Well before the state had to bail out the Oakland Unified School District in 2003, fiscal experts warned school officials that their overspending was going to land them in big trouble. That didn’t stop the district from running up a $37 million deficit, resulting in a state takeover and record bailout that Oakland Unified is still repaying.

Nearly 14 years later, district officials are once again spending more than they have and acknowledge that urgent action is needed to stave off another fiscal crisis.

As he heads out the door for his new job at the head of the Washington, D.C., schools, Superintendent Antwan Wilson is expected to lay out a dire financial forecast this month showing Oakland’s school spending exceeding its revenue by $30 million next year.

Wilson insists that the situation is different from last decade, when California loaned the district $100 million and removed local control for six years. Back then, the school board was blindsided by an accounting error that hid the true size of Oakland’s deficit, Wilson said in an interview.

This time, there’s a clear picture of a bloated spending plan that well exceeds anticipated incoming cash.

“This is all in front of us,” Wilson said. “This is all preventable.”

It’s as if the district has loaded up the shopping cart with costly commitments and proposed programs, but is now standing at the cash register with an empty wallet and a nearly maxed-out credit card. If it wants what’s in the cart, it’s going to have to figure out what bills will go unpaid.

Choosing won’t be easy, Wilson said.

“We will have recommendations,” he said. “My nervousness is not if we’ll do it. The difficult part is helping people ... find the will to make the decisions you have to make.”

In the meantime, rumors about just how deep the shortfall will be have created anxiety bordering on panic among teachers and principals, said Trish Gorham, president of the local teachers union, the Oakland Education Association.

“Any time someone says ‘hard decisions,’ you know the hammer is going to be falling,” she said. “It’s a panic, run-on-the-bank kind of situation.”

School board members said they hadn’t seen a detailed analysis of costs versus revenue. Wilson is expected to lay out a budget plan over several public meetings this month.

“I’m still waiting to understand this better,” said board member Jody London. “I do expect there will be less money than we’ve had in the recent past, and the board will be making some tough decisions.”

That said, the district is not in the same dire circumstances as in 2003, officials insisted.

Since the state takeover, district accounting systems have been tightened and oversight from the Alameda County Office of Education is more thorough. And a trustee appointed by the California Department of Education continues to monitor district finances — oversight required until the $100 million bailout loan is paid off, which should be in 2026.

Still, there are striking similarities between the current situation and what was happening in the early 2000s.

Back then, the district was eating into its reserve fund to cover special education programs and cafeteria costs, outside auditors found. A large raise for teachers was requiring creative accounting, and declining enrollment was a big worry.

Now: The district has eaten into its reserve fund, in part to cover special education and cafeteria cost overruns. The school board has agreed to a 14 percent raise for teachers over three years, although it’s contingent on increases in state funding.

And enrollment declined this year to 36,668 students — 850 fewer than Wilson expected. That will soon cost the district about $10 million annually in state funding, a total that will worsen if enrollment drops further.

Even without the enrollment hit, the district is operating with a $500,000 structural deficit, meaning it’s spending that much more than it’s taking in.

As in the early 2000s, the superintendent and school board have pushed policies and programs to improve schools while boosting worker pay — good intentions lacking sufficient funds.

Wilson has added central office administrators as well as extra staff and resources to several struggling schools where he overhauled the ranks of teachers after taking over in July 2014. A plan to expand preschool programs will cost an extra $800,000 next year, according to district officials.

On top of that, the district must restore its reserve fund, which was drawn down over the past couple of years to cover cost overruns, the superintendent said. And there’s a critical need to upgrade payroll and human resources systems, he said, which are still dependent on paper and obsolete computer programs.

In the meantime, special education costs have skyrocketed, in part because the district spends $5.3 million to send about 175 students outside the district for services. San Francisco, with 20,000 more students, sends 130 students to special schools. Oakland schools need to provide more of those services in house, Wilson said.

Also, charter schools are fighting for a $5 million share of a 2008 parcel tax, district officials said.

All told, Wilson said, everything adds up to about $30 million more than the district will probably get in the 2017-18 school year.

“If you don’t want to repeat history, you’re going to have to make decisions,” said school board President James Harris. “It’s a come-to-Jesus moment that’s got to happen.”

To avoid rolling back policies and programs, district officials say they will propose cuts to the central administration, which now accounts for $32.5 million of the $405.3 million operating budget. Harris would like to cut $12 million from that total.

He said the district also needs to look at consolidating schools, specifically where small schools share a site. Closing schools does not appear to be on the table, given community opposition.

How all of that will add up to $30 million in savings and a balanced budget is still unclear.

Labor leaders and community members said they were anxious to see specific numbers and the superintendent’s suggested cost-saving measures to get an idea of just how bad the situation is.

“We look forward to more concrete information coming out,” said Marc Tafolla, policy director for Go Public Schools Oakland, a nonprofit education group. “We want the (school board) and the superintendent to be as careful and thoughtful so these cuts stay as far away from kids and classroom teachers as much as possible.”

Gorham, the teachers union president, said she’d like an explanation of how enrollment fell short of expectations and why the district compiled a to-do list without a clear idea of revenue.

Wilson has about a month to provide numbers and answers before he leaves for his new job in the nation’s capital.

“We're going to have to see what kind of demerit it is on his report card,” Gorham said. “He's going to have to own this as part of his legacy.”

Jill Tucker is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: jtucker@sfchronicle.com

Twitter: @jilltucker