Luna: ‘It was a difficult, difficult decision’

Among the questions that JFAC members had this morning for state school Superintendent Tom Luna about his budget request:

Sen. Lee Heider, R-Twin Falls, told Luna, “I want to thank you for the courage it’s taken to make students come first in Idaho. I appreciate hearing that we’re not going to decrease any salaries and we’re not gonna lay off any teachers. But we also have to hire a lot of IT personnel … to maintain the devices.: He said he’s wondering where schools will find those people and what their salaries will be.

Luna responded, “Some tell me they don’t anticipate any need, others tell me they’re very concerned.” But he said, “When it comes to the mobile computing devices or the laptops, the state provides not only the devices but the repair.” A state contract will cover maintenance and replacement, he said.

Rep. Maxine Bell, R-Jerome, JFAC co-chair, asked, “The units, you’re saying we’re going to have 100 less. … Is that a good, firm number?” Luna responded, “It is a good firm number. They are always some form of estimate ‘til we get to the very end of the school year.. We have a number of parts of the budget that are based on some forms of well-educated estimate.” Last year, for example, the state deposited $4 million into the Public Education Stabilization Fund at the end of the year, he said, because of changes. But, he said, “We’re very confident with that number.”

Having 100 fewer classroom support units would cost the state $8 million less.

Sen. Dean Cameron, R-Rupert, told Luna, “First I want to applaud you for receommending the $19 million backfill of the reduction of salary-based apportionment - I think that’s appropriate and I applaud you for that effort. … But I’m wondering about the additional adjustment in salary-based apportionment that took place last year that’s continuing. … Why did you decide to do the $19 million rather than the entire 4 percent reduction of salary-based apportionment?”

Luna responded, “We made a commitment last year, and it was a difficult, difficult decision, but are we willing to spend the money that we have differently, or are we going to do those things that we know are necessary for students. … It was obvious that if we were going to move forward, we had to spend some of that money differently. The only place left to go was salary-based apportionment,” he said, because many other line items in the school budget already had been cut. “It was a matter of priorities.” He said other agencies took bigger cuts in their personnel costs than the 1.67 percent cut in school salary funds imposed this year; in dollars, that equates to $14.76 million.

Under the Students Come First laws, this year’s was the first of six years of cuts in salary-based apportionment to finance the law’s reforms, including technology boosts and performance pay bonuses. Next year’s scheduled $19.67 million shift is the one that’s being discussed for possible “back-filling.” In the following year, the law calls for another $21.5 million to be shifted out of salary-based apportionment, on top of the first two years’ shifts; with smaller shifts following in each of the next three years.