The Grand County School Board voted unanimously to approve the “Proposed Financial Recovery Plan” at the board’s monthly meeting Wednesday, Dec. 16. The motion solidified the draft document that was sent to the Utah State Office of Education and State Board of Education for approval the following day. The plan outlines budget cuts and policy changes slated for the 2010–2011 school year.

The details of the plan were explained in depth to a packed conference room of parents, teachers, and community members during a pre-meeting public forum. Grand County School District Superintendent Margaret Hopkin broke down the seven main cuts to be made and the amounts these actions will raise.

The budget cuts are a result of a $1.89 million deficit expected for 2010-2011 school year and involve some drastic changes to not only the district staff, but also the education programs available to Grand and San Juan County students.

The largest savings in the recovery plan come from the non-renewal of 45 provisional employees – those who have worked in the district less than three years – and six tenured employee positions. Total staff cuts account for $1,349,265 in savings, Hopkin said. Hopkin and school principals gave the news to the likely affected staff members last week.

A layoff and reduction in workforce of this magnitude will have many affects on the community, not only for the school system, but also for the local economy as well, according to Connie Wilson, the parent of a 9-year-old third-grader at Red Rock Elementary School. Wilson said she has been in attendance at many of the school board meetings and public forums.

“We believe our schools are unique. This district has a blend of teachers ranging from third generation locals to teachers that have traveled the country before making Moab their home,” Wilson wrote in a “letter to the editor” submitted to The Times-Independent before the November elections. “These teachers bring diversity, talent, and passion to the classroom. We can honestly say that every parent/teacher conference we have attended proved that the teachers knew each of our children very well. I fear that will not continue if the classroom size is increased due to lay-offs.”

In fact, in accordance with the plan, there will be two fewer teachers per grade, decreasing the staff for each grade from five to three. Class sizes for grades kindergarten through sixth will increase from 24 to 36 students, including the merging of first and second grades. Classes at the secondary level (grades seven through 12) will have up to 45 students, district officials said.

The plan also calls for eliminating many of the intervention and mentoring programs for all grades, shifting from a full-day to half-day kindergarten for most students and full-day kindergarten for a small number of students chosen by lottery and pre-assessment readiness skills. The Grand County Middle School will be losing their comprehensive guidance program and certified media specialist in the library.

Grand County High School will be eliminating a number of courses from their curriculum, which may threaten the accreditation status at GCHS, the plan states. However, the school board acknowledges in the plan that they will do everything possible to continue to retain the accreditation. Student activities will also take a $100,000 cut.

The plan further asks the USOE and State Board of Education for permission to move to a four-day school week. The projected savings from that change would be $115,000. The loss of an extra day means a 20 percent pay cut for bus drivers and cooks.

Custodial staff and teacher’s assistants will move to a 36-hour work week. Five contract days will be cut for 12-month employees and four days will be eliminated for 11-month employees, the plan states.

School board members will also be taking a 15 percent cut to their $3,000 per year stipend.

Hopkin also informed the school board and the public at Wednesday night’s meeting that she will reduce her salary to that of the highest-paid teacher’s salary multiplied by the number of days worked. That change will take effect immediately in January 2010, she said.

“We’re in a place in this district where extraordinary cuts are being made, and there is a need for massive teamwork,” Hopkin said. “We’re facing a cliff like we’ve never seen before.”

The board also hopes to raise more revenue through the sale of certain parcels of land declared surplus and adjusting tax rates through the “truth in taxation” process. Truth in taxation allows the board to raise taxes without a public vote, but with feedback from county taxpayers, to a specific cap amount set by the state.

School board members said they hope to decrease tax rates for some funds and increase others to avoid increasing taxes altogether. The board also will be asking voters to approve a voted leeway in June 2010. If approved, the leeway would annually generate significant revenues for the school district.

Local residents in attendance at the meeting raised many ideas about how to generate more revenue and avoid the massive layoffs. However, school board members said that because of the state laws regarding restricted funds and how revenues can be allocated within those funds, the only way to actually raise money for the district’s maintenance and operation fund is through taxes.

Some concerned citizens questioned whether the board was seriously considering the sale of property, namely Red Rock Elementary, as a way of decreasing the deficit, rather than imposing the drastic measures outlined in the recovery plan. Profits from property sales are considered capital outlay, school board members said. For this year only, because of the district’s distressed status, any money earned until the end of the 2009-2010 fiscal year in June can be moved around, including proceeds from land sales and donations. However, after this school year, the board loses that ability, because state law prohibits shifting those funds around without approval from the State Board of Education.

Whereas Hopkin and the school board members agreed that proceeds from land sales would help the district make up some of the almost $1 million deficit from the 2008–2009 school year, they said it does not provide a solution for this year or coming years.

“We’d like to go to the community and find out what their opinions are and try to figure out a stable solution,” Hopkin said. “It’s not affective to run a school district yo-yoing between leeways and one-time fixes. We need community help. We cannot do it alone.”

Wilson said she agrees that a combination of community and district support is what is needed to get through the crisis.

“I think if they [the board] had better public relation skills, they could help the community understand what happened,” Wilson said. “I want the community to come together and trust each other. I hope at least every parent in the community could realize that hating the school board only hurts the school district employees and students. Good education does not come for free.”

Despite Wilson’s comments, many citizens expressed a distrust of the board and said they were curious about what sort of investigation the board is conducting to uncover the full details of the budget problems.

Hopkin explained that the board is seeking legal counsel and waiting to hear whether there is a need for a forensic audit. Richard Clark, a retired Murray School District business administrator who discovered the deficit while helping out the Grand school district this year during the illness and subsequent death of district business administrator Doug Cannon, explained that by the request of the State Board of Education, the district will be going back over the audits of the past few years, all the way to 2001, in order to learn when the financial mismanagement began.

A forensic audit, Clark noted, would cost close to $100,000. Unless criminal activity is involved, which neither the school board nor the state auditor has discovered at this time, there may be few, if any, new revelations uncovered concerning the bookkeeping irregularities, he said. The next step is for the district to weigh the cost of a forensic audit against the potential value.

The board plans to have an amended budget completed in January. Hopkin noted that the financial recovery plan is “just a plan.” She said the district needs permission from the state to begin instituting the plan, but there is an acknowledgement built in to the plan that allows the details of its implementation to shift as new information comes to light.

For instance, she said, if the $922,000 shortfall from the 2008–2009 school year can be raised through other avenues and paid off, the district will save $250,000 a year, which will allow them to re-implement some of the staff or programs included in the proposed cuts.

The State Office of Education and the State Board of Education are scheduled to discuss Grand’s proposed recovery plan at the state board’s Jan. 7 meeting, district officials said.