IOWA CITY, Iowa - The Iowa City school board appears ready to dip into the district’s savings account to reduce the number of teacher layoffs proposed for next school year.

At a work session Monday night, a majority of board members spoke approvingly, though reluctantly, of adjusting their policy of requiring that at least 5 percent of the district’s budget be reserved for savings. They are expected to vote Tuesday night to drop that to 3 percent.

The discussion comes after a week of criticism of central office administrators by teachers, students and members of the public over a proposal to cut 22 teacher positions to help reduce a budget deficit.

“The feedback we’ve had is, ‘I’d rather not have my field trip than not have my teacher,’” board member Toni Cilek said.

Changing that policy would free up an estimated $2.5 million next fiscal year, taking what is known as the undesignated unspent reserve balance down to $3.5 million, Superintendent Stephen Murley said.

That would mean none of those 22 teaching positions would need to be cut, he said.

Tom Yates, a City High schoolteacher and president of the teacher’s union, said using savings would be a logical move that would save jobs and keep class sizes down.

“What’s the point of a rainy-day fund if you don’t use it when it’s raining?” he said.

The teacher reductions were proposed to help reduce a budget deficit estimated at $4.3 million to $6.8 million next fiscal year. The cuts were to include 10 layoffs and not replacing 12 early retirees.

The 22 positions are from the taxpayer-supported general fund. The district already has notified 15 other teachers funded by other sources that their jobs will be cut next year, including special-education teachers, reading teachers and early education teachers. Those would not be affected by changing the reserve fund policy.

Administrators hope to save some of those jobs, but by law the layoff notices have to go out by the end of this week.

School officials have repeatedly expressed frustration at state lawmakers for the uncertainty surrounding K-12 finances. School districts are dependent on allowable growth, which is new state funding, but that has not yet been set for next fiscal year.

Republicans are proposing no allowable growth, while Democrats have called for 2 percent. Murley has said each 1 percent of allowable growth represents about $700,000 for the district.

The change in the reserve policy would be a one-year exception, and Murley said that money would have to be made up the following year. That reality, along with the loss of one-time funding being used to reduce the deficit, “is not erasing that difficulty that lies in front of us,” Murley said.

Board member Mike Cooper questioned whether going down to 3 percent was appropriate.

“I think what we’re doing is delaying the inevitable and it’s going to be worse next year,” he said.

Board members also cautioned that having less in savings could make the district more vulnerable if unexpected expenses pop up in the middle of the budget year or if there is a state-mandated cut like the 10 percent midyear reduction two years ago.

Murley said they’ll put a freeze on hiring support staff and will look for non-personnel cost-savings, which will possibly let the district still set aside 5 percent of its budget for savings.

Board member Tuyet Dorau said she thought a freeze on administrator salaries should be considered. Cooper questioned if teachers also should not get pay increases next year.