Lindbergh Schools’ preliminary operating budget for the 2012-2013 school year proposes the elimination of summer school for elementary and middle-school students and a one-year reduction of the district’s textbook budget.

A surplus of more than $29,000 is projected in the preliminary 2012-2013 budget, which was discussed Saturday morning by the Board of Education. During the workshop session, Chief Financial Officer Pat Lanane outlined to the board the assumptions he is using to build the preliminary budget for the coming school year.

Under those assumptions, 2012-2013 expenditures are projected at $60,969,554 with anticipated revenue of $60,998,867 — a surplus of $29,313.

Eliminating summer school for elementary and middle-school students would save $180,000. Summer school will be offered for high school students, according to Nancy Rathjen, assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction.

Elementary and middle-school principals formulated the proposal to eliminate summer school for their students, she said.

Rathjen said, “You remember at the Learning Report (meeting on Nov. 1), you said to the principals, ‘Find a way that we can continue our high student achievement and still maintain a balanced budget,’ and this was what the principals came up with.

“No, we don’t want to cut summer school, and we’re not cutting the high school summer school because high school summer school helps students gain those credits that they need to graduate.”

Regarding the elimination of elementary and middle-school summer school, she said, “We think that it will do the least damage to high student achievement of any of the things that we can cut at the school level. And it is a fairly big number, $180,000.”

The one-year reduction of the district’s textbook budget will save $320,000, according to an April 19 memorandum written by Rathjen.

“Elementary science and middle-school science textbooks and materials were scheduled for purchase in the 2011-’12 school year with modern language materials adopted in 2012-’13,” she wrote. “We are now placing a hold on the purchase of new science materials and going forward with the purchase of modern language materials with the 2011-’12 budget.

“New science standards are being developed on a national level and are being released in the spring of 2012. By delaying a year, we have an opportunity to become more familiar with the new standards rather than adopt the same year they are being released,” Rathjen wrote. “In addition, materials currently offered by publishers are not aligned to the new standards yet.”

Lanane said Saturday he believed the $320,000 would have to be restored to the textbook budget for the 2013-2014 school year.

“I will say this to you, this has to come back next year,” he said.

Board of Education President Vic Lenz agreed, saying, “Next year, you’re going to look at a $320,000 increase.”

By consensus, board members agreed with the assumptions Lanane is using to build the preliminary budget, including expenditure decreases totaling $868,000.

Besides eliminating summer school for elementary and middle-school students and reducing the textbook budget for one year, board members agreed to reduce facilities expenditures by $200,000, among other decreases.

The board recently approved a new contract for districtwide trash pickup and recycling that will provide an annual savings of $48,000.

Board members by consensus also approved expenditure increases of $1,145,725 for the coming school year, including a $714,000 increase in salary and benefits for employees.

The Board of Education last year voted to approve a two-year salary schedule for teachers that provides an annual average increase of 2.8 percent.

The schedule provides teachers with a 3.87-percent salary increase for the current school year and a 1.78-percent pay raise for the 2012-2013 school year.

The increase in salary and benefits includes the 1.78-percent salary increase, a 5-percent increase in insurance premiums and mandated retirement contributions, according to Lanane.

Among other increased expenditures in the preliminary 2012-2013 budget are $177,225 for three full-time teaching positions, if needed, to accommodate increased enrollment and a one-hour Spanish teacher at Lindbergh High School; and an additional $60,000 for student transportation under the district’s contract with First Student.

Other assumptions Lanane is using for the preliminary operating budget include:

• The district will be held financially harmless against an underfunded, unlimited, open-enrollment scenario that could occur in the pending Turner v. School District of Clayton court case.

• The district will be held financially harmless against a state revenue shortfall allocation beyond the loss level imposed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education for the current school year.

• The level of local funding will remain constant with that of the revised 2011-2012 district budget.

• Actual 2012-2013 enrollment will not substantially exceed current enrollment projections for the coming school year.

The district’s revised budget for the current school year projects expenditures totaling $60,774,352 with anticipated revenue of $61,229,423 — a surplus of $455,071.

Board members voted in June to approve the original 2011-2012 operating budget that projected revenue of $60,812,763 with anticipated expenditures of $59,435,504 — a surplus of $1,377,259.

A 65-cent tax-rate increase approved by Lindbergh voters in November 2010 is projected to generate nearly $8.3 million for the coming school year. Revenue from Prop L allowed the board to approve a balanced budget for the first time since 2002.

Since the 2007-2008 school year, the district has sustained a cumulative loss of revenue totaling $18 million. Approval of Prop L restored the district’s funding to the 2007-2008 level and saved 80 teaching positions, Lanane said.

Regarding Prop L, he said, “… It’s what it doesn’t do that is important for everyone to understand, particularly our public, and I think people are starting to understand that. Because typically with any kind of tax increase, it’s ‘Happy days are here again. We’re going to be able to do all these programs and ideas that we’ve been waiting to do.’

“That’s not what happened here. It restores revenue to that 2007-2008 level … Basically, all it does for us, it does get us back to even and it prevented a true tragedy — disaster — in this community, not only the school district, but the community, I believe …”