Lake Orion school administration’s had their say on what to axe and what to keep in next year’s budget. Now it’s my turn, but I get to throw a disclaimer on my recommendation: I made some assumptions for the sake of argument, so bear with me.

The groundwork:
The goal is to slice $5.4 million from next year’s budget, according to Assistant Superintendent Jillynn Keppler. Administrators in the district ? superintendent, two assistant superintendents, executive director of human resources, 11 principals and six assistant principals ? cost $2,764,000 in salary and benefits. All other staff cost $57,734,817 in salary and benefits.

My recommendation:
Reduce administrator salaries and benefits by five percent, saving $138,200, and cut all other staff by three percent, saving $1,732,045. (I really like what Melissa Miller said at the March 10 school board meeting: ‘The value of leaders demonstrating leadership is much larger than the cost savings you get out of it.?)
Implement two furlough days (saving $300,000), charge fees to cover afterschool activities based on the cost of each activity ($52,635), reduce four, 12-month secretaries to 11-month secretaries ($27,200), collect indirect costs ($100,000), clean classrooms every other day and eliminate 10 custodians ($483,000), coordinate purchasing ($50,000) and don’t rollover building budgets ($100,000).
Then, take $2,466,870 from fund balance. That should leave the fund in perfectly good umbrella-like condition in case it rains harder. If the district uses the $5 million from fund balance budgeted for the current year, about $12.6 will be left in it ? enough to cover 15.2 percent of yearly expenditures.
In next year’s budget recommendation, the administration calls for taking another $2.8 million, leaving fund balance with a little less than $10 million, or about 14 percent of yearly expenditures.
With this plan, not only can the district use less of fund balance than they recommended ? an option they seem to favor ? but keep middle school assistant principals, special education staff and the supervisor, the GAP coordinator, family school coordinators, elementary art, Moose Tree, police liaisons, pay-to-play fees and the high school media assistant, all of which was included as a cut or reduction in the administration’s recommendation.
And I didn’t even touch on the savings from switching to modified block at the high school ($625,000 and eliminating 13 teachers), or the whopping 41 teachers who took the early retirement buyout.
Originally, 28 were expected to take the offer, saving the district $1,365,922 in the first year alone, but 41 teachers should bring savings to around $2,048,883.

But wait, there’s more:
Maybe the district should keep those 10 custodians and continue cleaning each room every day. The solution seems simple enough ? just take $2,949,870 from fund balance. Want to keep those 12-month secretaries? Take $2,977,070 from fund balance.
Or, just take $3,529,755 from fund balance, and leave all the programming and staffing intact.
I think, though, the financial climate is a good excuse for a little house cleaning. Open the district’s windows and let the economic breezes air everything out. Throw on those prudent gardening gloves and start weeding things out. That’s why I think investigating areas for potential savings without cutting programming, like coordinating purchasing and mandating furlough days, is a good idea.
I’m also interested in ‘revenue enhancements? or ways to bring more dough into the district. School Boardmember Jim Weidman brought up a couple of interesting ideas at the March 10 school board meeting: leasing school property for wind turbines, marketing and advertising, and trash ‘gasification? to name a few.
There are probably 30,000 different combinations of cuts and reductions that keep essential aspects to the district, like FSCs and art, and I’ve only mentioned a few options here. The budgeting process is complicated and I probably goofed the math a little bit along the way, but my point is there’s potential for savings in areas that don’t immediately impact a student’s quality of education.

Waking up:
Like I mentioned in a previous column, I think the school board is beginning to wake up and not blindly follow recommendations from the administration. That’s a good thing, especially when it comes to the budget.
Neither Mary Jo Burchart nor Bob Gritzinger liked seeing elementary art on the chopping block, and were hesitant to throw their support to cutting it. And staff and community members definitely echoed those sentiments during public comment at the March 10 board meeting.
‘If we cut art in elementary, that’s going to play itself out in middle school tests, MEAP tests, ACT tests, federal funding ? it is just going to snowball,? said Cherene Ahlborn.
And Boardmember Jim Weidman wasn’t too keen on getting rid of middle school assistant principals.
‘I think it’d be very difficult for us to operate our middle schools without assistant principals. That one was probably the most prominent for me,? he said to me in an interview when I asked if there was something on the chopping block he thought didn’t belong there.
And now that staff and boardmembers are communicating openly (see page 1), hopefully the board can blend their own ideas with ideas from staff and the community to come up with a better budget recommendation than the one from the administration.