Note: The online Request to Speak window has expired.
Agenda Item
S.-3 25-2351 Referral to the Board of Education, by the Budget and Finance Committee, without recommendation, for discussion and possible action, Resolution No. 2526-0177 - Directing the Preparation of Budget Scenarios to Address District's Projected Fiscal Years 2026-27 and 2027-28 Structural Deficit.
I don’t like being rude, but it feels like the Oakland school board is perpetually planning to do tomorrow what should have been done yesterday.
It feels like in rejecting the budget reductions package last spring—against the advice of Director Hutchinson, OUSD staff, our superintendent, and our fiscal overseers at the county—you have simply kicked the can down the road with very little to show for it even now.
You have squandered our reserve fund and squandered our runway to fix these fiscal issues and as a result our schools will have massive mid-year budget cuts which are always the worst and most painful. When you wait till the last minute or the eleventh hour to act, it is impossible to act with intention and thoughtfulness and wisdom. Please do better. 34,000 students today and countless more in the future are depending on you to center student outcomes and the paths and strategies needed to improve them. Everything else is noise.
I was sorry to see that the OUSD sponsored amendment, drawing from the input of multiple Board directors was withdrawn, as it seemed to me to be a true effort at collaboration. Regarding Director Latta's proposed amendment: I am concerned that in the past the district seems to have directed a reduction in central office "administrative overhead and positions" to classified non-managerial staff. One area I have repeated mentioned as disproportionate in OUSD is among the highest paid staff: Administrators, Supervisors and Managers. I also do not see how school closures, other than perhaps coalescence of programs already occupying one campus into one school, could meet the articulated, and necessary, criteria in the time frame required.
I like the proposals of restructuring central services and networks and cutting positions that are funded by one-time funds or grants with end dates.
If this is currently in practice, I propose when there are positions funded by one-time funds or funding with end dates, the district should provide a contract stating that the position will end at the end of the contract. This can reduce fears of layoffs and the staff is aware that their position has a limited term.
Hiring freeze and furlough days for non school site staff is another good proposal. Also, I propose looking at vacant positions that don't provide direct student services and remove them. Vacant positions take up funding allocation as well.
I don’t like being rude, but it feels like the Oakland school board is perpetually planning to do tomorrow what should have been done yesterday.
It feels like in rejecting the budget reductions package last spring—against the advice of Director Hutchinson, OUSD staff, our superintendent, and our fiscal overseers at the county—you have simply kicked the can down the road with very little to show for it even now.
You have squandered our reserve fund and squandered our runway to fix these fiscal issues and as a result our schools will have massive mid-year budget cuts which are always the worst and most painful. When you wait till the last minute or the eleventh hour to act, it is impossible to act with intention and thoughtfulness and wisdom. Please do better. 34,000 students today and countless more in the future are depending on you to center student outcomes and the paths and strategies needed to improve them. Everything else is noise.
I was sorry to see that the OUSD sponsored amendment, drawing from the input of multiple Board directors was withdrawn, as it seemed to me to be a true effort at collaboration. Regarding Director Latta's proposed amendment: I am concerned that in the past the district seems to have directed a reduction in central office "administrative overhead and positions" to classified non-managerial staff. One area I have repeated mentioned as disproportionate in OUSD is among the highest paid staff: Administrators, Supervisors and Managers. I also do not see how school closures, other than perhaps coalescence of programs already occupying one campus into one school, could meet the articulated, and necessary, criteria in the time frame required.
I like the proposals of restructuring central services and networks and cutting positions that are funded by one-time funds or grants with end dates.
If this is currently in practice, I propose when there are positions funded by one-time funds or funding with end dates, the district should provide a contract stating that the position will end at the end of the contract. This can reduce fears of layoffs and the staff is aware that their position has a limited term.
Hiring freeze and furlough days for non school site staff is another good proposal. Also, I propose looking at vacant positions that don't provide direct student services and remove them. Vacant positions take up funding allocation as well.
Thank you.