By Adam Pagnucco.
After getting $31 million less from the county council than it requested, MCPS management raised the possibility of reductions in force (terminations) affecting “all employee groups” and the teachers union expressed concern about potential furloughs. This triggered an avalanche of emails sent to the county council and a demand by the teachers for $10 million to hold off such measures.
These outcomes appear to have been avoided in budget materials on the school board’s agenda tomorrow.
First, some background. MCPS’s annual operating budget process involves several steps. The superintendent releases a recommended budget in December. In January or February, the school board modifies the superintendent’s budget and sends its request to the county executive. In March, the executive recommends a budget for MCPS and other county agencies and sends it to the county council. In May, the council approves budgets for the agencies, with the new fiscal year beginning on July 1. The process then repeats next year.
MCPS’s budget frequently changes as it proceeds through these steps. In the last 18 fiscal years, the council approved MCPS budgets below the school board’s request 14 times. Over this period, council-approved budgets averaged 98.5% of the board’s requests and layoffs were not needed. This year, the council approved 99.1% of the board’s request but apocalyptic predictions were nevertheless circulated.
MCPS management has now forwarded a plan to deal with the fact that it is receiving $31 million less from the council than the school board requested. The plan, which is on the board’s agenda tomorrow, includes the following elements.
Reductions in the central office, including:
- The Office of the Deputy Superintendent is being abolished along with the vacant deputy superintendent position and one position in the office.
- The Office of the Chief of Staff is being reduced by two positions.
- The Office of the School System Medical Officer is being abolished eliminating six positions.
- Other personnel-related reductions across the MCPS central service supports include three coordinators, two supervisors, one team leader, two program managers, one instructional specialist, and one parent community coordinator.
Increased class size by one student. The memo states, “The FY 2025 Operating Budget appropriation requires us to implement an increase in class size guidelines of one student at each grade level across the district. This will reduce the budget by 122.7 FTE positions and $10,114,721. We expect to be able to absorb a number of these reductions through retirements and other vacancies.”
Delay prekindergarten expansion.
Reduce staff development teacher positions by 26.4 full-time equivalent (FTE) in middle schools and high schools.
Eliminate the Montgomery Virtual Academy (MVA), which continues virtual learning from the COVID pandemic. Management comments, “Since its inception, the number of students participating in the MVA has decreased; moreover, both attendance and graduation rates for the MVA significantly are less than that of the overall district. Given this data and the reduced budget for FY 2025, the MVA will cease operating following the 2023–2024 school year. Students with medical conditions still will have the option of Interim Instructional Services in FY 2025.”
Trims to contractual services and musical instrument repair.
Not everything in here is a negative adjustment. MCPS is holding its health benefits fund harmless and is adding funding for special education, community schools and a state Blueprint program coordinator.
The terms “reduction in force,” “layoff,” “termination” and “furlough” do not appear in the document. Instead, note this sentence in the increased class size section: “We expect to be able to absorb a number of these reductions through retirements and other vacancies.”
Let’s not characterize this as honey-flowing happiness. Class size is projected to increase. (Let’s see if it does.) There will be staffing reductions at some schools. (I’d like to see a list.) There could very well be involuntary transfers. And I would like to know if MCPS has declined to honor any new contracts already offered to incoming teachers.
But my source network, which was skeptical that layoffs and furloughs were necessary, may ultimately be proven correct. The worst outcomes appear to have been avoided. And let’s note that MCPS management concedes that the FY25 budget approved by the council contains a $147 million (4.6%) increase over FY24. What is happening here is not an absolute dollar cut of the kind that occurred during the Great Recession, but rather a smaller increase than the school board wanted.
With revenues available to county agencies projected to be flat in FY26 and no permanent MCPS superintendent yet in place, here is the question we should all ponder.
What’s next?