Blogging Bayport Alameda

June 6, 2013

SpEd off

Filed under: Alameda, School — Tags: , , — Lauren Do @ 6:06 am

So remember this post I wrote on the difference between last year’s budget and this year’s budget for AUSD and it appeared that there were cuts to the school site budgets.  Turns out the reason why it appeared that there were cuts is because from last year to this year District staff removed Special Ed service dollars from their budget.

Screen Shot 2013-06-04 at 6.32.04 PM

Now it makes complete sense why there was a separate slide for Special Ed services. (I actually just thought they were being forthcoming about how much Special Ed is as a comparison to the school site budgets)

According to District staff they are still using the same funding formulas to budget money to schools sites, it’s just this removal of Special Education services — though the school sites are receiving this money just in case that wasn’t clear — that makes it appear as though the schools are getting hit with cuts.


  1. Wow, great investigative work.

    Comment by jsanders128 — June 6, 2013 @ 6:37 am

  2. I knew the amounts had to be massive because I know several people who work in this area full-time. One is assigned to a single child (not that the child doesn’t need the help, just that I figured, knowing that my friend’s salary was dependent on the needs of only one child, that the total allocation for special ed must be huge–although, trust me, the salary she’s earning is NOT). I hope no one makes the leap to say that this is a waste of money, because it seriously is not, they could use more. But, once again, AUSD dicks around and makes things look bad. When will they ever learn? Honesty is the best policy. When you use weasel words and play hide the expenditures, people tend to get the wrong idea.

    Comment by Denise Shelton — June 6, 2013 @ 11:32 am

  3. I don’t think they were deliberately trying to hide anything or make things look worse than they were. It’s actually better to remove the SpEd dollars from the total amount because if you do a true cost per pupil but have the SpEd money rolled in, it would make it appear that one school has a higher spending per pupil when in fact they might just have a bigger population of SpEd students.

    Comment by Lauren Do — June 6, 2013 @ 11:50 am

  4. 4. I agree. It’s just that people jump on every little thing. Why not just state that’s what you’ve done with an asterisk or something? This is my ongoing complaint: not that AUSD is corrupt, just that they do things that make them LOOK that way and so alienate the voters. They also give excuses to anyone looking to find a reason NOT to support the schools. When that revolving door turns on the next superintendent, they should look for someone who has a solid PR track record with a focus on clarity rather than obfustication.

    Comment by Denise Shelton — June 6, 2013 @ 12:22 pm

  5. I meant 3. I always do that!

    Comment by Denise Shelton — June 6, 2013 @ 12:23 pm

  6. Another thing to keep in mind is that the District locates some of its Special Education services for group of students from multiple schools at a school site with facility capacity. So one should not make inferences about Special Education services provided at a site and the makeup of neighborhood students who need Special Education services.

    Comment by Mike McMahon (@MikeMcMahonAUSD) — June 6, 2013 @ 12:30 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: