The Cedar Rapids Community School District presented a portfolio of cost‑saving options to the board on Jan. 12 that administrators said could together address a multi‑million dollar deficit if adopted in whole or in part.

District staff described a package of roughly $19 million in ideas that span program consolidation, operational savings and personnel adjustments. Proposals highlighted at the meeting included:

- Consolidating alternative programs (CityView, Iowa Big, virtual academy and homeschool assistance) under a common administrative umbrella to increase enrollment and reduce duplicative costs; administration estimates initial savings and enrollment gains but said program design would determine exact outcomes.

- Special education: the district plans to narrow and standardize programming across the system to reduce recurring overspending in categorical budgets; staff said they expect to identify $2 million in efficiencies next year by aligning program slots, staffing and service locations.

- Community partners: a proposed reduction from $750,000 to $600,000 in district partner funding (a $150,000 savings) while working with partners to pursue alternative grant dollars and preserve front‑line services.

- Software audits and license consolidation aimed at saving $300,000 through license optimization and retiring low‑engagement software subscriptions.

- Pausing or delaying large curriculum purchases to save about $1 million next year; curriculum leaders cautioned some deferrals can compound costs in later years but said targeted pauses are feasible where teachers prefer more implementation time.

- A staffing model tied to current enrollment that would reduce teacher FTE by 33 over time (estimated $2.8M) largely through natural attrition and reassignment; administrators emphasized the impact would be felt across buildings and would require careful personnel planning.

Administrators told the board the package is intentionally broad, and that some items (for example, school consolidation) produce multi‑year savings while others are one‑time reductions. The superintendent and principals emphasized the need to balance fiscal stabilization with program continuity and student supports. Board members requested more granular data — including the full ELSC (central administration) budget and historical comparisons — and asked staff to translate the proposals into clear near‑term and multi‑year implications for staffing, programs and implementation timing.

What happens next: the board asked directors to submit scenario questions by midweek so administration can model specific configurations and return with detailed cost and operational impacts at the following work session.