Cuts Looming at School District?
Prince George, B.C. – Despite a $727,000 cut to their administration budget this year, it’s too early to say if that will translate into cuts at School District 57.
That from vice-chairperson Brenda Hooker.
School District 57 vice-chairperson Brenda Hooker
“It’s too early in the process, we don’t even know really what the number we’re facing this year is beyond the $727,000,” says Hooker. “We’re concerned there’s a structural deficit in the district that we’ll have to do some sustainability exercise around but that would be a lengthy conversation and we’re hoping we have enough of a cushion in our surplus this year to address it.”
She says that structural deficit sits at around $1 million and follows some financial juggling the district undertook last year.
“At this time last year we were looking at an over $5 million deficit. So we cut back each of our departments in schools and then we allocated $3.2 million out of our surplus just to balance the budget.”
Hooker concedes they’re also facing other budgetary pressures this year.
“We’re facing over $61million in unfunded costs provincially, from increasing cost pressures like MSP increases, CCP increases, BC Hydro increases, natural gas increases, plus we haven’t seen a wage increase for our administration staff since 2009.”
Despite all this she insists school closures are not on their radar (there have been 22 closures in the PG School District since 2002).
“It’s just way too early to even speculate on that.”
She admits in many respects their hands are tied.
“The ministry (Education) negotiates a contract, it allocates our income, and now they’re directing us to where to make cuts,” says Hooker. “But if school districts complain too loudly either you’re fired like the Cowichan Board, or you have a special auditor and an audit team assigned to you like the Vancouver School Board. So it just becomes very difficult to operate autonomously.”
She says the district’s budget must be submitted by the end of June.
Comments
Despite ending last year with a nearly $1 billion surplus and projected surpluses going forward, the BC Liberals fail once again on public education
Families first…….
Teachers first…..
axman last
Families first in the line of fire.
Brenda – is that an appropriate picture to submit for a school board trustee?
“At this time last year we were looking at an over $5 million deficit. So we cut back each of our departments in schools and then we allocated $3.2 million out of our surplus just to balance the budget.”
Actually I find it amazing that there was a surplus from which $3.2 million could be syphoned! Things don’t seem to be that bad, unless the ever declining enrolment numbers are a problem. Of course fewer students represent a smaller footprint of everything, including the budget.
An interesting comment on the Liberals and education.
http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/columnists/geoff-johnson-education-is-plagued-by-the-new-stupid-1.1801922
I attended a meeting last week, where it was mentioned that there is a cut being made to the special needs programs in the schools. So while we don’t know where all of the cuts will be coming from this is one area that has been targeted.
WHAT we really need is a cut in govt. LOOK at this mess they have created in the most beautifull place in the world.KRUSTY is trying to make the children of this province illiterate.
Maybe start the administration cuts near the top! Why are there so many ‘principals’ in SD57 not assigned to a schools?
Enough cuts in the classrooms!
Government needs to invest more into education for the next leaders of tomorrow. Good call Ice
Run public education into the ground, privatize it, then throw your hands up and plead that there was no choice. It’s already happening with medicine (e.g., emergence of multitudes of private surgical centers).
The current government wants to force the rich into private education and the poor into underfunded public education. That way you create a system where the professionals enable their children to be well off, while the rest are lower wage earners. What is going on is the result of an intentional act, it was not by accident
karrman, I read the article that you posted. The one thing that stuck out the most to me was one of the comments posted after the article, a comment regarding the massive growth in the size of “Government”!
I agree wholeheartedly that we have seen a massive increase in Government over the past 4 decades. We have far more Government than we need, at all levels!
Government in and of itself seems to be a growth industry. When will we stop the bleeding hearts and their constant demands for more and more and more services from “government”?
It’s time to stop this unfettered growth in Government! It’s time to reduce the size of Government and the scope of the services that we demand.
Maybe, just maybe if we are able to do that, we will have lots of taxes money left over for the essential services of government, essential services like education, healthcare and policing.
Posted on Wednesday, March 25, 2015 @ 10:20 PM by minion2014
The current government wants to force the rich into private education and the poor into underfunded public education.
———-
The education system is well funded. The issue is with where the funds go.
Private education sounds like a good idea. Pay people based on merit rather then seniority and put in place a system of accountability. Seems like a winning proposition to me.
Private schools only get 50% of the funding per student that the public system gets. Why wouldn’t you want as many people as possible using this system?
Private schools get a different rate of funding depending on a few factors.
They are divided into four funding levels: Group 1 schools employ B.C.-certified teachers, have educational programs consistent with ministerial orders and provide programs that meet the learning outcomes of the B.C. curriculum. They receive 50 per cent of the local school district’s per-student operating grant.
Group 2 schools meet the same requirements as Group 1 schools but are typically university preparatory schools with higher per-student operating costs. They receive a smaller subsidy of 35 per cent.
Groups 3 schools, which are not required to meet the Group 1 requirements, and Group 4 schools, which cater mainly to non-provincial students, receive no funding.
So some private schools dont follow any set criteria and still get tax dollars.. sounds like a useless waste of money and “education” to me.
What about the people that cant afford to send their kids to private schools. they still have to pay taxes to fund the schools they cant afford to attend..how stupid is that.
Also private schools like to brag about the average grade points the students are getting… but thats because they ask the kids not doing so well to leave the school, nice way to falsify the numbers… help out the kids with trouble..no kick them to the curb… yeah thats exactly what we dont want.
P Val – do you have any actual examples of a private school kicking a kid to the curb – in Prince George? You don’t think the public school doesn’t kick kids to the curb – only they call it a suspension?
This makes no sense to me:
“What about the people that cant afford to send their kids to private schools. they still have to pay taxes to fund the schools they cant afford to attend..how stupid is that.”
We all pay taxes to send kids to school. When you send your kid to public school, we pay about $7,000.00 for your kid, and $3,500.00 for the kid that went to private school. If you got your wish and we closed the private school, we’d all have to pay even more taxes to fund $7,000.00 for that former private kid, who is now in the public system. To put it in an equation – current system, cost per student based on 12% private school participation rate. ((.88 X 7000) plus (.12 X 3500)) = $6,580.00 per kid, current system.
No private schools, well that’s easy $7,000.00 per kid. What is the real beef with private schools? They are saving us money, only the most disingenuous argue otherwise. Is it offensive that someone has the ability to provide something better for their children than others, and actually pay toward a system they aren’t using?
It’s ironic that on one hand people argue for a PAC because it’ll attract all sorts of professional people to our community because professionals like the finer things, and same people get all annoyed if same professionals give their kids an education advantage – at their own cost.
I lived in Surrey, and got a used bike for my birthday, and the kid across the street in Delta got a new bike – how unfair is that? Of course, being from Surrey, I eventually managed to get the kid from Delta’s bike for my birthday too.
I work with a fellow whos one daughter is having trouble in school and he was asked to look at another school for her..
yes lets have all private schools.. who dont hire qualified teachers..and follow their own curriculum, a perfect set up for failure..also private schools are more expensive than just the monthly cost to the parents.. they also have more demands of all needing ipads etc.. again making it more unattainable for the less fortunate.
yes we all pay taxes to send our kids to public school.. but our kids can go to public schools.. lots cant afford to send their kids to private schools and yet still have to fund them.. that is wrong.
None of our tax dollars should go to private schools.. if these professionals are so worried about sending their kids to a private school then have them fund the entire thing.. shouldnt be complaining if they really want an advantage at their own cost.. with us tax payers not paying for their kids to go to private school when the option of public school is there.
IF we only had private schools the cost would skyrocket.. and then you would be here complaining about that cost..lol
I just read 2 of the most disengenius comments on this topic and both from the same person!
How can one argue for eliminating the 50% funding for private schools that meet the highest criteria when every student enrolled at those schools actually saves the rest of the education system aproximately $3500. That is ludicrous to say the very least! If I am willing to pay full education taxes while my child goes to a private school where I again have to pay a huge tuition, I should not have to justify myself to those that can’t afford to make the same choices! I am in effect subsidizing the Public Education system and not the other way around!
The same poster listed the different categories of private schools, their criteria for existance, and their various funding levels. It is clear that those that do not follow any recognized provincial rules or criteria get ZERO funding from the province. Yet this poster goes on to say words to the effect that we should not be subsidizing shcools that do not wish to follow proovincial guidelines. Perhaps he should read his post again!
As I see it thgere is more than enough money invested in public education. Too much of it is squandared on duplication of administrative services province wide, and there are too many managers at the trough in each district taking away from the kids in the classroom!
First off Brenda Hooker’s picture is NOT appropriate for this article….maybe a dating website?
Second: Why does the School Board consistently “over inflate” school administration? Years ago there were Elementary School Vice Principals. Then they had to be cut due to budget constraints. Now we have Elementary Vice Principals again. They need to be cut AGAIN! and not ever filled again.
It would be wonderful to see our elected School Trustees make decisions that are not solely based on the biased information presented to them from the School District Senior Administration, but from looking at historical practices and making changes that WORK. I believe we now have a Board that is able to do that. (4 x-teachers/principals) It’s an ugly job but that’s what you were elected for!
Funny thing is Pval, I do get your point. But it’s predicated on the notion that if you stopped funding private schools, that the private school parents would still fund the private school, and pay more in tuition and the 3500 could go to bolster the public system, when a more likely scenario, is about 90% of the private schools would close, and 50,000 kids would be headed back to the public school, requiring a funding increase of 175 million dollars per year (50,000 kids X additional 3500 that public system gets), plus we’d need to build schools to house them – approximately 100 schools at 39 million a piece (that’s what Duchess Park cost) – probably more in GVRD where land cost is higher, so at least 3.9 billion for capital costs. We couldn’t use the empty private school buildings because they don’t meet the standards. Private schools get capital funding, so they run fairly lean and mean.
With the government’s current 800 million surplus, that’ll be gone in a flash and everyone’s taxes will go up. The good news, is BCTF will get another 2100 new members, and CUPE as well will come out ahead, just the taxpayer will lose to support the ideology that everyone should have equal access to a mediocre education, just like our health care system currently works. And with BCTF having 100% control of the education choices in the province, watch how the next round of bargaining goes.
And for what it’s worth, this policy has been in place 40 years. The NDP had a shot at scrapping it – they didn’t – because, – while they like to rant the rhetoric of the evils of the two tier education system, they looked at the numbers and realized they couldn’t afford the aftermath of killing the private system.
Comments for this article are closed.