I think class size reduction in primary grades needs to be our #1 priority. Followed by a wide range of academic programs that interest a variety of students and finally instructional days. I recently spent the last 15 minutes of the day in a 1st grade classroom. 25 students age 6 were to remain respectful and attentive while each of their classmates read a few sentences they wrote about a story they had been read. It was ridiculous to expect this. I could see the value in this lesson if there were 15 students in the classroom, but after about 10 kids and about 20 minutes, they were becoming impatient and restless (and so was I). I also feel that the state of California no longer funds education to the point where the distict can offer free bussing to your school of choice. I'd propose that if your neighborhood school is at or over capacity, you should be offered a choice between 2 schools. So that all the students on a bus in a general area are being sent to the same school for free. If you want to send your student to a school other than your neighborhood school (ie. magnet), you will need to provide the transportation or pay a fee for it.

First, thank you for this opportunity to share our perspectives with you as well as each other. Our #1 priority should be to maintain our current academic programs. When the budget improves, we can reverse a shortened school year or increased class sizes with relative ease compared to re-instituting dropped academic programs. By the way, if we shorten the school year, we lose ADA. How would this be a net gain? If anything, it could be a further net loss since the school district incurs on-going expenses that are not related to whether schools are open or not. TO CUT COSTS WE MUST CLOSE SCHOOLS THAT ARE UNDER-POPULATED. This has been a political challenge that we have avoided in the past but the time has come to face the fact that we can not continue as we have. I also agree with Judy that we can no longer afford the comprehensive transportation system we have been providing; a reduction in free services is in order.

First priority - maintain or REDUCE classroom size. Second priority - Maintain 180 days of instruction. Third priority - Maintain all programs. In fact, some programs I think are luxuries and not indespensible (ocile, non-required transportation).

I agree with Judy above. Get rid of bussing in every capacity possible. Utmost importance is to maintain low class sizes. In the early years where literacy foundations are laid, it is very important to have small class sizes. Second in priority would be to keep as many programs as possible. Last in priority would be the 180 instructional days. Fewer days would cut substantial costs and if there are less programs anyhow, that means more time in the rooms with the classroom teachers. Many parents provide enriching and extracirricular activities at home anyway.

Magnet programs do not work! The seminar program is a joke. If parents want their neighborhood school to get better, stop complaining and get involve. Busing is being abused by parents and loved by the Union. If we want to keep 5th/6th grade field trips, then we (parents) should pay for it, and don't give me the excuse that some parents can't afford it, if they can dress their kids in the latest fashion, they can afford it. We created a welfare mentality with education and now we are paying for it, as one of the richest state in the Union, yet somewhere in the bottom where education is concerned. If you look at the model of schools that are successful, you will find that teachers/parents and administrators work together, not as 3 separate groups.

I agree with Judy. My priorities are as follows: #1: a #2: c #3: b All the academic programs in place are of no use unless students are in an environment in which the lessons can be absorbed. Class size is one of the primary factors that affect this environment. On the other hand, we should examine how much the district can save by shaving a day off of the 180 days of instruction. I come from the east coast, where snow days are a fact of life. Sometimes we lost a day or two of vacation to make up for snow days, but sometimes there would be just too many days, and we would simply lose that day of school. I think we were not too much the worse for it.

First, thank you for the opportunity to voice our priorities. I know this is a very difficult situation and hard choices must be made. (It's depressing how this budget crisis is affecting our schools, kids and teachers. I believe we will suffer the consequences long-term. What a mess.) Here are my priorities: Number 1: a)Class size. Please do NOT increase class size. I've notice a big difference in the functioning of classrooms with the current increase (from 20 to 25). A good teacher with a class of managable size can provide a rich learning experience that might compensate for for other cuts. A good teacher in an overcrowded classroom can't. I give b) # of school days and c) academic programs 'equal' weighting as secondary priorities. While the number of school days can't be cut drastically without a negative effect, a slightly shorter school year might be OK. Academic programs: I think OCILE can be cut. Focusing on a core curriculum is a way to cut costs (although cutting them to the bone can make for a flat school experience.)

I feel that you can't put any of these items lower on the list than any other item. They are all crucial to maintaining an adequate educational experience. I think we could find room in some special ed programs for cuts.I know no one mentions cuts to this area because it is considered "un PC", but I belive we are in a crisis and all programs must be reevaluated to find the most benefit for the least cost. For example putiing a child with special needs into a regular classroom is sometimes a benefit to all the students. But when that child must have an aide at their side for the entire day it becomes cost prohibitive. If a child needs an aide at their side for the entire day are they really ready to be integrated into a regular classroom? Why not group children with like needs together for most of the day . This will allow an aide to work with more than one child during the school day and will also take some of the pressure of the teacher who is trying to teach to a ,now, over capacity class. I think this will lead to not only cost savings but also a more productive learning environment for all the students.

I have been a school bus driver for SDUSD for 2 years, prior to becoming a TA and then a teacher for 19 years. I think that busing should be abloished. If we don't bus students out of their neighborhoods we could save all the money and more and HELP the environment at the same time.

I don't believe we should be limited to these 3 considerations. Of course no one wants to sacrifice any of them. But sports and the arts should not be sacrificed at the expense of other academic programs that benefit a small number of students. What about closing campuses that serve few students, teachers taking a reduction in pay and benefits. Are we legally mandated to have 180 days of instruction? Many high school AP classes are done in March or April. But students have to continue to attend and watch movies so the school gets funding.

1. Class size -- The education of each of my children this year has been compromised by the increased number of students in their classes. 2. Keep all academic programs in place. Our future workforce depends on high academic performance. 3. Maintain 180 days of instruction. While I see the value of both Old Town and Balboa Park programs, I have to say that more time in the classroom would be beneficial to both students and teachers.

I have an idea for a 4th option. If we went to a 4 day week and extended each school day by 80-90 minutes, we could have longer class periods to allow more time with students each day (in case our class sizes still stay large). The instructional minutes would remain the same for our 180 instructional days; and, we could save a HUGE amount cutting transportation and operating costs for an extra day each week.

Priority #1 is to keep the integrity of all academic courses. The VAPA dept. is the only item on the list of proposed cuts that directly affects students "in the classroom" and has State standards to support the curriculum. Please remove it from consideration. Priority #2 is to keep reasonable sized classrooms at all sites. I am cautious about any research that suggests that class size does not affect student achievement. Having been a teacher in the classroom for over 29 years, I know first-hand that large class sizes are chaotic at best. Overcrowding is the reason why some animals in the wild eat their young. Overloaded class size is not good for kids or teachers. Priority #3 is to cut back on the number of school days. Although I feel this might be an appropriate option, won't the district lose some State funding if it drops below the 180 minimum? If not, bring it on. We are all learning to do more with less. Much thought should be given to reinstating the Curriculum and Instruction office. I don't know of a school district our size that has as much disrespect for the heart and purpose of education as SDUSD. CIO's need to be assistant superintendents (what they do is important) and let the C and I dept. do what they do best - that is to see that all students recieve appropriate curriculum taught by effective teachers.

I would like to list the following to be noted as my priorities to be kept in place for our students: • First, we must keep all academic programs in place. • Secondly, we must maintain reasonable class sizes, many of which are already too high. Here are some other suggestions: • There could be salary freezes and even roll backs. This district did this once before. • With the State’s approval, cutting out 10 days of school could assist us in eliminating some of the budget problems. • Perhaps the State could offer a “Golden Handshake” state-wide. That would assist them in covering their deficit. Our District keeps adding expensive positions to the Ed Center administration. We went from Instructional Leaders (Bersin) to 6 area Superintendents (Cohn) to 15 plus SIOs, and other titles and positions (Greer)- many from out of our district, earning more than the original people who were here. How many of these positions actually impact students’ academic learning and could be eliminated? Thank you for this opportunity to share ideas for resolving this budget crisis.

Reduce the number of school days. Reduce the number of standardized tests given. That would give back the lost classroom time. Allow high achieving high school students to take classes at junior colleges to meet high school requirements. If you choose to increase class size, you could add aides in the lower grades to assist with crowd control. I also agree that any non-mandated bussing should be cut. If enrollment is of concern, there are plenty of parents who would gladly choice into the UC schools and drive their children there. I have spoken to many over the years who were denied enrollment to UC schools in the lottery system. I also think that the bilingual magnet program at Spreckels could be eliminated. I do not believe the majority of kids are getting anything out of it. I know my kids did not.

As a parent of school-aged children in our district, as well as a teacher, it is of utmost importance to me to have a full curriculum for all students. This is the only way in which we can reach ALL students and help them discover what they are passionate about, keep them connected to school and launch them on the path to success as a well-rounded citizen of the world. We must continue to maintain multiple pathways for education. Children are not all cut from the same cloth and need ALL academic areas available to them. VAPA and Athletics included! This priority is followed closely by the necessity to maintain reasonable class size. Finally, I believe that the length of the academic school year is an area in which we CAN cut back to save some money. A furlough of 4 – 10 days, where all schools are shut down, could save a lot of money while also saving jobs. I realize that this must be approved by the state, but how can the state, in good conscience, mandate a certain number of days and then not provide the appropriate funding to make that happen? Testing is another area where, with the approval of the state, we could save some money. Let’s take a hiatus from testing for the next two years until this budget crisis has begun to improve. I also believe that parents should pay for transportation to schools outside their neighborhood and families should pay for sixth grade camp, with the district offering scholarships for students on free and reduced lunch. Finally, I have talked with several teachers and administrators who say that if the “golden handshake” were offered again this year, they would jump at the opportunity. Thank you for all you do. I know we have tough choices and sacrifices ahead. I admire the work you are doing and your efforts to really hear what your community wants to have happen.

My main priority is to maintain class sizes.

Keeping ALL academic programs in place should be the priority. Families already shoulder the cost of music and other programs at the high school level since the district can not fund them. Our students need to be able to take classes besides Math, English and History. Students benefit in several ways from taking art, music and drama classes. We can not afford to drop any programs.

c. We need well rounded individuals.

Cut buses to everyone, why should a select few get free buses when the majority do not have it at all. Class size should be reduced, there is not enough books nor desk for 25 kids in my sons 2nd grade class room and they are so tight for space there is no where to breath little alone learn!! Lets ask the superintendent to take a cut in pay or cut car expense from upper level positions. Our schools have taken a big enough hit how much more can they withstand. Stoping sports in school and band, music will only cause these kids to get into trouble and possibly gangs.

It would be good to know how much $ would be saved with each option A, B or C because they can't all be equal. It's like asking people to vote for a new proposition (ie. prop S) when they don't know that SD Unified will face a severe financial shortage in the coming year. What we do know, is that salaries and benefits account for about 80% of the SDUSD budget. Please start there and then you can ask me about what sacrifices me and my kids are willing to make. What have you found the unions are willing to part with? Please make labor unions be part of the solution, not just 80% of the problem. Even Mr. Barrera's resolution to be presented at the Dec 1st board meeting only mentions sacrifices that will affect students. No mention is made of teachers unions (just maintenance) sharing in any of the cuts. What a disgrace. Please tell us that teachers and administrators are going to be part of the financial solution and not remain 80% of our budget problem.

Since there is a long list of San Diego public school alumni who have become successful, wealthy, and famous, why not do a philanthropic push and see if some funds can be gifted during this unprecedented time of budget cuts as at least a slight help towards the goal of maintaining what slim public school funding that still exists? See this list for a start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_San_Diegans Or possibly partner with businesses or sports franchises to help underwrite some of the class necessities. Getting Office Depot or Staples to donate supplies in exchange for branding on school and district communications would be ugly, but so is a $200M budget gap. The NFL could put some of their "PLAY 60" ad budget into the schools. They are already spending a ton on network and print advertising. Why not go directly to the kids and spend some ad money where it can really help? In normal budget times this kind of "selling out" would be considered a no-no, but if this is the only path towards keeping our schools intact why not at least try?

It is interesting to see all the different perspectives on this impossible situation and I sincerely thank you Mr Evans for making it possible for us all to voice our opinions and concerns. I have found it hard to rank maintaining/reducing class sizes and keeping our school year at 180 days. The increase to 25 children in my daughters 1st grade class has had its challenges and I feel the children at the lower end of the class do miss out as there is just no way a single teacher can spend addition time helping these children. If class sizes were to increase further, accomodating them would be the first hurdle followed by a certainty that children will be left behind. My biggest concern with regard to reducing the number of days at school is the proposal to reduce kindergarten to a half day program - I don't know if this is even part of this proposal??? Children are expected to learn SO much in Kindergarten and a half day program just isn't going to be able to cover everything which is turn will mean 1st grade will effectively be a second Kindergarten year putting our children's education back by a whole year!!! With such a budget shortfall we must consider reducing some of the academic programs, possibly funding some through school FFC's or parental contributions. Although it is nice to have extra's I would prefer to have the basics taught and fund the rest myself instead of reducing the education standard. Obviously, in an idea world, we would give our children everything but we must prioritize and make cuts where we can.

The San Diego Union School District is too large. It needs to be broken up asap - this is the first step in cutting overhead and fat. The machine is bloated and broken. Time to break it up into smaller, manageable pieces and get back in control.

-No class size increases -Move to half day kindergarten--neither of my children suffered from it. -Eliminate OCILE programs(Balboa Park, Old Town, 6th grade camp)--to most kids it's just an excuse to get out of school -Eliminate all transportation--My kids never had any and we managed to get them to school for 14 years -Increase teacher health insurance co-pay and eliminate double health care benefits for employee spouses--teachers should expect to share in higher costs just as everyone in private industry has. -Cut GATE expenses--don't feel my 2 GATE children saw any benefit -Eliminate or reduce printed materials for parents and send only one per household -Eliminate library allocation--it's the digital age and students access online -Keep high school sports--this are needed to be competitive for college admission

Once concern that I have is the focus that everyone has on pointing out "academic programs". Arts and electives are just as important for a well rounded education for students. Drama, band, choir, art, yearbook, etc., have their important places in student development. At the same time, cuts do need to be made. some people will be angry at this idea, but the GATE program should be tossed out the window. Identifying students that are supposedly better and have more to offer than other students is a terrible way to label the students who do not make it into the program to begin with. It also costs a lot of money in testing, classroom expenses, distinguished lecture series, and specified classes, teacher certifications, and the list goes on. Out of the three listed above, reasonable class sizes should be maintained.

1. 180 day instruction. Ultimately our kids will be competing in a global economy. The U.S. already drastically lags behind most countries in total time in the classroom. 2. Classroom size. This impacts quality of instruction. 3. All academic programs. Though undesireable to cut, there are at least outside options to provide kids exposure to arts/sports/electives. That is not true for the above two choices. John, thanks for involving parents in helping to make hard choices, and not just making this a forum of complaints that we shouldn't have to make them.

Well rounded education is #1!!!!! Class size means nothing to me. The more the merrier!

If we absolutely must prioritize these 3, I would say 1)maintain or reduce class size 2)maintain academic and arts programs 3)Days of instruction. I do feel that cuts from these areas should be avoided at all costs. Let's look first at other areas, bussing,the OCILE program and teachers benefits. As far as the GATE program ,if it works we should keep it. The kids in the program though,should be correctly identified as being able to benefit from the differenitated curiculm. As it stands now in many schools quite a few of the children placed in GATE programs neither tested high enough to be there, nor have shown the academic ability to be able to appreciate and learn from the curriculum. It is important to provide an enriched educational experience for children who can benefit from it,these are our future leaders, scientists,lawmakers after all. Not all children are the same ability level and to pretend that they all are is doing them a disservice. As far as the kids not being plced in GATE feeling inferior , the GATE identified kids are the minority so I don't think that a child not placed there would feel too bad since most of his peers aren't either. Not academically challenging a gifted child is tantamount to witholding appropriate instruction to a child with a learning disabilty,they both need special instruction to flourish.

Maintain 180 days of instruction. I think if it is cut then the Legislature and voting public will believe that the smaller number of days is just fine and no need to restore them. Small classes are better, but the fact is that 15 years ago we had 30 + students in elementary and half-day kindergarten, and students now graduating from high school are no better performing than those who graduated 15 years ago. Although not sufficient to reduce the budget, I believe it is crucial to cut a lot of programs that are considered to be extras before the voting public will permit additional taxes. For example, non-mandated testing, American Indian Education Center, smaller schools, languages other than Spanish, adult education. Cut Professional Development, especially for office staff, before you cut classrooms.

I think a smaller districts would work well because the money could be used for the schools in a particular area. Regarding class size, anything over 20 children in kindergarten is too large. One teacher with 20 4 and 5 year olds should be the limit. The class size is now at 24; reality is that many kindergarten classes are at 26 plus. This is not fair to young children who need lots of adult interaction, support, attention. IT ISN'T SAFE!! If kindergarten classroom size is increased than we need to have aides in the classroom or two teacher teaming together as was done in the past. The half day classes were larger, but with morning and afternoon teachers helping each other the student teacher ratio was better. Leslie

choice 1 - a choice 2 - b choice 3 - c This is difficult to rank. Reducing class size helps both teachers and students. Keeping 180 days makes sense because of the ADA money we receive. Keeping all academic programs is OK, but without the arts electives, there is no "broad" education.

I don't agree with your arguments. I believe the best way to achieve these cuts is to shorten the school year. I would much rather have a shorter year with fewer kids in the classroom than the full 180 days with overcrowded classes. I have a 3rd grader in a class with 27 kids now, a few of them special needs. It's too many kids. The teacher tells me that. I have a four year old entering kindergarten next fall. How's he going to learn to read w/ 28 other kids in the class, including those w/ special needs? I believe nonessential programs (like ocile) need to go. Blend integration curriculum in w/ competitive programs (sports, art, science, debate). Please don't promise the teachers union that you won't do any layoffs. That just ties your hands. Keep your options open. Please do what is best for the kids.

Keep acidemic programs going like BAND and COLORGUARD!

How about those instructional Leader people? Why are we paying $150, 000 for each one? This is a lot of money wasted on supervising principals when the job is so public that we as parents can tell you if the job is not getting done.

b) We must maintain the current minimum of 180 days of instruction. Decreasing the number of days in the school year would have an unacceptable effect on our student achievement.

the "taxpayers" will not ever get the picture unless the board of ed sends a very strong message. cuts are just about the only choice left. the board could still attempt to raise a tax as proposed by John de Beck. tie that in with drastic cuts: high school sports, the outdoor ed program, close ALL schools with a student of less then 300 students, set up a system of one Principa overseeing three smaller schools with vps. eliminate the duel principas at some of our high schools (replace with vps. set priorities by grade level and have no more then three per subject area. it is time for tough love with the voters. the trend that seems to be supported by the loudest are cut, cut, cut. that seems to be the choice you have. it is indeed a sad time for public education. good luch.

Priorities: 1. class size 2. academic programs 3. 180 days

As a mother of a middle school age child and a teacher at the middle school level, I would rather see fewer school days with classes at a reasonable size (30 or less). Fewer days of high quality education is better than more days with crowd control.

VEEP busing costs the district 18 million dollars a year-- every year. We are spending these dollars on mechanics, gasoline, tires, and drivers-- and polluting the environment at the same time! How many teachers, school nurses, student aids and school secretaries could be hired for 18 million dollars a year? Is VEEP busing the best use of our currently very limited resources? If we cut VEEP busing now this would allow us to save some of our most important acedemic initiatives: small class size, summer school, libraries, literacy and math intervention. Tough times call for tough decisions. No one likes to appear to be "anti-integration" but this is one program that does not deliver a measurable return relative to its cost. Let's cut VEEP busing.

RE: "Budget Crisis: What would YOU do?" Option C is the best route. Children who have an interest in the activities the school has to offer have an interest in insuring they are taking responsibility for their grades are are more likely to continue studies even when school is not in session. Option A is too loose - "reasonable" is hard to define. I have seen teachers with as few as 15 students fail, and teachers with 35+ students succeed, with success and failure being that the children understand and retain what is being taught. With students having choices in their curriculum they are more likely to do what it takes to stay involved in their "choice" activities which includes taking ownership of their education and asking for help outside of the classroom if needed. Option B is strictly a budget change. There is no gain to students by reducing the number of days in a school year. Option C is clearly the choice - a full curriculum is the key to student success.

Mr. Evans, It is my sincere hope that you and your colleagues on the board will support the proposed district-wide furlough program for the 2010-11 academic year. It is, by far, the most fair and effective solution to the budget crises facing our entire district. The proposal allows all staff, teachers, and communities to share equitably in the cost reductions. If we "zero-budget" any more programs or jobs, we all know that those important services and people will most likely never be re-instated. We must think long term, and we must stop pitting schools against schools, parents against parents, and programs against programs. Please let us stand as one community of San Diego and share equitably in this crises. If we accept the proposed furloughs, saving an estimated $6 million/day, then all the people and programs will remain in place when the funds are once again available in San Diego. And, who knows, if the "Race to the Top" funds are approved, perhaps there will be enough funds to even shorten the furlough time proposed for next year. I strongly urge you to vote for the district-wide shortening of the 2010-11 school year as an equitable solution to the budget crises facing SDUSD. Thank you, Lisa Bonebrake, concerned parent

I would NOT want to see an increase in classroom size. We have already experienced that for my 1st and 3rd grader and both classes (23 students and 26 students, respectively) are at their limits. I could see and would support a reduction in school days because there are definitely wasteful days throughout the school year. For example, the week before Thanksgiving we had a full week of minimum days. I would rather have had two days of school and two days of conferences (without the kids at school)and one less day of school for everyone that week. Another set of minimum days comes up in the Spring for parent teacher conferencing and yet many of us don’t have conferences that time of year (they are elective and not mandatory). Simply hold two days of school and one day of conferences and take two days out of the school week. Another example is the last few weeks of school. Grades are done and we are simply “waiting out” the last two weeks of school and having parties. The District could take a serious look at the productivity of those minimum and end of year weeks and cut out unnecessary spending there by dropping days off the schedule. Who do we contact about State and Federal funding? How do the other states do it? Why are our students (my kids) so underfunded? Is it a population thing in California? Is it a state taxes thing? Please provide me links so I can understand why. Thanks for your time and efforts to make these tough decisions.

Mr. Evens: Is there any thought being given to the prospect of increasing the school day hours while at the same time decreasing the school week to a four day week? If we can work this angle, we not only save on busses, but on facilities as well. I really don’t know what can be done without a true infusion of money and a prioritization by the government…but I do not believe that cutting programs or increasing class sizes benefits anyone. The truth is, education is broken and needs to be addressed at a systemic level if we are going to thrive… Just my opinion…

1) Please go to a successful corporation to draft your budget, ask them for help. 2) Please let the top 15% of thriving schools go charter. 3) Unfortunately, the teachers union has literally handcuffed our children and your staff.

Of the three possibilities that you posted in your recent email, the following would most closely reflect my priorities: a) We must maintain reasonable class sizes, many of which are already too high. It would be better to make other cuts, (I don't agree with this statement: "such as the number of school days") or certain academic programs than to have even more students in every classroom. As much as I love the OCILE program, I see it a non-negotiable. That is it's not possible to keep the program. I feel it should be suspended until this crisis is over. There are other ideas that I like, such as: 1) Make medical/dental/vision benefits optional. We have many employees who could be covered by their spouses' employers and save our district a huge amount of money. 2) Unpaid furlow days with substitute teachers. Although I am not crazy about this, if each employee were required to take one day per month off, unpaid, and employee substitutes only for the jobs that must cannot be left vacant (i.e., classroom teacher), a lot of money would be saved. 3) As much as I hate to propose this, job-sharing wherein both job partners get full benefits should no longer be allowed. If there is a 20/80 job-share, only one person gets benefits, so that's the only split that would be acceptable. 4) Either all K-3 classes should be a at 20:1 class size, or all 2nd & 3rd grade be at 24:1 class size & all K-1 classes at 20:1. I wish I were more creative so that I could come up with more ideas

If you cannot run the school district with the money that you received from the State of California, you should testify to that in Sacramento. If the legislature fails to provide the funding that is needed, then the SDUSD should file a lawsuit against the State of California.

CA educators work miracles on small budgets, and yet still have many luxuries that other states do not have. Ideas: Trim special education staff and reduce number of aides in classrooms. In other states aides are used only for severe cases. I have seen aides everyday in classrooms for students who function low academically, but can make it through with more teacher accommodations. They'll simply have to work harder to pass. Increase price of school lunches and channel profit to other areas? INCREASE NUMBERS OF STUDENTS IN ARTS PROGRAMS- band and choir can accommodate 50-60 students per class, reducing class sizes in other areas. These programs are already largely self-sufficient and have been cut to the max with teachers working 80% and double schools. It would be a crime to cut them further. Lengthen school day and reduce number of calendar days? Trim after school bussing and use neighborhood schools. Push for more county tax revenue- wheel tax? Property tax? Trim sports to varsity and junior varsity only- no freshmen teams. Trim the sports offered at each school to football, basketball, volleyball, soccer, tennis, and baseball/softball. Other sports can be taught in community leagues. Cut technology. We all learned without smartboards, laptops, and promethium boards. They are NOT essential to learning- they're luxuries. Go back to overhead projectors and opaque projectors.

Like you I do not like any of the choices. But if I were faced with your three priorities I think the only reasonable and logical choice is to raise class sizes which creates an excess of teachers and a reduction of payroll. This choice creates the greatest possible political lobbying group. Every family, every student, every classroom is negatively impacted. Everyone shares the pain equally and would have an incentive to collectively lobby Sacramento directly for more teachers to reduce class sizes in every discipline and at every level. I know that lowering class size has a positive impact on student learning. As a classroom teacher I have anecdotal evidence. The correlation between budget reductions and student achievement should pressure Sacramento to reexamine their funding priorities. Whenever a school board pits one academic area against another, one grade versus another, one extracurricular program versus another they enable Sacramento lawmakers to avoid some very tough choices: which programs to reduce or eliminate in order to fund education in the arts, humanities, sciences, and basics.

* Top Priority is Academics This includes Special Ed and GATE/Seminar * Eliminate: busing, MAGNET, athletics, VAPA, 6-to-6, and all social programs. Allow CHOICE program as long as parents drive their own kids. Force parents to pay for field trips (we already do). Force kids/parents to realize they only get enrichment (dessert) when they finish the core curriculum (meat and vegetables). * Our community already has athletics, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, religious/social programs, Jr. Theater, childcare. It is not SDUSD's responsibility to provide these. * SDUSD's goals should be 1. Education for career. 2. Education for good citizens in a democracy. * SDUSD may not have the funds to fulfill all State mandates. Force the State to sue our district. We can't obey all their rules. Stop trying and focus on what we CAN do.

The State and County and Washington have been collecting money from us all for Public Education. Where is San Diego Schools' money? Pres.Obama said he designated Billions to help make public schools stronger and even more effective - but its reported that only a small % of the money has been given out. It is going to the States,not to school districts,with some onerous Federal requirements which seem to make districts compete for it and delays it- but it is needed HERE, NOW! just so the schools can stay open and do their jobs! The School Board seems worried about following peripheral unfunded State mandates, when the State is giving them less and less money for Required courses, teachers, seats, books, supplies, maintenance, and security, which are their Highest Obligations. The Board's Highest Priority is ALL classroom needs: reasonable class size, meaningful curriculum, including required electives which are the hooks that keep some children in school, and enthusiastic teachers and students, and involved parents. Shorter or 180 Day school years limit education and the ADA funds that the district needs. The latest State demand for more budget cuts is beyond the pale. I believe the Board should ask US Sec.of Educ.Duncan for IMMEDIATE DIRECT FUNDS. The Board and Unions should gather ALL their legal minds and power and say "No", "Enough is Enough!" and sue the County, CA Legislature, Governor and Dept.of Educ.if need be, to get all the funds that are needed for schools. They must be CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS and REFUSE to be the States' Weapons of Mass Public Education Destruction. We can put off building High Speed trains and Football Stadiums and Foreign Wars, but NOT good schooling for our kids!

1. Reduce Bussing 2. Cut OCILE 3. Reduce district/state mandated testing 4. Put on hold the purchasing of new technology: smart boards, laptops 5. Put on hold the purchasing of new textbooks 6. Reduce the number of district supervisors/administrators 7. Cluster small schools; utilize administration - we do this with nursing/counselors/resource teachers Keep elementary and general education class sizes 25:1 EQUITY: High School Teachers have NEVER been asked to pay or give up their PREP TIME. Why should elementary teachers give it up? Twenty years ago they gave up a portion of their salary to have this. EQUITY No matter how many days students are required to come to school, they will not show up unless there is a class they WANT to attend. Keep quality education a priority in a safe environment. Thank you for allowing us to submitt ideas.

Increase class size, but bring in more volunteer parent-teachers to assist in the classroom.

1: Keep all academic programs. 2: Maintain reasonable class sizes. 3: Maintain 180 days of instruction. It is important to keep academic programs, as it keeps thousands of children from doing illegal activity.

1: Keep all academic programs. 2: Maintain 180 days of instruction. 3: Maintain reasonable class sizes. Without the full set of academic programs and with reduced number of days of instruction, there will be an increase of students just hanging around the neighborhood doing bad things because there is nothing else to do. Most parents do not sign them up for community programs for various reasons: inconvenience, high fees, taught and run by non-professionals/volunteers, parents being forced to volunteer, etc. With school programs, everything is at school. You do not have to get off work and drive the kid to the program. You do not have to deal with a volunteer coach who knows nothing about soccer teaching your kid soccer. One can only do the community programs for the kid(s) during the first 3-5 years then the parent gets burned out especially if there are 2-3 kids in the family involved. The parent is running around from program to program. There is no instructor accountability- a kid can be in a community program for years and learn absolutely nothing. You just keep paying for the program to keep the kid busy. Without the academic programs, expect an increase in the following: teen pregnancy, graffiti/vandalism, drug use, drug dealing, teen smoking/alcohol, street drag racing, teen shoplifting, illegal s*x with minors by adults, incest, teen STDs, stupidity, etc. It will be like the 70's and 80's again when old people hated teens because they knew they were all trouble. At least the teens of today, get more respect than the teens of decades ago. Instead of getting better, we are all going back in time and starting over. That's real sad.

I don't understand how elementary schools, some with enrollment over 800 students can run with just a Principal and no Vice Principals yet middle schools with similar populations need a Principal and two Vice Principals. Can we not cut some of the Vice Principal positions? Transportation costs are extreme. Can we not cut some of the bus routes, eliminate the Old Town and Balboa Park Programs and make students pay for field trips to cover the cost of busses? Can we eliminate some of the departments that most districts don't even have? Can we change some of the Department Heads to "Managers" and reduce their salary? Is it possible to get rid of highly paid consultants to the district? Have you considered extending the Monday through Thursday school day at middle and high schools and closing the campus' on Mondays? This proposal would cut expenditures by 20% for the hourly paid staff as cafeteria workers, bus drivers, custodians, etc office support staff, etc would all be off on Fridays. Also.. schools in more affluent areas such as Scripp's Ranch and La Jolla are paid to have security guards. As some of the schools, middle schools especially, don't hire a security guard, do they really need the funds that they receive? Schools such as Standley, Marshall, Muirlands definately are over staffed with two Vice Principals and could get by with just a Principal. By the way, some have had the same Principal for over 7 years. Stir the pot, move them around a bit to freshen the schools. Lastly, if you follow the Boston mode you might want to consider getting rid of bussing and strengthening local neighborhood schools to save money in that regard. The amount of money needed to be cut is enormous and I am not sure how you will achieve all of the cuts needed. I hope my suggestions will help foster some ideas.