Education - Westmont Hilltop School District

Public Funding Community Meeting
February 7, 2012
WESTMONT HILLTOP SCHOOL DISTRICT
WELCOME

Westmont Hilltop School Board
Diana Schroeder, President
Rooney Gleason, Vice-President
Leah Spangler, Treasurer
Phyllis Forman
Kamal Gella
Gary Kramer
Gordon Smith
Michele Trevorrow
William Trevorrow
PURPOSE AND FORMAT OF THIS MEETING
Education


Budget process and requirements
History
Comparisons

What we have done
Consultation


Brainstorming solutions
Setting priorities
District Presentation followed by Community Input
DISTRICT BUDGET ISSUES
Controlled by:




Legislative Rules
Contractual regulations
Legal considerations
Educational considerations
Our goal:
To provide the best education to the students in a fashion
that controls costs. Every economic decision has to have
a neutral or positive effect on educational outcomes.
CHIEF RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE SCHOOL
BOARD (PSBA)
Through the staff, to develop and constantly improve
the educational program.
 To provide adequate and effective personnel for
school programs.
 To provide and maintain educationally efficient school
facilities.
 To secure adequate financial resources.
 To maintain two-way communication between the
board and students, employees, parents, taxpayers,
and the community.
 To select the chief executive officer, and to work
harmoniously and honestly with that person.

ACT 1 REQUIREMENTS

The provisions of Act 1 require that a decision on the
2012-2013 General Fund Budget had to be made no later
than January 5, 2012. The options this year were as
follows:


Adopt a preliminary budget and apply for a referendum
exception for retirement ($161,155 – maximum total tax
increase – 3.0 mills)
Adopt a resolution that the district will not raise taxes above
the Act 1 Index (2.2% or 1.8 mills)
OPTION CHOSEN
 Adopt
a resolution that the district will
not raise taxes above the Act 1 Index
(2.2% or 1.8 mills)
 This
is the maximum tax increase
possible this year. The district may
adopt a tax rate lower but not higher.
GOVERNOR’S BUDGET PROPOSAL RELEASED


Today, February 7, 2012, Governor Corbett
announced education funding for Pennsylvania
School Districts.
There is no increase in Basic Education Funding
for school districts.
OVERVIEW OF DATA PRESENTATION
Preview of data presentation by
Dr. Susan Anderson, Superintendent
Responsiveness of School Board
 Receptiveness of Leadership Team and all
Employees and Staff of this district
 During this presentation, Mr. Sanford, Business
Manager, will provide a preview of our current
funding issues, the challenges this district
faces, and what we have done to date to
address those.

LOCAL FUNDING ISSUES



The Westmont Hilltop School District continues to
seek a funding formula adjustment to address the
inequities in funding as they relate to our school
district.
The Westmont Hilltop School District has limited
revenues as a result of low state funding and a 96%
residential property tax base with limited
opportunities for commercial revenues.
Westmont Hilltop receives less than 30% of its
revenue from state sources; the Cambria County
average is 59%.
LOCAL FUNDING ISSUES (CONTINUED)


The current funding formula is outdated and an
adjustment is needed to reflect the demographic
changes in our community and to provide
adequate funding for our school district.
Tax increases are not a result of excessive
spending and/or out of control expenditures.
PA INCOME TAX OBLIGATION – 3.07%
BASIC EDUCATION FUNDING PERCENT OF DISTRICT PA TAX
WESTMONT HILLTOP SPENDS LESS
Westmont Hilltop School District spends less per
student than any other school district in Cambria
County.
 As of the most recent date, in 2009-10, only 9 of the
commonwealth’s 500 school districts spent less
per student than our district.
 Historically, the district consistently spends less
per student than its peers across the
commonwealth. It’s not a spending problem – it’s a
funding problem.

EXPENDITURE PER STUDENT – 2009/2010
EXPENDITURE PER STUDENT – STATE RANK 1 = HIGHEST, 500 = LOWEST
STATE AID FORMULA



The problem lies with the aid ratio and formula that
determines how much Basic Education Funding our
district receives from the Pennsylvania Department of
Education.
In 2011/2012, for instance, our $1,970-per-student subsidy
was substantially lower than the average $5,053 received
by other school districts in our county.
While many local districts receive 70 percent or more of
their cost for educating a student from the state, at
Westmont Hilltop that figure is closer to 30 percent. Local
taxpayers are forced to make up the difference.
2011/2012 BASIC EDUCATION FUNDING PER STUDENT
BASIC EDUCATION FUNDING 2006/07 – 2011/12
LOCAL REVENUE PERCENT OF BUDGET - 2009/10
FUNDING INEQUITY


If Westmont Hilltop was allotted the Cambria
County average BEF subsidy per student, the
district would receive approximately $5.4 million or
the equivalent of 42.2 mills in tax dollars. This
money is currently coming from district property
owners.
Today, our real estate millage stands at 86.2 – a full
35.2 mills above the Cambria County average.
TAX INCREASES

That’s what taxpayers in Westmont Hilltop School
District have faced due to an unfair state funding
formula that forces residents to send approximately
$11 million in personal income tax dollars to
Harrisburg every year, with only $3 million in Basic
Education Funding (BEF) returning to educate the
district’s students.
TAX BASE


Our district tax base is approximately 96%
residential with little or no opportunity for growth.
Approximately 32.8% of our population is over the
age of 55.
TAX BASE
DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES
WHSD Demographic
Changes
Percent of students (Free
and Reduced)
2001/2002
2011/2012
Percentage Increase
15%
24%
58%
0.3939
0.5182
31.6%
Market Value
386,916,700
547,102,700
41.4%
Personal Income
Personal Income Per
WADM
State Average Personal
Income Per WADM
Average Daily
Membership - WHSD
Average Daily
Membership - Total State
287,916,700
350,393,642
21.7%
147,542
162,472
10.1%
99,024
134,551
35.9%
1,674
1,747
4.4%
1,799,653
1,757,319
-2.4%
MV/PI Aid Ratio
COST REDUCTION MEASURES TAKEN FOR 2011-2012
COMPLETED:
 Professional
staff voluntary wage freeze
 Administration
staff voluntary wage freeze
 Reduced
teaching staff by attrition - 4 positions
 Reduced
support staff by 1 part time position
COST REDUCTION MEASURES CONTINUED

Eliminated one bus run, one van run, and consolidated
non-public school runs

Eliminated detention and activity bus runs

Eliminated the classroom & behind the wheel driver
education program

Initiated a district offered cyber opportunity as an
alternative to other cyber school programs (10 students as
of 11/1/11)
COST REDUCTION MEASURES CONTINUED
 Initiated
a district operated alternative
school to reduce placement &
transportation costs (9 students as of
11/1/11)
 Approximate
Total for All of the
Above=$800,000
 Delayed
future building projects
ONGOING COST REDUCTION MEASURES

Reduce printing/duplicating costs






In-house maintenance projects

Athletic fields
Middle school upgrades
Sidewalk repairs
General projects

Reduce substitute teacher use & cost




Restrictions on printers
Meters on copiers
On-line newsletters
Red & Gray on-line
Report cards on-line
Monitor conference expenses
ONGOING COST REDUCTION MEASURES
Act 39 Guaranteed Energy Savings evaluation in
progress
 Consortium member for electricity & natural gas
purchase
 Ongoing staff effort to reduce utility costs
 Reduced technology budget by $40,000 for 2011/2012
 Reduced building, athletic & general supply budgets
 Review building schedules to maximize efficiency of
staffing
 Review transportation schedules

EFFORTS TO INCREASE REVENUE
PDE Propel Grant - $50,000
 PDE Bullying Prevention Grant - $55,000
 COPS Grant - $53,085
 Highmark Healthy High Five Grants – 3 years, Total
-$30,000 high school, $30,000 middle school
 Electricity Curtailment program
 Right of Way for Water Authority Project - $7,700
 Vending Commissions - $144,000 since 2003

BEYOND OUR CONTROL

PSERS Rate











2011/12 – 8.65%.........................................$432,500
2012/13 – 12.19%.........................................$627,785
2013/14 – 16.69%.........................................$885,321
2014/15 – 21.18%......................................$1,157,198
2019/20 – 26.96%......................................$1,707,606
Charter and Cyber School Expenses


WHSD Share
Regular Ed - $8,568 per student
Special Ed - $13,859 per student
ARRA Funding eliminated - $997,091
Accountability Block Grant eliminated - $123,907
Charter School Subsidy eliminated by PDE- $25,128
96% of district tax base is residential
Special Education mandates and placement costs
FUTURE CHALLENGES
Pennsylvania’s commitment to fund & support public
education
 Building program/facilities
 Employer retirement rate increase
 Cyber Charter school costs
 High Taxes
 Elimination/modification of referendum exceptions
 How much can we reduce expenditures while
maintaining a quality educational program to attract
new students and families to our district?

FISCAL REALITY
Westmont Hilltop School District has a revenue
problem.
 Tax increases are not a result of excessive spending
and/or out of control expenditures.
 Westmont Hilltop receives less than 30% of its
revenue from state sources, the Cambria County
average is 59%.
 The current funding formula is unfair and needs to be
adjusted to reflect the demographic changes in our
community and provide adequate funding for our
school district .
 Historically, Westmont Hilltop spends significantly
less per student than its peers locally and throughout
the state.

SPRINGBOARD TO BRAINSTORMING

Creative Funding Initiatives
CREATIVE FUNDING COMMITTEE INITIATIVES
An example of the successful search for solutions!



Drafted advocacy piece in December 2011 that led to
meeting with Secretary of Education Ronald Tomalis
Organized 2011 letter writing campaign that
culminated in meeting with high level lawmakers about
the funding formula as it applies to Westmont
$108,000 in grant funding for security systems at the
elementary and high schools
CREATIVE FUNDING COMMITTEE INITIATIVES CONTINUED
Worked with Senator Wozniak’s office to identify grant
source through PDE to fund $50,000 iPad initiative at
high school for teacher professional development
 Coordinated formation of Alumni Association and
worked with board to gain approval
 Brought together founding members of alumni
association
 Worked with district to begin collection of names and
addresses of graduates for future fundraising efforts
 Completed Planned Giving brochure for district

CREATIVE FUNDING COMMITTEE IS CURRENTLY
WORKING ON . . .
Re-write of the 2011 letter writing campaign, with
the addition of a phone campaign companion
script
 Grant to fund student planners for the elementary
and middle schools
 Identifying additional grants appropriate for the
district
 Watching for next COPS grant announcement to
fund security system for middle school

BRAINSTORMING SESSION
No
bad ideas and no wrong
answers!