(San Mateo Times)
The San Mateo Union High School District on Wednesday passed a balanced budget for the 2007-08 school year. The budget is designed to end years of deficit spending, which culminated in about $5 million in cuts over the past 12 months and threats of county and state intervention.
But the school board, recently lambasted for lax fiscal oversight in a report by the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury, isn't taking any chances. Board President Robert Griffin called for district staff to draw up a contingency list in case of unexpected shortfalls. Griffin also asked that the district's chief business officer provide the board with monthly budget updates, starting next fall. Board Member Peter Hanley added that he'd like to see the district build its budget reserve from the state-mandated 3 percent to as much as 6 percent in the years to come. That might require more belt-tightening, but it would prevent a repetition of the past year's nightmare, he said. The budget received a stamp of approval from interim Superintendent David Miller, who serves on the board of a state team of school finance experts.
Teachers' union President Craig Childress thanked Miller, the board and district staff for passing a budget that didn't include any more teacher layoffs.
- Written by Fiona
"Board Member Peter Hanley added that he'd like to see the district build its budget reserve from the state-mandated 3 percent to as much as 6 percent in the years to come. That might require more belt-tightening, but it would prevent a repetition of the past year's nightmare."
If this is true then the district should look at retiring its $80 million COP debt that is drawing upon the General Fund. This loan is secured against a diminishing and unstable cash flow and which is also drawing funds out of classroom dollars.
Retiring this debt would require an $80 million reduction in new construction from the passage of Measure M.
Posted by: KRN | June 28, 2007 at 07:00 PM
The current board are the same clowns that got us in to this mess in the first place.I personal would not trust any one of them to a good job, come election time I wont be voting for any of them.
Posted by: Csea 516 member | June 29, 2007 at 12:11 AM