Lean on Multi-Million Dollar
Contingencies, Not Layoffs

TL;DR

PPS sits on $40+ million in contingencies and “unappropriated” reserves yet still cuts librarians, raises class sizes, and leaves crucial positions unfilled. Our plan taps a modest slice of these funds to shield classrooms from layoffs while smashing the board’s rubber-stamp culture so real debates happen on camera — not in backroom deals.

1. What’s the Problem with PPS’s Contingencies and Reserves?

  • The 2024–25 PPS budget holds $42–$44 million in contingencies across multiple funds, plus an extra “unappropriated ending fund balance.”

  • Meanwhile, PPS cuts teaching staff, raises class sizes, and leaves librarians underfunded.

  • Though bond rating agencies and Board Policy 8.10.025 recommend a 5–10% General Fund reserve, PPS is near the low end of that range—and it can responsibly tweak the reserve to prevent staff layoffs now.

Example: If PPS moved from 6% to 5.5% in reserves, it could free millions for teacher-librarians without jeopardizing bond ratings.

2. So, We Drain the Reserves? Isn’t That Reckless?

No. We keep a healthy 5–6% reserve, meeting bond rating requirements, and state law. The question is whether that extra 0.5–1% cushion is more valuable in a savings account or protecting real programs—like libraries, mental health support, or reading specialists. Think of it as a short-term bridge until stable funding (like an improved local option or new state revenue) arrives.

3. What Specific Actions Will PPS Take?

  • Adopt a “Protect the Classroom First” Reserve Policy: Codify that if enrollment or state budgets dip, PPS can temporarily lower the reserve within safe bounds to avert teacher and librarian layoffs.

    1. Time-Limited “Bridge the Gap:” For 1–2 budget cycles, tap a small portion of contingency, e.g., $2 to $5 million, to shield essential staff, then rebuild reserves once we secure stable revenue.

    2. Full Transparency on Reserve Usage: Host open budget forums explaining how even a 0.5% reserve shift funds hundreds of classroom positions.

    3. Review 2025 Bond Allocations: If the proposed 2025 bond includes padded contingencies or “slush” funds, reassign them to essential capital repairs or offset staff cuts.