1.  Administrators; additional tasks.  The District apparently formerly had the practice of requiring administrators – including the superintendent – to do a certain amount of substitute teaching each year – not only to save money but to provide a useful experience for administrators as well.
 
2.  Administrators; days worked.  "Administrators; salaries," below, refers to cuts in pay for administrators with no cuts in days worked.  "Administrators; days worked" is a proposal for the savings that would result if administrators were provided additional unpaid days off during the summer months when schools are not in session.
 
3.  Administrators; salaries.  A number of cost saving suggestions have involved salaries paid administrators.  They have ranged from proposals for 10% cuts (noting that none would be paid less than $50,000 a year, and that the superintendent would still receive $100,000 a year), to proposals that administrators’ pay be held to slightly less, or the same, percentage (or dollar) increases as those provided teachers (at the end of the bargaining process).  Some mentioned, specifically, the Superintendent’s car allowance.
 
4.  Boundaries and buildings.  (a) Closing buildings is proposed as a preferred way to save on the relatively high administrative and overhead costs of principals and schools with low enrollments (rather than having half-time principals). (b) Redraw boundaries to get a more even distribution of staff and students (within limits of building capacities).
 
5.  Community contributions.  (a) Reference was made to the Reading Recovery and Community Read-In programs supported through community assistance, with the suggestion such sources might be used to help fund other programs (such as MARS and LARS).  (b) If each school were to raise (in such manner as it chose) the equivalent of $1.00 per student beyond current fund raising, that would be an additional $10,500.
 
6.  Cost control.  Mentioned were such things as: reuse of paper; leaving lights off in school rooms until teachers arrive; don’t replace furniture that is still perfectly good.
 
7.  Curriculum support.  It was proposed that we study the alternative ways to provide curriculum support in an effort to find the most cost effective:  curriculum coordinators and directors (do we need two?), department chairs, Science Advocate model, LARS/MARS, in-service, AEA services, etc.
 
8.  Debate.  A music parent suggested evening the ratio of District money per student for debate and music, requiring parents of students in debate to raise more money.
 
9.  Drivers’ education.  Eliminate to save cost; or substantially increase fees to increase revenues.
 
10.  Extra-curricular activities.  Require participants/parents to pay the full cost of extra-curricular activities.
 
11.  Facilities charges.  Increase charges for use of District facilities by outside groups.
 
12.  Foreign language.  Eliminate all but one foreign language.  "Less is more."  Select Spanish as most important to our North American students’ future. Make it a required concentration so that all students graduate with mastery/fluency in at least one foreign language (others are available for them, as high school students, through UI or Kirkwood).
 
13.  Grants.  The grant writer position, now vacant, returned $100 for every $1 invested (roughly $4 million for $40,000).  Grants can represent a very substantial revenue enhancement for the District.  One specific proposal was for a "community learning centers" (media centers open to the public) grant from the U.S. Department of Education.
 
14.  Hiring levels.  Buildings presently have zero economic incentive to hire entry-level teachers.  They hire; and whatever the pay scale, the District pays it.  Not unexpectedly, most teachers are at the top of their "lanes" (salary ladders) – and many new hires are hired near the top.  Hypothetically ("hypothetically" because they are already in place and won’t be fired) if the number of teachers at each step and lane (56 steps) were equally distributed it would represent a $5 million savings for the District.  If buildings had something to gain from such savings it might affect hiring choices – and payroll costs.
 
15.  LARS.  A retirement is coming up; do not fill it; this would represent "a true $50,000 savings" (because the employee would no longer be on the rolls; eliminating MARS personnel, none of whom are retiring, does not remove them from the payroll, it just moves them elsewhere).  It is represented this would still leave five LARS staff plus Title I and Reading Recovery.
 
16.  Physical education.  PE waivers for students in athletics, marching band (or with full academic loads) might save PE staff/expenses.
 
17.  Single-source vending contracts.  The grant of a monopoly right (such as the UI’s exclusive contract with Coca Cola) could bring in some additional revenue.
 
18.  Strings, fourth grade.  Cut the program.
 
19.  Summer school.  One proposal, without specifics, was that summer school spending be reduced.  Another was that "non-certified instructors" be used (for, e.g., computer instruction) rather than teachers and that the tuition be raised for those who could afford it.
 
20.  Teaching days and salaries.  Like the "Administrative; days worked" proposal, above, there were a number of proposals involving (a) the reduction of days teachers are employed (perhaps one contract day per year), (b) the elimination of in-service days (especially when the subject matter is not seriously followed up to action/results/accountability), (c) the use of Thursdays rather than Tuesdays for this purpose (to avoid the added cost of substitute teachers) and even (d) the number of days students are in school (since this is, to some extent, controlled by law, perhaps it could be balanced by increasing the school day a few minutes per day).  (e) Some teachers say they would support a salary freeze, or small increase, if it could prevent cuts in programs.
 
21.  Transportation; bussing.  Additional use of the already available bus services (Cambus, Coralville, and Iowa City) might relieve some of the costs of the school bus contract.
 
22.  Transportation; parking.  Fees for stickers authorizing faculty and students to park at the schools could discourage driving, raise additional revenue, and encourage exercise and use of public transportation.
 
23.  Unspent, unobligated balance.  Last year this was 1% of budget; this year it’s about 2%; Strategy II recommended we work toward raising it to 3%; the Iowa Association of School Boards recommends 5%.  Obviously, to the extent we’re willing to reduce this percentage – as a number of persons have suggested, including Dr. Grohe – it can decrease, by that amount, what needs to be shaved elsewhere.  (The downside is the risk that unanticipated expenditures will require the District to borrow money, with interest payments further reducing available funds.)
 
24.  "Zero-based budgeting."  Rather than tweaking present programs and budget items in an effort to pick up $500-700,000 of savings, clean the slate, start from scratch, and put together a stripped-down quality educational program, drawing on global "best practices," new concepts and programs that are realistic given our five-year budget projections.

Nicholas Johnson’s E-mail: njohnson@inav.net  Web page: http://soli.inav.net/~njohnson