The Park City School District needs consider making budget cuts or raising property taxes for the upcoming school year to balance its budget. According to Budget Advisory Committee member Henry Glasheen, the committee came up with four recommendations and presented them in a school board meeting on Tuesday.
“We looked at the budget and went through this analysis and we found a lot of things we wanted to bring up and mention to the board. We’re bean counters and so the teachers on the committee provided us with a lot of perspective.”
Over the last two years, expenses have increased 21 percent. In order to have a sustainable budget, those numbers need to align with revenues, Glasheen said, adding that salaries make up 87 percent of the school district’s budget. The district’s overall expenses have increased 5.2 percent annually, with no increase in student growth, he said.
“There is a $5 million budget shortfall from what we take in and what we spend,” Glasheen said. “We wanted to focus on expenses rather than revenues, before a property tax increase. Revenues have gone up a small amount, but expenditures have gone up five times faster.”
The committee has recommended four steps to help rebuild the school district’s $5 million shortage in the general fund. First, increasing the student-teacher ratio from 19 to 1, to 23 to 1, according to Glasheen, who said that this would save the school district at least $1.7 million.
According to Park City School District Superintendent Ray Timothy, to reach the $1.7 million goal, they would have to cut approximately 22 fulltime teachers district-wide. He said changes need to be made within the district for the 2012-2013 school year in order to reduce the deficit and balance the budget.
The school board will give further direction in the next board meeting, Timothy said, adding that it will be his responsibility to recommend the level of cuts and efficiencies the school district needs to achieve.
“We’ve spent a lot of time looking at the realities of the economic situation and what we’re facing today,” he said. “What we’ve done as a district is look at strategies that the board has used over the last several years and what steps need to be taken to keep sustainability in the future.”
The committee also recommended a change in the school district’s health insurance policy that would result in more than a $1.7 million savings, according to Glasheen, who said Park City is one of the only school districts in the state to include families on its insurance policy.
“The way to do that would be to cover the teacher only and have the teacher pay the coverage of the rest of the family,” he said. “That will result in much more than $1.7 million savings. We would take additional savings and put that money into a health savings account so that the district can go back and reimburse the employee for part of those costs depending on if the teacher is married or has kids.”
According to Glasheen, there is about $500,000 of potential cost savings within the district, which is why the committee started with cost reductions rather than making recommendations for tax increases. The committee also recommended an 11 percent reduction in expenses district-wide, which would generate about $1.6 million in savings. Another option is a three-year district-wide salary freeze.
He said that the average household income for Summit County is $82,000, with some Park City School District teachers receiving more than $86,000 including benefits for nine months of work. He said Park City has the highest paid teachers in the state, earning sometimes $20,000 more compared to teachers in other school districts.
According to Park City School District Business Administrator Patty Murphy, the median salary for PCSD teachers in 2011 was $58,000. The next highest average was $53,000 in the San Juan School District.
Murphy said the Utah State Office of Education showed that Park City School District teachers received an average of $81,000 including benefits last year.
“We want to make sure that the school stays special but at the same time there is some fat in there that we can probably cut out without hurting education,” Glasheen said. “We had a number of teachers on the committee that helped us understand the issues, and how certain cuts would affect education so we believe we came to the recommendation that served the dual purpose of excellence in education and budget sustainability.”