K-12 districts take one advantage over meat inspectors, military contractors, national parks staff, air traffic controllers, Head Beginning operators (see story) and others facing immediate cuts in federal funding as of Fri's sequester borderline: time. Because of how districts upkeep their money, the 5.1 percentage reductions in federal revenue that would go into effect March 1 nether sequestration won't be felt by districts until the first of their new fiscal year, July 1. That gives districts four months to plan for the impact ­and Congress and President Obama plenty of time to change their minds – or not.

In a letter to congressional leaders, Torlakson said cuts from sequestration will cause "long-lasting and irreparable harm."

In a letter to Congressional leaders, Torlakson said cuts from sequestration volition cause "long-lasting and irreparable harm."

In figures released Tuesday, Superintendent of Public Educational activity Tom Torlakson said that California faces $262 million in reductions in federal education funding from sequestration. With the federal government contributing simply about x percent of total One thousand-12 spending in California, and some programs, like school luncheon and nutrition services, exempt from the round of cuts, that represents a tiny piece overall.

Just near federal dollars are targeted to disadvantaged children, so, if sequestration happens, the biggest cuts will exist $91 one thousand thousand to Title I, providing services for low-income students, and $72 million in funding for special teaching.

Other cuts, outlined in a letter Torlakson sent to Congressional leaders, would exist:

  • $2.viii million in startup grants for public lease schools;
  • $half dozen.nine million for Career and Technical Education;
  •  $nine.half-dozen million in funding for English learners under Title Iii; and
  • $3.7 1000000 in Touch on Aid for schoolhouse districts in California that include untaxed federal state within their boundaries, such as San Diego Unified, which is home to several military bases.

The federal government contributes $ane.8 billion in Title I dollars to California annually and about $1.iv billion in money for special education. But a cut in federal special ed funding won't event in less spending for children with disabilities. They will continue to receive the services they're legally entitled to under federal law, with districts picking upwardly the full amount. Since the federal authorities but contributes about xiii per centum of the toll of special ed services in California at present, according to new written report by the Legislative Annotator'due south Office – far beneath the 40 per centum contribution promised past Congress  when information technology passed the mandate in 1975 – districts will accept to make room for the $72 meg cut elsewhere.

"We'll have to draw from classrooms to back up those mandates," said Sanger Unified Superintendent Marc Johnson. "You lot lose the categorical programs supporting it, you just use general fund dollars; we take a statutory responsibility to maintain a sure level of funding."

Local districts now pay for more than than 40 percent of the cost of special pedagogy out of their general budgets, an impact chosen "encroachment."

As for Title I reductions, districts volition make up one's mind how much and which services – such as subsequently-school programs, summer school, tutoring and actress teachers – to cut. One district that says a 5 percent cutting won't affect its plans is Fresno Unified. Deputy Superintendent and Chief Financial Officeholder Ruth Quinto says the district is expecting a $4 million to $6 1000000 cut in federal dollars. But operating in California ways hedging against volatility – unpredictable actions by the land and federal governments – so the district has congenital a 10 percent reserve. A cutting in funding won't alter its focus on student accomplishment in Title I schools; other coin will be shifted there, she said.

Although sequestration cuts volition comprise less than 1/20 of total K-12 spending, they would come at an awkward time. By state law, districts must send preliminary layoff notices for the following school year to teachers by March 15. A sampling of districts contacted said they planned no layoffs per se from sequestration. There's enough natural turnover in staff, said Stephen McMahon, chief business officeholder for the 30,000-student San Jose Unified, to blot the $900,000 in predictable federal funding cuts.

Sanger plans no layoffs either. "We're non issuing whatever layoff notices. We've been through then much, were not putting our families through this again," said Johnson.

Torlakson predicted in his letter that the federal cuts to educational activity "could effect in school closures; teacher and administrator layoffs; increased student teacher ratios; the elimination of college counselors and school-based mental wellness personnel." That may be overstated. Just in the context of the overall potential impact on the state, sequestration volition add together doubtfulness and some feet to districts' budget planning. Total federal cuts to the land budget could reach $ten billion, and left untouched, sequestration could gear up back the land's economic recovery – and unbalance the country budget, dimming districts' hopes to restore five years of upkeep cuts.

San Jose Unified's McMahon said that school administrators have been brash that sequestration cuts would go permanent unless Congress reverses its action, and that would mean the five percent cuts this year will grow to 8.two pct annually through the rest of the decade.

To get more than reports like this ane, click here to sign upward for EdSource's no-cost daily email on latest developments in education.