portion of Prop 1A whereby the jagged lines are smoothed, the district’s budget grows based on a projected trendline, in years where the line is exceeded by revenues, the district saves the money and in years where the line dips below the trendline, the district uses the rainy day fund?
Hammond: I think we’re held by state law to a financial formula that the state defines. There’s a basic aid and there’s ADA districts and we’re obviously an ADA district. So to technically answer your question, no we cannot create something similar to Proposition 1A because the state already defines our apportionment.
Colby: I think what you’re trying to say is that when there’s higher COLA [Cost of Living Adjustments] years, can you not spend all the COLA? The Governor actually had one of his proposals a year back to do something similar to that—to get rid of COLA and just fund CPI [Consumer Price Index]. The district has the ability to do that. It basically is a big change based on standard processes in collective bargaining. It would have to be a very long and strategic conversation with your bargaining units. The one thing that people would have to get used to if you went to that structure is that in tough years you still would be paying out CPI. When you have stronger COLAs you give out less but in the years when there was zero COLA you might still be giving out salary increases because it would be averaged out over multiple times. It would have to be a long-term strategy that both the community and all of your bargaining units buy into.
Hammond: We’ve worked really hard—we haven’t had the luxuries of COLAs obviously—but we’ve worked really hard to build up the fund balance over the last two years. Every time we’ve addressed the structural deficit and try to build the balance, we get the new budget assumptions that basically dig a new hole for us.
Colby: There’s district that do that. I’ve spoken with people, but it’s a policy and it took many many years to buy into the policy and still it takes a lot work to maintain the policy. It’s human nature to spend and to spend versus cut. That’s part of it. The challenge is too that you have to trust when you spend it and when you have to make cuts. Because it doesn’t mean you won’t ever make cuts.
The only challenge is managing your automatic increases versus your CPI increases to the salary schedule. It takes one and a half points of COLA money just to pay for your step and column automatic increases. So CPI has been two and a half to three percent per year. It means that people have to get used to that if there’s any changes in salary schedules it would be one percent, half a percent, smaller numbers than they’ve seen in the past, but it would be more often. People would have to understand that because when you throw one percent out—it’s considered a very small number. The first thing you get back is that it’s not a serious number. It’s very small.
You’d have to get into multiyear agreements and not bargain every single year with your bargaining units. It could get done, but it would be work. You’d have to get into policy so that it outlives boards and people because it can’t be based on the people that are in the process in that day and time. It would have to be written into policy as well.
3. Past this year, speaking right now not as a board member, is it likely we will face more staffing cuts?
Hammond: For 09-10, at this point in time, we don’t feel the need to do additional staffing cuts for the 09-10 school year. However past that time, for 10-11 school year, current day assumptions is going to result with additional cuts. Does the board have the ability and the latitude to exercise with additional cuts? Yes, there’s a window of time prior to August 15 that they can exercise additional cuts. But at this time, I believe that the board direction is to go into the 09-10 school year with the cuts we’ve already identified and enacted upon.
4. When is the next CBA due with the bargaining units and will there likely be changes to the type of contract particularly on the salary side from previous years?
Hammond: They negotiate every year. There’s always sunshine opportunities for each of the bargaining groups. As far as salary schedule changes, we floated several options at the bargaining table to both CSEA and DTA. They’ve considered them but at this time we have no indication that there’s going to be any form of salary reduction any time in the near future.
Now obviously the governor’s budget does provide provisions where the school year can be reduced by seven school days. There may be some opportunities there to look at reduction of work calendar years and as a result to not have to pay traditional salaries, the same level salaries.
Is that process outside of the collective bargain process?
Colby and Hammond: Part of the collective bargaining process.
Hammond: So we’d still have to negotiate it.
5. James: What would you rather be working on right now other than the budget crisis?
Hammond: I would rather be working on ways to develop more instructional practices at every site for kids that are not achieving at grade level—particularly for Hispanic/ Latino children or African-American children who traditionally don’t tell well on our STAR assessments. I wish I had more time to focus on the instructional leadership and best practices and provide more imbedded professional development for teachers and classified staff to support students slipping through the cracks.
6. We now have the Blue and White Foundation raising money for the new stadium and the Davis Schools Foundation raising money for more general programs. What role do you see these monies playing in funding? Again this is more of a question for the board, but how is the district likely to utilize the money from the DSF?
Hammond: I think both of the foundations have two separate and distinct focuses. The Blue and White foundation right now their campaign is addressed solely on the stadium and getting donations to help complete the stadium project particularly bleachers and concession stands and things of that nature.
The DSF obviously has a focus on programs and services within the instructional day for the most part, some exceptions. So they really have an instructional focus. So the areas that the board may go once dollars are accrued; there’s three thematic areas: K-6, 7-12, and school safety.
The board has discretion and latitude to find appropriate programs and services within each of those three silos to say to the DSF once they’ve raised the money over this thirty day window that we’ve love to have more counselors at the high school, we’d like to fill-in the staffing at the college and career center. Or they may say, we would like to eliminate the secondary combo classes and as a result have a certain amount of FTE at the elementary level. It’s still up in the air as far as what the board or the district may actually request of the DSF. But they do have three separate areas of focus within their campaign.
7. I toured the football stadium in early May, I was appalled by the conditions. To me, there is no way children should have been using that facility. Why did the district allow it to deteriorate as far as it had?
Hammond: Well no doubt it has ongoing maintenance issues. We obviously wanted… it’s not ideal conditions and we only have limited resources. But we have obviously events with PE Classes and athletic events that still have to run and operate. The maintenance department has worked very hard and they’re understaffed to do everything from the sodding, the grass. They run that metal grate over the track to even out the grade. But you do all that work, but you have a rainstorm and people are stepping into the track and creating these permanent footprints. So you keep it up but it doesn’t take much for it to go back and deteriorate because it’s such an old facility.
We have put money and time into trying to reinforce certain components of the home side bleachers even though they are not ideal. It’s a huge liability concern and that’s why it became a priority for the board to address.
Colby: Every year we go in the offseason and replace the planks [on the bleachers] that we have to. The problem is wood it doesn’t last very long. It’s getting wet, cold, hot, and it doesn’t last as long as [other materials]. It isn’t of the best material—so we try to keep up as much as possible, but just to replace all of the wood on just one side is about $10,000. So we change it, but we’re chasing a moving ball. You fix and it doesn’t take that much and in a couple of years it’s back to where it was.
And the bleachers are not scheduled for the first phase?
Hammond: No they are not, but the contractor has made a commitment to refurbish…
Colby: So one side of the bleachers, the visitors bleacher side, there’s temporary bleachers that are going to be put up. They are being demolished on the visitors side and the contractor will refurbish for one year—will put new wood and fix up the home side until their replaced.
Aluminum bleachers?
Colby: You have to look at when it was built. Now the standard is aluminum bleachers but at the time they were built, wood was the standard.
Can’t change that on the fly?
Colby: You would have to buy a whole bleacher structure which is costly and have a state architect, it’s an official school project that goes through state architects and companies that make bleachers.
Hammond: There’s a trigger on requirements ADA-wise too.
Colby: That’s true there are requirements, so as soon as you touch the bleachers then you have to do all the requirements all the way back to the parking lot for disability access. And you’d have to the bathrooms and the concession stands. It would all have to be done at one time as soon as you make any changes and modifications to the bleachers.
8. In your opinion, should the other bargaining followed your leads and taken paycuts rather than allow layoffs to go forward?
Hammond: It’s a very difficult thing to ask of somebody to go ahead and take a pay reduction. These are real people with real life issues from car payments, mortgage payments, some are single parents, and I hold no type of expectation for people. This is such a deep personal choice. It’s a consideration that I wanted the membership evaluate very seriously, but the fact that we are moving forward with reductions doesn’t mean that I would say anything in the realm that says here’s an expectation because I understand it has to be a very difficult, well thought out.
If you’re evaluating a percentage reduction versus people on the street, those are also kind of personal decisions that people have to weigh. There is a process and that process hasn’t gotten us to that conclusion. The process is to discuss it at the negotiations table, see if there’s enough of a consensus at the negotiations table to bring it to the larger membership for a vote, and that hasn’t happened yet.
With more cuts down the road likely, maybe that conversation gets revisited.
9. What have you learned from the budget crises that will make for better fiscal policy in the future?
Colby: I think this has taught all of us that you need to plan for the rainy day. You have to have some level of savings account in order to ride the ups and downs so that you have time to make strategic and long term decisions. I think that is something that the board has learned over the last few years. That’s a lesson learned.
Hammond: I think bigger picture the state really needs to revisit huge reform mechanisms of how they finance schools. Even looking at state budgets from simple majorities to multiyear budgets to a whole bunch of other policies at the macro-level. For us locally, cash has to be kind now. As far as fund balance and reserves, it’s really sad for me to hear Bruce articulate here’s our fund balance, but I don’t have our apportionment from the state, so here I am showing you a fund balance with no cash. That’s a pretty scary place for any school district to be. So there has to be strong considerations for building “the rainy day fund” with real cash.
The state supposedly runs out of cash on July 1, what happens to the district when that happens?
Colby: They’ve already deferred a lot of the cash they’ve encumbered, they’re not making payments out but they have to by law fund schools. It’s not a matter if they’re going to fund schools, it’s when they fund schools.
We get loans, we have cash balances to cover. If there are cash shortages, that’s why you’ll notice our cash borrowing is more than twice as much than it’s been in the past. So we have to make up for their cash shortages.
10. Bruce: You ended up taking a paycut last week, but in retrospect was it a mistake for you to have taken a pay increase back in December?
Colby: I decline to comment.
Hammond: I support the decision that the board made. It had my support. I believe our CBO does an exemplary job. To cost out what it would cost to lose him and bring in a new CBO and start over with new processes. To invest in terms of getting a new CBO to right our ship.
These are also very personal decisions that boards and superintendents have to endorse and support. Bruce is value added to our district and the fact that we had to re-structure his contract was necessary because his contract was expiring and we wanted to make sure that he knew he was valued and we wanted to keep him and at the same time this decision to roll back the salaries was completely separate from the new contract that he will start on July 1st. So the fact that he was willing to come out and take that salary reduction I think was a testimony of his ongoing commitment to the district and to the kids.
People don’t realize his compensation package also includes his medical benefits. People forget to look at the details. They look at his bottom line compensation but that also includes medical and wellness for his entire family that he has to pay out of pocket.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Why does step and column take 1.5% of cola? Is this a demographic issue or something else?
I believe that’s how much the automatic step and column increase costs to fund each year. That’s why we end up down like $2 to $2.5 million every time we get zero cola.
But why? If as many are being hired as retire there should be no change unless there is a demographic bulge somewhere. Is that it or is there som other reason?
I don’t really know the why, I’ve seen the numbers and been told by Mr. Colby how it works. If you really want to know, you are free to talk to him.
“Colby: It’s human nature to spend and to spend versus cut.”
That says it all! Most people learn to budget their money, unlike DJUSD and other gov’t entities.
As for Colby’s salary increase, it was a huge public relations gaffe!
So we are going to pay big bucks to upgrade an outdated stadium with outdated materials so that it will deteriorate again very quickly. Oh smart move!
Actually what Colby said was that they have had to learn to save money for a rainy day and fight against that temptation.
“So we are going to pay big bucks to upgrade an outdated stadium with outdated materials so that it will deteriorate again very quickly.”
That’s not what he said at all. The idea is that we are currently spending tens of thousands each year to maintain an outdated stadium and instead we are going to spend what is in the scheme of things a modest amount to build the stadium so we don’t have to. One example is going from wooden planks on the bleachers to aluminum which are much more durable and won’t breakdown over the course of a single season. Another is to go to a better material for track that will not become problematic when it rains.
In fact, he said the opposite of what you wrote.
“As for Colby’s salary increase, it was a huge public relations gaffe!”
I understand that increase never came into effect. It was part of his contract renewal back in Nov. I think the contract was set to go into effect July 1. Bad PR? yeah, maybe. But I think the school board was probably more concerned with getting a contract commitment with Colby since we seem to be in the midst of a challenging budget situation.
“So we are going to pay big bucks to upgrade an outdated stadium with outdated materials so that it will deteriorate again very quickly. Oh smart move!”
I went to a high school in another state back in the late 70’s, roughly same size as DHS, which had a stadium pretty much like DHS will finally be getting, almost 50 years after the original current one was built. I think 48-50 years is a pretty good lifespan for a stadium like what we have now — sod field, gravel track, wood benches.
I hope the new facility has the possibility for lower overhead/maintenance costs to operate.
Based on the way California so poorly funds k-12 education, I’m glad DHS even has a stadium, but frankly it sucks compared what else is out there for a high school like DHS.
[i]As for Colby’s salary increase, it was a huge public relations gaffe![/i]
As I said, I think that this blog is great for Davis. But if it devolves into a string of complaints about executive salaries, that would be really sad.
Greg: There are really two portions of the blog. The first is the articles itself, there seems to be an audience of a few thousand people who read it on a regular basis, depending on the topic. The second is the comments which seem to be largely a much smaller subsection of the population. That said, executive salaries are a legitimate issue across the state, there are any number of other issues that are just as pressing and we try to address. For me, I think James Hammond did a good job of addressing the question I posed. I think we need to let the issue go now, there are too many other more important issues that need to be addressed.
Interesting how step pay works for district (teachers)… ~2.5 +/-/year of service… ~ 20 steps… city/county employees generally have 5 steps of ~ 5%… and, if teachers or the district fund additional educational units, they can rise to another “scale”… even if there is no cost of living (CPI) adjustments, any teacher with less than 20 yrs with the district appears to get a ~2.5% increase, even now… yet many contributers to this forum advocate city employees taking 10-25% reductions (to keep ‘salaries under 100k’… much more if their total comp (inc. insurance/retirement/other costs) should be capped at $100k…
Once again David, I know you published the 100k club, but I want an actual breakdown of how many teachers are getting paid how much including benefits. i want the same break down for all the cops, all the firefighters and all the public employee unions. It’s our right to know and be a part of the process. it’s simply not fair that in private industry, you have people working at retail stores making 10 bucks an hour if they are lucky and now they have to pay 8.75% sales tax when they buy something all so they can support these bloated salaries and pensions that the state can’t afford. It makes me sick to my stomach that most of these guys are making more than or near 100k and would rather they cut welfare and foodstamps than take a pay cut themselves. welfare has gone down now from 540 to 500. there’s been a 10$ paycut for the lowest of the low. Not even welfare recipients. What about the working poor? I say screw these greedy unions. I’m tired of paying a regressive tax for these guys. we can’t afford it and they don’t deserve the pay they’re getting. Everybody is suffering right now. if private company unions have to take a collective pay cut then these greedy unions need to do the same thing in government. they just seem to think that if they work in govt. they have a free ride. it’s got to stop. FUCxxx california. Davis sux too. it’s bloated in retail values and not worth the outrageous rent and cost of living. If you’re thinking of move to davis california, RUN RUN RUN as fast as you can. it’s surrounded by dirty farms that pollute the groundwater with no controls. they spew out toxic chemicals into the air and suck out all the water from the wells to support their archaic farming techniques. END WATER SUBSIDIES TO FARMERS. STAY AWAY FROM DAVIS CALIFORNIA IT SUCKS AND IT’S OUTRAGEOUSLY EXPENSIVE. IT’S NOT A GREEN COMMUNITY EITHER.
Once again David, I know you published the 100k club, but I want an actual breakdown of how many teachers are getting paid how much including benefits. i want the same break down for all the cops, all the firefighters and all the public employee unions. It’s our right to know and be a part of the process. it’s simply not fair that in private industry, you have people working at retail stores making 10 bucks an hour if they are lucky and now they have to pay 8.75% sales tax when they buy something all so they can support these bloated salaries and pensions that the state can’t afford. It makes me sick to my stomach that most of these guys are making more than or near 100k and would rather they cut welfare and foodstamps than take a pay cut themselves. welfare has gone down now from 540 to 500. there’s been a 10$ paycut for the lowest of the low. Not even welfare recipients. What about the working poor? I say screw these greedy unions. I’m tired of paying a regressive tax for these guys. we can’t afford it and they don’t deserve the pay they’re getting. Everybody is suffering right now. if private company unions have to take a collective pay cut then these greedy unions need to do the same thing in government. they just seem to think that if they work in govt. they have a free ride. it’s got to stop. FUCxxx california. Davis sux too. it’s bloated in retail values and not worth the outrageous rent and cost of living. If you’re thinking of move to davis california, RUN RUN RUN as fast as you can. it’s surrounded by dirty farms that pollute the groundwater with no controls. they spew out toxic chemicals into the air and suck out all the water from the wells to support their archaic farming techniques. END WATER SUBSIDIES TO FARMERS. STAY AWAY FROM DAVIS CALIFORNIA IT SUCKS AND IT’S OUTRAGEOUSLY EXPENSIVE. IT’S NOT A GREEN COMMUNITY EITHER.
Sara, as a member of the public, you have the right to file a request for public records.
“That’s not what he said at all. The idea is that we are currently spending tens of thousands each year to maintain an outdated stadium and instead we are going to spend what is in the scheme of things a modest amount to build the stadium so we don’t have to. One example is going from wooden planks on the bleachers to aluminum which are much more durable and won’t breakdown over the course of a single season. Another is to go to a better material for track that will not become problematic when it rains.”
Am I missing something here? I thought Hammond was saying that they must still use wood for the new stadium, bc to use more modern materials for the bleachers will trigger the need to comply w all sorts of expensive ADA requirements. Correct me if I misunderstood his statement that aluminum cannot be used for bleacher seats bc it will trigger the need to do all sorts of ADA required upgrades.
“That said, executive salaries are a legitimate issue across the state, there are any number of other issues that are just as pressing and we try to address. For me, I think James Hammond did a good job of addressing the question I posed. I think we need to let the issue go now, there are too many other more important issues that need to be addressed.”
Let the issue go? To do so is to invite it to happen again, and again!
“It makes me sick to my stomach that most of these guys are making more than or near 100k and would rather they cut welfare and foodstamps than take a pay cut themselves. welfare has gone down now from 540 to 500.”
Right now the modus operendi for cutting the budget is on the backs of the needy. SSI recipients (low income disabled) have just had their benefits cut from $900 per month to $870 per month. That is $870 to pay for everything – rent, food, clothing, transportation – everything. There is a proposal on the table by the governor to cut student aid (CAL GRANTS) to low income students in CA. So if you are wealthy, you can go to college, but if you are low income, you will not be able to get yourself educated and dig yourself out of the hell hole you are in.
Furthermore, if you want concessions from teachers to take a pay cut, it is not wise to give upper management a pay raise. How cooperative do you think teachers are going to be when they see that sort of thing. Let the matter go? You’ve got to be kidding! It is the very issue we need to be addressing. Upper management is continuing to get pay raises, while lowly paid workers are being laid off. Yes, lowly paid workers are being laid off to pay for the pay raises for the likes of the Bruce Colbys of the world. Geeeeeeeeeze………….
“Am I missing something here? I thought Hammond was saying that they must still use wood for the new stadium, bc to use more modern materials for the bleachers will trigger the need to comply w all sorts of expensive ADA requirements. Correct me if I misunderstood his statement that aluminum cannot be used for bleacher seats bc it will trigger the need to do all sorts of ADA required upgrades.”
Yes you miss understood. He was saying they couldn’t simply swap out the current stands for aluminum stands without doing all the other work. So that’s why the next phase will have them do the stands, bathroom, press box, etc. to make sure they are safe and ADA compliant. They will have aluminum stands at the new stadium and a more durable field turf and a track that will not weather like this one. All of that will save ongoing money.
“Upper management is continuing to get pay raises, while lowly paid workers are being laid off. Yes, lowly paid workers are being laid off to pay for the pay raises for the likes of the Bruce Colbys of the world. Geeeeeeeeeze….”
In the case of Bruce Colby, it is important to remember the problems connected with Ahad doing outside work while under contract with DJUSD. Colby and others now have to agree not to do outside work. I think part of the deal was that DJUSD would provide a sufficient salary in return. Nevertheless, he and others are taking voluntary cuts (and not pay raises) at a time when it seems few others have followed suit.
“That says it all! Most people learn to budget their money,”
And that’s the reason we have all of these foreclosures? Wise budgeting on the part of lenders and borrowers?
“And that’s the reason we have all of these foreclosures? Wise budgeting on the part of lenders and borrowers?”
We have all these foreclosures because of 1) predatory lending; 2) Greenspan encouraging adjustable rate mortgages with no banking oversight; 3) Congressional Banking Committee headed by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd insisting banks lend to low income folks who could not afford to repay; 4) a federal gov’t who will not enforce its own SEC/banking regulations; 5) the selling off of subprime mortgages to hedge funds so that the originator of bad loans is not the one left holding the bag when foreclosure happens. In so many cases, senior citizens were the victims of predatory lending – their loan applications were filled with misinformation/misleading language about their net income and ability to repay, and the true terms of the loan.
[quote]5) the selling off of subprime mortgages to hedge funds so that the originator of bad loans is not the one left holding the bag when foreclosure happens.[/quote]This is 95% of the answer. However, it was not primarily “hedge funds” which bought subprime mortgages. You forget Freddie-Mac and Fannie-Mae. In 2008, those consolidators owned 50% of the $12 billion mortgage market.
It is nonetheless true that hedge funds played a great role, because of investments in the tertiary mortgage market, in the collapse of all of the investment banks which have gotten into trouble. They apparently sliced and diced these products up so finely, that many even inside those banks had no idea what systemic risks they faced.
[i]50% of the $12 [s]billion[/s] [b]trillion[/b] mortgage market.[/quote] — source: Wikipedia.
“We have all these foreclosures because of” … blah, blah, blah
Maybe I’m way out of touch, here, but I believe in taking some individual responsibility for poor choices instead of blaming everything else that moves. There’s a well-known aphorism, “if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.”
Maybe this recession will produce a new generation of “Depression babies”.
“”We have all these foreclosures because of” … blah, blah, blah
Maybe I’m way out of touch, here, but I believe in taking some individual responsibility for poor choices instead of blaming everything else that moves. There’s a well-known aphorism, “if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.”
Maybe this recession will produce a new generation of “Depression babies”.”
In some cases, there were people such as those in prison, who knew full well they could not afford the loan. But too often senior citizens were specifically targeted, and talked into loans they could not afford. But the banks lied about consumer income on the loan application, buried the true nature of the loans in confusing language, and essentially hid the truth from the consumer. I’m sorry, but I do blame banks/loan officers for “predatory lending” practices. As a volunteer attorney, I have come across this situation all too often.
Banks are acting in a fiduciary capacity, and would know far better than the average consumer what can be reasonably afforded. Seniors come from an era when banks could be trusted for fiscal prudence. However, recently banks/lending institutions gave “teaser” rates, then buried the fact the interest rates “readjusted” in two to three years. Monthly mortgages jumped by $1500 to $2000 when the loan “reset”. Anyone at middle income or lower could not possibly afford that kind of rate hike unless they won the lottery – and banks knew it. Adjustable rate mortgages are an abomination, IMHO.
Different strategies for districts to raise class sizes in Sac area:
[url]http://www.sacbee.com/ourregion/story/1923769.html[/url]
Natomas was a standout this past March for being a district that wasn’t pink slipping teachers. Now they’re giving out pink slips. No district is unaffected:
[url]http://www.sacbee.com/education/story/1920859.html[/url]
Woodland JUSD looking at more ways to make cuts on future budget:
[url]http://www.dailydemocrat.com/news/ci_12529152[/url]
Limited summer school:
[url]http://www.thereporter.com/news/ci_12534750[/url]