Superintendent warns of roughly $100 million shortfall as educators and students plead with board over cuts

Superintendent Ben Schoelner told the Seattle School Board on May 13 that the district is facing an estimated $100,000,000 deficit and could be unable to operate within a year without additional revenue or deeper changes. "We are almost a $100,000,000 in deficit and will be insolvent in less than a year," he said, adding that central-office cuts of nearly $10,000,000 already have been made.

The warning followed a prolonged public-comment period in which teachers, paraeducators, parents and students told the board how proposed reductions are affecting school communities. Dan Shapiro, a math teacher at Cleveland High School, said 20 paraeducators and eight office staff have received reduction-in-force notices and described the toll on employees who had been funded by the levy: "It's a horrific roller coaster," he said.

Roosevelt High students and robotics team members said cuts to engineering classes would remove access to technical pathways that feed local industries and postsecondary opportunities. "The district is cutting engineering at my school," Lynn Anderson, a Roosevelt junior, told directors, urging them to find alternatives to program eliminations. Another Roosevelt student, Hannah Isogai, said a petition opposing the cuts gathered more than 450 signatures.

Multiple speakers asked the board to delay or pause reductions until the district produces a concrete plan to support students affected by staffing losses. Kayla Epting, a finance professional and community member, urged the board to "pause the RIFs and displacements until you have a concrete and communicated plan that centers students." Several speakers said abrupt displacements and large class sizes harm student learning and continuity of relationships.

Other comments highlighted program-specific concerns: an instructional aide at Gasser described a contracted cap violation in a Distinct classroom where staff projections would leave 12 students with only two paraprofessionals, a ratio she described as a safety and legal issue; a parent from Greenwood Elementary warned that closing one of two early childhood developmental classrooms would overwhelm the remaining class and force families to be turned away; and a representative of local ABA providers criticized a proposed Sunburst contract-management model as a conflict of interest and said a roughly 5% fee risked driving smaller providers from the market.

Board members and the superintendent repeatedly cited the constraints of state funding rules that limit how much the city can transfer to the district, and Schoelner urged the community to press state lawmakers for relief while the district pursues internal savings. Directors acknowledged the emotional testimony and said staff would continue to brief committees and provide data on placements, projections and potential mitigations.

The public plea for more transparency and for delaying personnel actions until staff has a communicated, student-centered plan was a recurring theme through the testimony. Several speakers also left petitions and written materials for the board to review; Elena Cusack, a first-grade teacher, said she had submitted a petition signed by more than 800 educators and community members asking for June enrollment adjustments and for the district to reconsider changes to the "purple book" that govern staffing and placements.

The board did not take immediate rollbacks of reductions during the meeting; directors stressed committee review and additional data briefings will follow.