Columbus City Schools eyes staff cuts, school closings to make $50 million in reductions
At an Aug. 13 special meeting, a joint committee of board members and committee members approved a recommendation to cut the $50 million, moving the recommendation to the school board. For 2026, the district has a $1.8-billion budget.
On Aug. 19, the board voted to approve making the cuts and directed the superintendent to present a plan by the end of November for what the cuts should look like. Board President Michael Cole said that the cuts will be challenging, but added that "first and foremost," they will be in "the best interests of our children."
"It's not a comfortable conversation, it's not one that's easy, but I can say that this is one that we're equipped for and this is what folks elected us to do — to make these tough decisions," Cole said.
District facing financial headwinds
Last week, The Dispatch reported that the district will begin deficit spending this year and will be out of cash by fiscal year 2029 under current projections.
Presently, the district has more than $300 million in reserve cash.
The discussion around budget cuts comes amid a variety of pressures on the district, including a recent reduction in funding from the state, federal funding uncertainty and inflation.
The district also faces a growing penalty from the state for noncompliance related to the transportation of charter and nonpublic students. In fiscal year 2025, the penalty is projected to be assessed at $10 million, and from fiscal year 2026 to 2029, the transportation penalty is projected at $15 million, according to data presented on Aug. 13.
And on Aug. 14, the Columbus Education Association, which represents teachers and other faculty, voted to approve a new contract with the district that includes 2.25% raises for members of the union, which the board approved at the Aug. 19 meeting. Personnel costs make up over 83% of the district's budget, according to district data.
Cole said that the reality is that personnel expenses are "a significant portion of our budget."
"It's important to identify where we can have the most minimal impact on that space," Cole said. "Without jumping in front of things, I want to make sure we do the proper work necessary to ensure kids have what they need to succeed in the district."
John Coneglio, president of the CEA, said that budget cuts "will fall heavily on the teachers and support staff."
"That's a concern of mine, and as we go through this process, we're going to make sure that all of our teachers are supported and the process is done correctly," Coneglio said.
More school closures could be coming
The board also discussed revamping school closings in the context of the threat to the district's financial solvency.
The CCS board voted in December 2024 to close Broadleigh Elementary, Buckeye Middle School, Moler Elementary and the building that houses Columbus Alternative High School.
The board also voted to close West Broad Elementary — under the condition that the board can secure funding to replace the school building on the site — and to close the Downtown board office building at 270 E. State St.
Columbus City Schools Superintendent Angela Chapman said that clearing up some expenses on the operations side of maintaining and operating "legacy" buildings could afford the district the ability to invest in classrooms.
"We're also looking at our operations, and looking how we can provide services leaner and make ways that are more efficient so we can redirect some of the dollars on the operation side of the classroom to help close some of those gaps," Chapman said.
Marielle Henault, a member of Pint-Sized Protestors and the Columbus Education Justice Coalition, said during public comment that the board needs to create a community-centered approach that "would truly involve the communities that could be impacted."
"We can see all the numbers we want, but at the end of the day, our kids are not numbers and their communities aren't squares on a game board that can be moved around at someone's whim," Henault said.
Cole Behrens covers K-12 education and school districts in central Ohio. Have a tip? Contact Cole at cbehrens@dispatch.com or connect with him on X at @Colebehr_report
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: CCS board approves $50 million in cuts, details could come by November
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
TechCrunch
a minute ago
- TechCrunch
Finally, Notion now works without an internet connection
For years, one of the most annoying issues with using Notion was that you couldn't get much done offline because of its cloud-first architecture. The company has finally solved that problem, adding support for an offline mode to its apps. To absolutely nobody's surprise, the company on Tuesday said in a post announcing the update that this is one of the most requested features from users. So users can now finally view, edit and create notes without an internet connection across Notion's desktop and mobile apps. The apps also let one download pages for offline access. Once you are back online, the app will sync any changes you've made to documents. However, some blocks like embeds, forms, or buttons won't work without an internet connection. Image Credits: Notion And if you're subscribed to Notion's Plus, Business or Enterprise plans, the app will automatically download your recently viewed and favorite pages. Users can turn off automatic downloads or manage downloads through a new 'Offline' menu in the settings panel. Ivan Zhao, the company's CEO, said in a thread on X that Notion couldn't ship the feature all these years because the app uses a complex database to store different blocks, and the company had to build a conflict resolution mechanism to manage instances where multiple people make changes to a document while they're offline.
Fast Company
a minute ago
- Fast Company
This classic Eames chair is getting a recycled-plastic revival
Herman Miller is reviving an iconic Eames design that hasn't been in production for more than 30 years. The new Eames Molded Plastic Dining Chair looks identical to its archival predecessor, but it's different in one key way: It's made of 99% recycled plastic. The original Eames Molded Plastic Dining Chair was an evolution of several design techniques pioneered by renowned design duo Ray and Charles Eames. It first went into production in 1970 and was discontinued in 1993. Now, the Herman Miller brand has collaborated with the Eames Office—the family-run foundation dedicated to preserving the married couple's work—to bring the chair into the 21st century. The sustainable twist swaps the original's virgin plastic for a post-industrial recycled plastic. The chair is currently available online starting at $645, though customers can customize it to their liking for an added fee. As Herman Miller has worked with the Eames Office to revive archival designs—from lamps to tables and coat racks —it has been doing so with a focus on sustainable materials. Already, the Herman Miller team has made a 100% recycled plastic version of the Eames Molded Plastic Chair and an iteration of the Eames Lounge Chair and Ottoman made with plant-based leather. The sustainable Eames reissues, family members say, mark both a continuation of Charles and Ray's own core design philosophy of material experimentation. The Eames spirit of experimentation Charles and Ray were, first and foremost, masters of innovation. The couple viewed furniture design as primarily about solving a problem rather than achieving a certain aesthetic. To that end, they experimented constantly with how new materials could make furniture better. In 1945, Charles and Ray were the first designers to figure out how to mold plywood on two planes without it splintering. With this technique, they created the Dining Chair Metal (DCM), a sleek molded plywood chair with a distinct seat and backrest. Just a few years later, the pair began experimenting with new materials for a competition held by New York City's Museum of Modern Art, called the International Competition for Low-Cost Furniture Design, toying with how to make their designs cheaper and easier to manufacture. At first, they tested prototype chairs made from stamped metal. Then, they moved on to fiberglass, which Eames Demetrios, director of the Eames Office and grandson of Charles and Ray, says his grandfather sourced himself from a local autobody shop. Finally, they realized that plastic could make an even more uniform, simple, and inexpensive chair. With their first-ever plastic chair prototype, the duo won second place at the MoMA competition. As they continued to experiment, the duo updated the original molded plywood DCM with a plastic construction in the late 1960s—resulting in the first Molded Plastic Dining Chair. 'They were always trying to make things better,' Demetrios says. 'The really radical idea was to take advantage of the plastic material, which they themselves had pioneered, to bring down the [DCM] price and also make it simpler to make.' The new reissue is a continuation of that experimental ethos, he says. Updating a classic, sustainably Like the process of creating a plastic version of the DCM was in the '60s, reviving the Molded Plastic Dining Chair in 2025 was a process of trial and error. Jennifer Nield, SVP of lifestyle product at Herman Miller's parent company MillerKnoll, says the team knew from the beginning that they wanted to use recycled post-industrial plastic as their core material. Post-industrial plastic is a broad category describing plastic discarded by manufacturers before it actually reaches the consumer, which includes everything from defective consumer packaged goods to automotive scraps. That made finding the right mix of plastic for the job the team's main challenge. To start, the team tried a 90% recycled resin made from two polymers. But after conducting several trials, which Nield says included 'dropping a ton of weight on this thing, pulling it, and pushing it in every way you can imagine,' they found inconsistencies in the surface quality and durability of the chairs. 'We kind of went back to the drawing board,' Nield says. Ultimately, they settled on using a single polymer—recycled propylene. '[That] allowed us to meet our consistency requirements and then also deliver on those durability and safety standards. It also had a higher recycled content, so we were able to bring it up from 90% to 99% [recycled material].' Demetrios says projects like this one feel like the embodiment of the directive that he was given by Charles and Ray to continue their legacy of material experimentation. 'The last thing Charles and Ray wanted is to say, 'Well, we're dead. No more Eames chairs.''
E&E News
a minute ago
- E&E News
Two 1950s coal plants defy financial gravity along the Ohio River
An Ohio law that took effect last week ended a decadelong subsidy program buttressing a pair of Rust Belt coal plants from volatile power markets. But the Kyger Creek and Clifty Creek plants along the Ohio River — each of which turns 70 this year — show no sign of giving in to financial pressures that have claimed dozens of similar generators in the region in past years. Their endurance is partly a sign of the times. The plants, owned by a consortium of eight utilities known as the Ohio Valley Electric Corp. (OVEC), sell their output into the nation's largest power market operated by PJM Interconnection, which is expecting a tsunami of new demand from data centers. And the coal industry, which faced headwinds under President Joe Biden, again has an ally in the White House. Advertisement Most importantly, OVEC companies are bound by a contract that calls for the plants, still saddled by nearly $1 billion in debt, to continue operating for 15 years. Any decision to pull the plug, or change how the plants are operated, must be the consensus of all the owners — a reason that utility lawyers and lobbyists have worked relentlessly to recover every dollar they can. The nature of the operating agreement has frustrated environmental groups because the plants are major sources of air pollution in the region. And while many of the area's large coal-burning power plants have been forced offline by failing economics — including the 2,000-megawatt Conesville plant, 2,200-MW Sammis plant and 1,300-MW Zimmer plants in Ohio — the OVEC plants keep going. Even critics agree there's likely to be little change in the future despite the loss of the subsidies in Ohio, a provision still stained by a connection to the state's largest-ever public corruption scandal. Devi Glick, senior principal with Synapse Energy Economics, has analyzed OVEC's economics as an expert witness in Ohio and Michigan over the past few years on behalf of groups ranging from the Sierra Club to the Michigan attorney general's office. She doesn't see the plants' owners taking any steps to shut them down. 'Given the current political climate and how tight the (PJM) capacity market is right now … I don't see the pressure being enough in the next couple of years,' Glick said. Columbus, Ohio-based American Electric Power has the largest stake in the plants with more than 43 percent. An AEP executive is OVEC's president. In an email response to questions, AEP spokesman Scott Blake said the state of the power market demonstrates a need for the plants. He cited soaring clearing prices in the recent PJM auction for power plant capacity — the cost of guaranteeing there will be power available at peak times — as proof there's increasing need for generating capacity. The PJM auction 'demonstrates that resources like the Clifty Creek and Kyger Creek facilities serve a critical reliability function,' Blake said. 'Customers and the communities around the facilities have benefited from reliable power produced and [the] economic contributions of the plants.' Neil Waggoner, who spent a decade working to help shut down coal plants as an Ohio-based member of the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign, said the subsidies authorized by state utility regulators in 2016 and later embedded in statute were never about preventing the plants from closing or protecting jobs. Waggoner, now part of Sierra Club's federal policy team, said the issue centered around protecting the bottom lines of three Ohio utilities contractually obligated to help pay the costs to operate the OVEC plants. It is that contract, known as the inter-company power agreement, that has kept the plants running and will continue to do so, he said. 'That is the No. 1 driver of what happens,' said Waggoner, who said some of OVEC's owners such as Kentucky Utilities, Louisville Gas and Electric, Centerpoint Energy, Indiana Michigan Power and Allegheny Energy operate in coal-friendly states where there's little if any scrutiny of the costs to operate the plants. The 1,304-MW Clifty Creek plant in Indiana and the 1,086-MW Kyger Creek plant in Ohio trace their roots back to the Cold War era. OVEC was founded in the early 1950s to supply power to the Atomic Energy Commission's uranium enrichment plant in Piketon, Ohio. OVEC's contract with the AEC's successor, the Department of Energy, ended in 2003. Bleeding red ink Rather than shutter their coal plants, OVEC's owners twice extended an agreement among themselves to continue operating and selling power into PJM's regional grid. The last extension in 2010 was necessary to help finance more than $1 billion in pollution controls and calls for the plants to operate until 2040, when they would be 85 years old. It was a decision that years later would send the utilities to the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) in search of financial help, and ultimately lead them to lobby the Legislature to entrench the subsidies in state law. The provision worked like this: The share of OVEC's output that was assigned to three Ohio utilities was sold into the PJM market. If revenues were less than the plant's cost of producing electricity, utility customers made up the difference. If revenues exceeded costs, customers got a credit. The mechanism helped OVEC weather ups and downs over the past decade, from surges and dips in natural gas prices, a global pandemic and, most recently, a projected surge in demand for electricity — one not seen in generations — to help power AI data centers. While prices in PJM are on the rise, so too are OVEC's costs. 'These plants are not getting any less expensive to operate, it's just that the supply of alternatives is becoming more constrained,' said Glick. 'At some point the supply will catch up, and these plants will still be old and expensive.' Fitch Ratings, in a December report, concluded the plants are likely to bleed red ink even with improvement in power demand and prices. 'While regional demand growth (especially from data centers) might tighten energy markets, Fitch expects OVEC's all-in costs to exceed prevailing merchant power prices, making the plants uneconomical for the foreseeable future,' the ratings company said. Regulators in at least one state have already taken notice. The Michigan Public Service Commission has three times disallowed recovery of more than $1 million in power costs by Indiana Michigan Power, which supplies electricity to about 133,000 customers in the southwest tip of the state. In those cases, Michigan regulators agreed that the utility, a unit of AEP, violated the state's code of conduct for affiliate transactions by paying above-market prices for power from OVEC. The PSC previously had made similar rulings that were upheld by the courts. And the commission had warned the utility to manage existing contracts to provide value for ratepayers, or regulators would be hard-pressed to consider more ratepayer recovery. The contract supersedes everything The utility's response: It found a more willing buyer in Indiana. The company told Indiana regulators that the state had a need for energy and capacity as large new electricity users, primarily data centers, began taking service, and that the OVEC plants provided an 'economically competitive resource.' The company further argued that the proposal was consistent with state policy to support existing coal plants. Despite Michigan regulators repeatedly slapping the utility's hand for trying to pass on above-market costs for power to consumers, Indiana's Regulatory Utility Commission bought in and approved the plan. 'It's just sort of indicative of Indiana being this incredibly favorable regulatory environment for energy holding companies,' said Kerwin Olson, executive director of the Citizens Action Coalition, an environmental and consumer advocacy group. 'It's just a big cash cow for these guys.' Glick, who provided testimony in the Michigan case, compared it to a child gaming their parents to get what they want. 'They asked mom and didn't like mom's answer, so they went to dad and got a better answer,' she said. Just as they did in Indiana this year, AEP promised big benefits to Ohio consumers in 2016 if utility regulators would approve a mechanism to insulate OVEC against higher natural gas prices, which strongly influenced power costs. The utility estimated that customers of AEP's Ohio Power Co. would see $110 million in benefits over eight years. The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio was convinced and approved what was effectively a revenue guarantee for the plants. They also approved similar requests by Duke Energy and Dayton Power & Light. Consumer groups, however, say the provision was no hedge. It was a financial albatross. An analysis by the Ohio Manufacturers Association estimates the subsidies approved by PUCO and later the Ohio Legislature cost utility consumers almost $600 million. The group projects the amount would have topped $1 billion by the time the law was supposed to sunset in 2030. In just one of the eight years that the mechanism was in place did the plants produce a net benefit to ratepayers, the report said. Meanwhile, efforts by OVEC utilities to sell their stake in the plants have received no takers. And when Akron-based FirstEnergy filed for bankruptcy protection in 2019, the utility unsuccessfully sought to get out from under its OVEC commitment, a request that the coal plants' other owners balked at because it would have required them to increase their ownership stake. While the meter has stopped running on OVEC subsidies in Ohio, the legal and regulatory battle over millions of dollars collected from Buckeye State consumers continues. Environmental and consumer groups are seeking to claw back hundreds of millions of dollars in OVEC charges already paid by customers — claims that the utilities are challenging. The groups are before the Ohio Supreme Court challenging an audit approved by the PUCO that determined the OVEC subsidies charged in 2020 were appropriate. A similar case for charges in 2021 to 2023 is currently pending before Ohio regulators. And the groups have petitioned the commission to audit charges for 2024 and part of 2025. At the core of the argument is the claim by advocates that OVEC's owners operated the coal plants more frequently than were justified by economics because the utilities knew they could pass on any losses to Ohio ratepayers. Typically, to minimize costs to consumers, grid operator PJM dispatches power plants according to their cost to operate. More costly units come online as a last resort to keep the lights on. By contrast, units designated as 'must run' or self-scheduled units are operated according to the owners, regardless of economics. The consumer groups say that's not what's happened with OVEC. Once again, critics say, the contract among the plants' owners supersedes everything. 'One of the really challenging things,' said Glick, is that 'nobody can really practice oversight on them because of how complicated their ownership structure is.'
