Is District 300 cutting too much?

I'm sure I'm not the only one who was surprised on Monday when, after the recognition portion of Community Unit District 300's meeting, the Carpentersville Middle School auditorium mostly emptied.

The school board hadn't even voted on more than $2 million in cuts for next year, including reduced transportation for a number of programs and reductions in the district's literacy staff.

But apparently Superintendent Ken Arndt's decision to take the dual language busing off the chopping block and mitigate the impact on students who attend parochial schools neutralized much of the opposition.

The majority of public feedback consisted of thanking the board and administration for allowing students to board shuttles from their nearest middle school to the religious school they attend.

Instead of staying until 2 a.m., the board had finished most of its business by 9 p.m.

Despite the love fest, the reductions did not pass without some dissent. While the changes to the parochial busing passed by unanimous vote, the vote on the other transportation cuts and a separate vote on cutting literacy staff and individual building budgets passed 5-1 and 4-2, respectively.

Monica Clark was the sole dissenter to the transportation cuts. Her beef? That busing for the dual language program was not being eliminated.

"I am disappointed that dual language was removed from this," Clark said. "It is right now something that we can't afford."

Clark opined that the dual language busing had been taken off the table because "one group of parents spoke out louder than anybody else."

Anne Miller and Dave Alessio voted against the reduction in literacy staff and building budgets, saying that those areas were too important to cut.

Besides these small acts of protest, I am somewhat surprised few in District 300 have publicly questioned whether the district is aiming for the right target.

As I've reported, the district is trying to trim $15 million from its 2010-11 budget. This goal is based on Gov. Pat Quinn's budget proposal, which most see as a transparent gambit to pass a tax increase by placing a disproportionate burden of state cuts on public schools.

Most also believe the state won't actually slash school funding as dramatically as it says it will - and therein lies the dilemma for public school districts in Illinois, including District 300.

Should a district "play it safe" and cut based on the worst-case scenario, i.e. Quinn's budget proposal? Or should a district play game theorist, balancing political pressures and economic realities to arrive at a guess of state funding next year?

Certainly, there are merits and drawbacks to both. But with class sizes projected to rise dramatically and many students facing fewer course offerings and after-school options next year, isn't that a valuable debate to have?