Joint Special Board/Budgeting for Results Committee - Jan 11, 2010

[Guest sullinss]

Joint Proceedings of the Budgeting For Results Committee and the Board of Trustees

School District No. 2, Yellowstone County

High School District No. 2, Yellowstone County

Billings, Montana

January 11, 2010

Call to Order

 

The Joint Meeting of the Budgeting For Results Committee and the Board of Trustees of School District No. 2, Yellowstone County and High School District No. 2, Yellowstone County, Montana met at Lincoln Center, 415 North 30th Street, Billings, Montana, on Monday, January 11, 2010. Budgeting For Results Committee Chair Joel Guthals called the meeting to order at 5:52 p.m.. Budgeting For Results Committee members present were: Sandie Mammenga, Rod Gottula, Joan Sleeth, Bruce MacIntyre, Deana Elder, Paige Darden, Peter Grass, and Kelly Donovan. Trustees present were: Joel Guthals, Peter Gesuale, Barbara Bryan, Teresa Stroebe, Malcolm Goodrich, Joyce Weber, Mary Jo Fox, and Kathy Aragon. Budgeting For Results Committee members absent were Don Stanaway and Ross Johnson. Trustee Dawn Achten was absent. Also in attendance were: Kathy Olson, Thomas Harper, Scott Anderson, Gail Surwill, Leo Hudetz, Rich Whitney, Dave Williams, and Sondra Baker.

Registered guests were: Sandy Weiss, Karen Norsworthy, Jase Norsworthy, Pam Christianson, Rob Rogers of the Billings Gazette, Jim Hartung, Marian Leligdowicz, Linda Leligdowicz, Bob Chatriand of MPEA, Karen Sanford Gall, Mari Jane Orner, Josi Wilgus, Karen Stears, Amy Griffin, Pam Dimich, Erin Zimmer, Julie Whitworth, Jane Leuthold, Terry McGuinness, Mary Lave, and LaVonna Robinson.

Communication From the Public

There was no further communication at this time. Communication was at the Budgeting For Results Committee meeting that preceded this meeting.

Joint BFR/Board Minutes of December 14, 2009

 

Teresa Stroebe said she had asked Kathy Olson if there were any studies on the educational relevance, and Kathy answered there was not. Teresa would like this added to the minutes. Paige Darden had in her notes where Superintendent Copps had stated that he wouldnt recommend looking at Administration for any cuts since Administration only represented only 1% of the budget; and, Paige thought that was a significant point and should be added to the minutes. Paige Darden asked Kathy Olson about the amount of space and how she came up with the space numbers, i.e., what space did she include, and why was there more rooms found under the cluster model then under the neighborhood model? Paige doesnt think Kathy answered the question, but she wants it noted in the minutes that the question was brought up.

 

NOTE: the recorded tapes were reviewed, and the draft minutes were amended per the tapes and review by the District Clerk. At the March 08, 2010 BFR meeting, Superintendent Copps requested these minutes note his answer at the December 14, 2009 meeting as follows: "Jack commented that 91% of our Elementary budget is in personnel. Our Central Office Administration is 1% of the General Fund budget and that is the lowest in the State for any AA schools. He said if the BFR/Board wanted to cut people from the Central Office they could, but we are currently staffed with numbers similar to much smaller districts."

 

Bruce MacIntyre moved to recommend the Board approve the Joint BFR/Board Minutes of December 14, 2009 as amended. Joan Sleeth seconded the motion. Budgeting For Results Committee members, only, will vote on this motion. Minutes will be brought to the Board for approval at the January Regular Board meeting. The motion carried unanimously. Member Rod Gottula clarified, and it was confirmed by Chair Joel Guthals, that meeting minutes are a summary and not a verbatim transcription of the meeting.

 

Budget Update

 

Thomas Harper explained issues at the State level may affect revenue for FY2012; however, Thomas has not changed the primary budget assumptions in the information presented tonight. The Elementary Budget FY2011 reflects a deficit of $1.9M, minus One-Time Revenue leaves a balance deficit of $759k. Our revenue may increase by approximately $400k if we maintain our K-6 enrollment count in February, lowering the Elementary General Fund budget deficit to $300K.

 

Thomas Harper explained we have $6.2M of One-Time federal (ARRA) money within the General Fund. Other ARRA funding is not in the General Fund; it is money earmarked for Title Programs and Special Education with restrictions on how it can be used. ARRA funds received in FY2010 were used to cover some on-going costs in FY2010, and the rest was allocated for FY2011. Thomas Harper said we will need to get a waiver to carry over ARRA funds to FY2011 because they are earmarked to be spent by September 30, 2010. In FY2011 we can spend ARRA funds to pay for one-time costs or on-going costs. ARRA funds cannot be carried over to FY2012.

 

Thomas Harper was asked what made up the Elementary one-time revenue classified as other for $1.4M in FY2010; and, what are the restrictions on how those funds can be spent. Thomas Harper replied those funds are not restricted. They consist of approximately $70k left from one-time kindergarten start-up funds, one-time Indian-Ed-For-All funds, under running the budget due to fewer retirements, and reclassifications of expenditures from one year to the next. There will not be any other left over revenue funds to carry over FY2011. By early March the District should know the number of employees committing to retirement and how that will affect the budget. Thomas Harper stated Elementary General Fund reserves are currently at 6% this year; and, reserves are budgeted for a minimum of 5% for both FY2011 and FY2012 based on Board directive for bonding rates.

 

Joel Guthals stated the reason the Legislature allocates so much money by one-time-only funds is that they dont want to make commitments to provide on-going funds. This makes budget planning very difficult for school districts.

 

Elementary K-8 Program/Budget Review

 

 K-6:

 

At the last meeting Executive Director of Elementary Education Kathy Olson presented Sister/Cluster Schools and the Stacking/Busing configurations for the K-6 grades. Additional information was requested. At Trustee Stroebes request Kathy Olson provided what research information on cluster/sister schools she could find, which was a study by a school district in the East and an article from the Principal Magazine. At Trustee Bryans request, Kathy Olson talked to persons that had involvement with cluster/sister school models, and presented information from Laurel, Havre, and Lewistown. At Trustees Bryan and Gesuales request Kathy Olson provided a design for a grade 4-6 realignment configuration. This design would entail a flexible boundary for grades 4-6 that could be shifted year to year to maximize student class size. This configuration would save the salary of 17 staff with all classes filled to the maximum 28-30 students per classroom. Realistically, Kathy Olson said the District might save 13 FTE. At Trustee Bryans request Kathy Olson provided a worksheet showing the number of additional combination classrooms using a 3-4 and 5-6 model for non-title schools only. We currently have six combination classrooms in the non-title schools and six combination classrooms in title schools. Rose Park is the only school that could save 1 FTE by combining classes.

 

Malcolm Goodrich asked what dollar figure Administration is using for teacher savings. Kathy Olson replied $45-46k per FTE.

 

Rod Gottula believes potential problems of transition and family interaction that may accompany sister/cluster schools could be mitigated if were proactive through communication and professional development. Kathy Olson said the educational impact of combination classes would depend on the individual student. Paige Darden said the studies presented were relevant but do not reflect the situation we have here in Billings. Paige Darden said the information presented is flawed and based on keeping our present boundaries when there is software available to reconfigure boundaries.

 

 K-6 Impact on Transportation of Sister/Cluster Schools

 

Joel Guthals stated were looking at a possible reduction in expenditures of $810k with the sister schools concept and $900k with the cluster schools concept; and, it is necessary to determine what impact those scenarios would have on the Transportation budget.

 

Director of Transportation Sondra Baker used the sister/cluster schools scenarios prepared by Kathy Olson to determine the impact on busing.

 

Sondra Baker estimates the cluster school scenario would require an additional 24 new bus routes ($961,512 minimum); and, the sister school scenario would require an additional 9 new bus routes ($360,567). If the District chose to strictly enforce the 3 miles rule and not offer any safety or discretionary busing or shuttling under 3 miles, then we would need ZERO new bus routes for either scenario. Joel Guthals asked what the Districts policy was on non-mandatory busing under 3 miles. Sondra Baker said there is nothing in Policy, but the procedure has been to bus for safety routes and shuttling kids from overcrowded schools to other schools, and busing Homeless students as mandated under Federal law. If we do not bus for safety routes we could save 5-7 bus routes at $41k per route from the Transportation budget but not the General Fund budget. If the District decided to bus for students under 3 miles, the additional cost would come from the Transportation budget which is a permissive levy. Students living over 3 miles from their school can either be bussed or the parents receive a transportation contract for reimbursement. Thomas Harper explained we have a five year contract with First Student for busing and all costs are charged to the Transportation budget. Rod Gottula believes we need to decide first on the educational model and goals we want, and transportation is secondary. Kathy Aragon advised she is on the advisory committee of the Citys Safe Bus to School grant, and she will ask them to prioritize safety routes. Once sidewalk projects are prioritized and in place, well no longer have to safety bus those areas.

 

 Grades 7 & 8, Middle Schools to Junior Highs:

 

At the last meeting Executive Director Scott Anderson presented information on the Middle School concept changing to Junior Highs. Scott Anderson said they would take the 7-period day (5 core classes of English, social studies, math, science, and health enhancement, plus two electives) and eliminate one elective class to get to the 6-period day junior high concept. Choices for electives are in visual arts, music, vocational technical education, and foreign language. Under the Middle School concept, per student reimbursement from the State is funded at the higher high school level; whereby, the Junior High concept reimbursement is funded at the lower K-6 level. Moving from the Middle School concept to the Junior High concept is changing education from being student centered to subject centered. Going to the 6-period day you lose the teacher-teaming concept along with continuity and a sense of community. Scheduling also presents a challenge and accreditation standards for safety reasons may not allow 30 students in a class for technology, facility limitations, etc.

 

Scott Anderson said as an alternative to moving to Junior Highs from Middle Schools he is offering up a savings of 2 FTE from the Fast Track program and potentially 3 additional FTE for a total 5 FTE savings.

 

Sandie Mammenga asked what the savings would be in moving to junior highs and what the revenue loss would be. Scott Anderson estimated a savings of 9 FTE (approximately $400k+). Sandie Mammenga asked if the teacher teams meet every day and if those meetings are documented. Scott Anderson replied they were. Sandie Mammenga asked if they had looked at keeping the 7-period day and eliminate the team meetings for staff efficiency. Scott Anderson replied he had not; but, right now there are some teachers teaching 5 classes out of 7 periods, and bargaining language prevents teachers from teaching 6 classes of a 7 period day which would not produce much cost savings.

 

Joel Guthals handed out a letter from community member Jerry Hansen regarding the Middle School to Junior High concept. Committee members reviewed the letter. Scott Anderson stated the letter contained some errors and did not seem realistic as it packed in students by numbers only with no choices.

 

Community member Pam Christensen addressed the Committee and Trustees and spoke against sister/cluster schools as a huge burden for elementary students to change schools and urged continuity of the neighborhood school. She spoke against eliminating the middle school teaming concept and asked the Committee to look at cuts in the warehouse and printshop plus other items to solve budget problems.

 

Bruce MacIntyre reported the Chamber of Commerce Board has agreed to be the facilitator for the Yes For Kids program to promote the mill levy and as such, is resurrecting a successful program they had two years ago. We need a message to tell the general public, without confusion over what our roles are. The Billings Public Schools Vision states We support K-6 neighborhood schools so children can walk and bike, and families can connect with nearby schools. The Chamber agrees with this philosophy; however, the reality is these are difficult economic times and the Chamber Board talks about all the unpalatable decisions they have to make in their own businesses, and theyre looking for those decisions to be made in the School District as well.

 

Bruce MacIntyre moved that the Budgeting For Results Committee vote for or against their support for the Cluster Schools concept and the Sister Schools concept as separate issues and make that recommendation to the Board. Paige Darden seconded the motion.

 

Peter Grass asked if reexamining the boundaries would have any savings in this whole picture and still be able to retain neighborhood schools. Kathy Olson said savings would be minimal; the way you get economy of scale is to get like students together in one spot by sister or cluster schools. Changing boundaries would still leave classrooms of 23-24 students. Rod Gottula supports the smaller school philosophy; but, he said we need to realize half of the community supports education, and the other half wants to pay minimal taxes. Eliminating the huge deficit cannot be done solely by recycling printer cartridges; it will require major changes to save money such as sister/cluster schools, or middle schools to junior highs, or make a major effort to generate more income with a mill levy. Kathy Aragon said our expenditures continue to outpace our revenue, and we continue to negotiate things we cant afford to pay for. Kathy Aragon said we need to examine the trends since enrollment is flat and revenue is based on enrollment we have a responsibility to look at all recommendations. We need to pass our mill levies. Paige Darden asked why we were not getting more ideas from parents and teachers about what they want and suggested budget cuts. Paige Darden said the community has already spoken in year 2001 that they want neighborhood schools, and we need more ideas on other cuts. Peter Grass said parents always want neighborhood schools, but the community may not. Peter Grass said there is no where else to cut, so if the community really wants neighborhood schools then theyll need to come up with the money either by passing the mill levy or push it to the State level to solve the problem. Malcolm Goodrich does not want to save $900k by implementing cluster schools and then require a permissive $900k levy in the Transportation Fund to take care of the added busing. Malcolm Goodrich said if our February enrollment count does not decline we may add an extra $400k to the budget. If we add up the dollar savings from the other budget cuts weve addressed we may have a bottom line deficit of $400k-$800k. Based on this, Malcolm Goodrich said rather than making a decision tonight about an entire change for school framework, he would like to make the cuts we talked about already for this coming year which would give us some time to decide on a fairly comprehensive restructuring of our school system to deal with this multi-million dollar deficit that is projected for FY2012. Teresa Stroebe would like Barbara Bryans Strategic Planning Committee and Kathy Aragons Planning and Development Committee to do the community work that needs to be done before they make a major decision on cluster/sister schools to allow time for the community to speak. Teresa Stroebe is bothered by the $500k on busing, and believes the legislators need to further address this problem. Joel Guthals said going to cluster/sister schools makes no sense if we are going to continue non-mandatory busing. Joel Guthals said busing is not part of this vote. Joel Guthals says it may be possible to scrape by FY2011; however, we need to make structural changes in the District to stop having budget problems every year. If we dont vote in favor of cluster/sisters schools structural changes this year, we will face a huge deficit next year.

 

The motion on the K-6 Sister Schools Concept was called for. Budgeting For Results Committee members voting for the K-6 Sister Schools Concept were Sandie Mammenga and Joel Guthals. BFR Committee members voting against the motion were Rod Gottula, Joan Sleeth, Bruce MacIntyre, Paige Darden, Peter Grass, Kelly Donovan, Peter Gesuale, and Barbara Bryan. The motion failed.

 

The motion on the K-6 Cluster Schools Concept was called for. Budgeting For Results Committee members voting against the K-6 Cluster Schools Concept were Sandie Mammenga, Joel Guthals, Rod Gottula, Joan Sleeth, Bruce MacIntyre, Paige Darden, Peter Grass, Kelly Donovan, Peter Gesuale, and Barbara Bryan. The motion failed.

 

Bruce MacIntyre moved that the Budgeting For Results Committee recommend to the Board to change grades 7 and 8 from the Middle School configuration to the Junior High configuration. Peter Grass seconded the motion.

 

Voting for the motion was Sandie Mammenga. Voting against the motion were Joel Guthals, Rod Gottula, Joan Sleeth, Bruce MacIntyre, Paige Darden, Peter Grass, Kelly Donovan, Peter Gesuale, and Barbara Bryan. The motion failed.

 

Activities

 

Executive Director of Activities Dave Williams presented information on Middle School Activity programs as related to budget savings in response to questions he received. Based on completed information from last year:

 

 

Dave Williams reported we may end up with $20-25k additional revenue due to the $45 activity fee, which was increased from last years $30 fee; however, scholarship requests have increased also. Most participants participate in at least two activities. Malcolm Goodrich asked Dave Williams if he has looked at charging for all middle school activities. Dave Williams said it would be difficult to charge students fees when theyre required to attend a concert for part of their grade in band and orchestra. At the elementary level they already charge for honor orchestra, honor choir, and honor band.

 

Dave Williams provided other requested information and said much of it is dependent on negotiations with the union and coaches and outside groups to get more defined dollar numbers:

 

What would the savings be if all activities were intramural? Could save approx. $200k in stipends.

1. Cost for coaches dependent on negotiations with union.

2. Save busing cost.

3. Save extra duty pay & referee costs

 

What are savings if all programs were farmed out to local entities? Could save approx. $300k.

1. Save stipend costs for programs picked up by other groups

2. Save busing, officials, equipment & extra duty costs.

3. Outside groups would still use our facilities for practice and games

4. Some activities not picked up by outside groups

5. Perhaps some equity issues

 

Cut some programs picked up by outside groups and keep others? Cost savings $100k-$200k.

 

What would savings be if we cut all Middle School activities? Could save approx. $400k in stipends.

1. Save stipends, equipment, and extra duty costs.

 

Negotiate a reduction in stipends equal to a reduction in workload for all Middle School activities?

2. Dependent on union agreement to negotiate.

3. Save stipend costs.

 

Combine 7th and 8th grade activities? Could save $95k in stipends.

1. Eliminate 7th grade stipends and let 7th grade students participate on 8th grade teams.

2. Add one additional stipend for all 8th grade sports activities.

3. May require students to be cut from programs.

 

Have all 7th grade activities be intramural which reduces time and have competitive only in 8th grade. Could save approx. $75k.

1. Saves stipends.

2. Decrease in participants.

3. Cost savings dependent on length of intramural seasons.

 

Dave Williams said if we farm out activities and outside groups use our facilities, we would require they meet equity requirements. If we cut all activities we would still monitor what goes on in our buildings.

Joyce Weber asked why we dont charge the public to attend Middle School activities. Dave Williams said if we charge we are required to pay a ticket taker. We might make some money on wrestling, but it would be difficult to collect at cross country meets and other activities. Barbara Bryan asked what the disadvantages were of having the City pick up programs. Dave Williams replied there would be some transition problems such as when they would practice, and supervision. The City does background checks, and they follow most of our playing rules. Middle School activities are very important to kids and it provides a sense of community for them in terms of their spirit and involvement in their school. Kathy Aragon asked if there had been discussion with the City if they took over programs if they would encourage our teachers to be involved. Dave Williams said the City does have some sort of pay schedule for those involved. Little Guy Football is all volunteer work and some people in our schools are involved in this. Dave Williams does not know if the teachers would be interested if its volunteer work; however, most of the volunteers are parents.

 

Bruce MacIntyre moved to have the Budgeting For Results Committee make a separate recommendation to the Board on each of the proposals addressed by Dave Williams as discussed with their proposed budget savings. The motion failed due to lack of a second.

 

Barbara Bryan moved to further investigate more details on programs that could be picked up by outside groups like Little Guy Football and the City of Billings. Bruce MacIntyre seconded the motion.

 

Dave Williams said the City said they could do basketball and volleyball. Dave Williams said Little Guy Football is ordering uniforms and helmets for next year. Little Guy Football estimates it will be $200k-$300k to pick up football. Paige Darden asked what the overall budget is for Middle School activities. Dave replied its about $500k out of a $60M budget. Teresa Stroebe said Lockwood eliminated football and gave it to Little Guy Football. The per child cost is about $200 with fees and jersey costs, etc. They do background checks, but there are no classes on character building and there are issues on unfairness to certain players. Once you discontinue the program it would be difficult to build up the program again. Stipend money goes to teachers and stays in the economy.

 

The motion was called for. Voting for the motion were Sandie Mammenga, Deana Elder, Peter Grass, Paige Darden, Bruce MacIntyre, Barbara Bryan, and Joel Guthals. Voting against the motion were Rod Gottula, Joan Sleeth, and Kelly Donovan. The motion carried.

 

Adjournment

 

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:27 p.m.

 

 

 

 

 

Joel Guthals, Chair Malcolm Goodrich, Board Chair

Budgeting For Results Committee

 

 

 

 

 

Sherrill Sullins, Recorder