Guest sullinss Posted April 26, 2005 Report Share Posted April 26, 2005 Proceedings of the Business Committee School District No. 2, Yellowstone County High School District No. 2, Yellowstone County Billings, Montana March 14, 2005 The March 14, 2005 Business Committee meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chair Malcolm Goodrich in a joint meeting with the Education Committee. Business Committee members in attendance were Joan Sleeth, Bob Whalen, Judy Herzog, Shanna Henry, Jerry Hansen, Dale Getz, Curt Prchal, Peter Grass, Malcolm Goodrich, and Patty Lacy. Also in attendance was Trustee Board Chair Katharin Kelker, District Clerk Leo Hudetz, Business Manager Thomas Harper, Rich Whitney, Dave Williams, Barbara Bryan, Randy Hafer, Karen Moses, Conrad Stroebe, other members of the Education Committee and Twenty-Year School Facilities Planning Committee, and other interested parties. The purpose of the joint meeting was to listen to a presentation from the Twenty-Year School Facilities Planning Committee before adjourning to individual committee meetings. Public Comment Karen Moses, Chair of the School/Community Committee, asked the Business and Education Committees not to endorse the public presentation materials or distribution of materials to students regarding the high school scenarios. She stated the School/Community Committee did not reach consensus on the scenarios jointly with the Twenty-Year School Facilities Planning Committee. Jack Johnson asked the committee members present to listen openly to the Twenty-Year School Facilities Planning Committee report. Twenty-Year School Facilities Planning Committee Report Barbara Bryan stated the Twenty-Year School Facilities Planning Committee did not come to endorse proposals, but came to inform, start conversations and ask for responses to their report on High School Scenarios. The Committee will use public responses to go back and design a final recommendation to the Board of Trustees. Mrs. Bryan reviewed the Public Comment Form, and presented the Twenty-Year School Facilities Planning Committee’s Statement of Problems, Shared Beliefs, Criteria for Evaluation of Alternatives, and the three High School Scenarios. Adjournment of Joint Meeting and Continuation of Business Committee Meeting Chair Malcolm Goodrich adjourned the joint Committee meeting at 6:20 p.m. and the Business Committee reconvened in Room 213. Chair Goodrich called the meeting back to order at 6:25 p.m. Twenty-Year School Facilities Planning Committee (continued) Randy Hafer and Barbara Bryan joined the Business Committee to answer questions from the Business Committee regarding the High School Scenario report. Chair Goodrich directed the Business Committee to go forward with the discussion focused on financial issues. Business Committee members asked the following questions; and, answers were provided by Barbara Bryan or Randy Hafer unless specifically noted otherwise. (Comments abbreviated) Q. What would the cost be for a full-blown sports program for Lincoln Center under Scenario #1, and is it fiscally possible? A. Dave Williams estimated $400,000. Q. Would the Career Center have sports or not under Scenario #1? A. That would have to be determined. Q. Have bussing costs been calculated for sports related activities in the different scenarios? A. The Twenty-Year School Facility Planning Committee’s budget projections are for facility costs only and they have not developed operating costs. Q. Were there any analyses of the location of these scenarios in relation to population growth? This will affect bussing costs. A. Barbara stated one-half to two-thirds of the students that would need to be bussed are already being bussed. Sondra Baker thought there might even be some bussing savings. Barbara said there is not much correlation between population growth and enrollment changes. Q. Has any analysis been done to determine extra staff requirements at the Career Center? A. They are trying to identify this. Q. Does your budget include the costs of refurbishing Garfield? A. No, but a lot of improvements have been at Garfield already. Q. Can we have a full-fledged high school without sports? A. Dave Williams replied it was possible. Q. Have teacher/staff transfer issues been addressed? A. These are part of operational cost issues. Q. Would operating costs for the District increase or decrease with the scenarios? A. If we choose additional expansion, costs may increase. Patty Lacy left the meeting at 6:42 p.m. Q. Curt stated all scenarios will have an impact on the General Fund and all will be an increase. He asked when we would be getting the operating costs. A. Barbara gave a 2-3 week time frame to get an initial indicator on operating costs. Jerry stated this study confirmed the schools are full but not overcrowded. Jerry believes the high school district enrollment will be decreasing. He believes we have 5-7 years to study these scenarios, put off expanding the capacity and proceed with deferred maintenance. He is as concerned with the elementary district as he is with the high school. Q. Dale asked for confirmation that the current situation states that we are not overcapacity and we have an excess capacity of 311 students. A. Barbara stated their Committee’s enrollment projections are not as low as the School District projections. Q. Dale asked Architect Randy Hafer how confident they were on their $55M-$65M cost projections. A. Randy replied about 85% confident. Q. Dale asked why there was not a “do nothing” scenario? A. Barbara stated it was originally considered, but their initial charge was to look at facilities. Q. Dale said if we are forecasting a decrease in enrollment, then why are you recommending an increase in capacity? A. Barbara said the excess capacity of 311-student district-wide does not allow for disproportionate growth in a specific area. They are looking at a 20-year study. Dale requested to see their enrollment studies. Q. Peter asked if they studied the costs of a high school in Lockwood vs. bussing costs. A. Barbara said this was not studied because of sprawl and lack of city sewer and water in Lockwood. Q. Judy said there were a lot of kids on the west end that are bussed. Why not have a smaller school on the west end? A. Mr. Small stated there are about 10-12 growth areas and they decided to work with the existing facilities until the community tells them where to put a school by the growth pattern. Barbara Bryan requested the Business Committee take no action on the Crossroads property until the facility issue is resolved. Judy requested a “do nothing” scenario. Barbara stated that is still possible as a scenario. Shanna believes it’s premature to send out a “Public Comment Form” until we have financial costs and know if the scenarios are even feasible. Barbara stated their time frame states they will make their final report before the end of the school year. Shanna would like a disclaimer on the information that not all operating costs are included. Chair Goodrich does not want the public by receipt of the “Public Comment Form” to assume that our budget is not based on fact and that we have the funds or are endorsing any of these scenarios. He would rather not see this go out from the District since we have no funding. Judy needs to see the costs before public information is sent out. Barbara said then the information probably wouldn’t go out because of time constraints. She wants to get the parents’ input. Dale does not want to imperil the essential levy. He does not want to send out any information to the public right now. Barbara asked if we would consider putting the information on the website. The Chair said the Business Committee would take it into consideration. Peter Grass believes a face-to-face audience is the best way to present this type of information to get the best feedback rather than a mass mailing. Chair Goodrich asked Barbara Bryan to make a future presentation to the Business Committee when operational costs are known. He stated our District does not have any money, and without operational costs, it’s hard for the Business Committee to make any recommendation to the Board. If we do not pass a mill levy, we will need to cut approximately $3M from the 2005-06 YR budget and 89.6% of our operation is salary driven. Barbara Bryan does not expect to get an endorsement from the Business Committee before giving their Committee report to the Board. Their timeframe was established to enable the District to prepare something for a November ballot. Request to Delay Pilot Program for Healthy Foods Initiative Until August The Principals of the four elementary schools that will be implementing the pilot program for the Healthy Foods Initiative are requesting that program startup be delayed to begin with our next school year in August, 2005. Dale Getz introduced a motion to recommend the Board delay the Healthy Foods Initiative pilot program startup to August, 2005 in the four elementary schools selected. Shanna Henry seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Request to Cancel Outstanding Warrants The Trustees of any school district are authorized to cancel any warrant that has been issued for at least one year, MCA 20-9-223. Judy Herzog introduced a motion to recommend Board approval to cancel the outstanding warrants as presented. Shanna Henry seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Minutes of February 15, 2005 Judy Herzog introduced a motion to approve the Business Committee minutes of February 15, 2005. Jerry Hansen seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Minutes of February 25, 2005 Judy Herzog introduced a motion to approve the Special Business Committee minutes of February 25, 2005. Jerry Hansen seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Addition of Bench Special Fund-Trust Account Board approval is required to set up a new trust account. Principal Strecker is requesting a trust account be set up for Bench Elementary School. This fund will be for miscellaneous donations to the school. Shanna Henry introduced a motion to recommend Board approval to set up a new Bench Special Fund Trust Account. Judy Herzog seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Buy/Sell Agreement for Crossroads High School Location Hawkins Companies LLC has presented the District with an unsolicited Buy/Sell Agreement to purchase the Crossroads High School location on Grand Avenue and 14th Street from our District for $1.8M. Dale Getz introduced a motion to table the Buy/Sell Agreement for Crossroads High School Location. Judy Herzog seconded the motion. Chair Goodrich stated we would first need to declare this property as abandoned, obsolete, undesirable, or unsuitable for school purposes, 20-6-604, MCA, before any action could be taken on a Buy/Sell Agreement. Rich Whitney stated that the Facilities Department views that building as hard to maintain, with the largest deferred maintenance per square foot in the District. It will be a huge investment to keep that facility. Dave Williams stated this is an elementary facility and the funds from its sale would go a long way to funding a new elementary facility. The 75 Crossroads students can be housed elsewhere. Those voting in favor of the motion were Joan Sleeth, Shanna Henry, Jerry Hansen, Curt Prchal, Judy Herzog, Dale Getz, Malcolm Goodrich, and Peter Grass. Voting against the motion was Bob Whalen. The motion carried. Burlington Elementary School Reroof-2005 As previously approved on the Elementary Building Reserve 2004-2005 Project List, a bid was let for the above project and opened on February 24, 2005. Bid results are as follows: Contractor Bid Empire Heating & Cooling $82,587 (low bid) Commercial Roofing $83,600 EmpireRoofing $85,297 Facility Services recommends the project be awarded to the low bidder Empire Heating and Cooling. Judy Herzog introduced a motion to recommend the Board award the Burlington Elementary School Reroof 2005 project to the low bidder, Empire Heating & Cooling for $82,587. Dale Getz seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Senior High/1966 Addition Asbestos Abatement-2005 As previously approved on the Secondary Building Reserve 2004-2005 Project List, a bid was let for the above project and opened on March 8, 2005. Bid results are as follows: Contractor Bid Alt. #1 Alt. #2 Total Environmental Contractors $44,325 $9,880 $20,160 $74,365 Safetech, Inc $46,950 $11,300 $24,500 $82,750 IIC NO BID Ingraham Environmental NO BID Facility Services recommend the project be awarded to the low bidder Environmental Contractors. Jerry Hansen introduced a motion to recommend the Board award the Senior High/1966 Addition Asbestos Abatement-2005 project to the low bidder, Environmental Contractors for $74,365. Peter Grass seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Feedback on Proposal Regarding Mill Levy Chair Goodrich reported that feedback from the Board/Community Work Session of March 7, 2005 indicated that there should be a call for a mill levy but there may not have been unanimous agreement that the high school levy should go to the cap. The mill levy issue will be on the March 21st Board agenda. The cutoff date for the May election for the mill levy is March 24th. The Chair asked for Committee members opinions on the mill levy. Peter Grass asked if the K-Ship initiative in the Legislature changes the financial aspect of any budget. Thomas said it did not affect the 2005-06 budget. Curt believes it would have a significant impact on the following year with aid to the District that’s not tied to a mill levy vote. Chair Goodrich said a significant portion of the Governor’s program money comes from raising the cap. Curt said the Governor’s proposal is not $70M; it would be $30M in year one and $10M in year two with the rest being made up by increasing the cap. Chair Goodrich said the actual increase for the District from the Governor’s program is close to $2.3M. K-Ship would start in year 2006-07 and would bring in $4.3M, but it would not necessarily go into insurance. Jerry is opposed to funding based on numbers of employees. It encourages inefficiency and we are in the business of educating kids. 90% of the budget is in salary and benefits. We are down 1100 students since 1993 and we’ve hired 54 more faculty in the elementary district. The budget increase being requested is over 9.5% in both the elementary and high school districts when inflation is only 3.5%. Jerry is opposed to the mill levy. Curt said OPI documents say 72% of the high school budget is salaries and 80% of the elementary budget because we do have salaries in funds other than the General Fund. We added 37 teachers a year ago, budgeted from Federal funds. Curt requested a breakdown of the 1127 employees as to which employees are funded by the General Fund vs. other funds. Joan said in about year 1998, the Federal government started their grant program for reduced classroom size in grades K-3 which required increased numbers of staff. Chair Goodrich said we need to decide on whether to run a mill levy by March 24th, and we will not have final legislation reflecting either the Governor’s proposal or the K-ship initiative by that date. If we do not have a mill levy and we don’t get money from the Legislature, we are looking at cuts at approximately $2.8M. Malcolm is uncomfortable asking for more money from the voters, but if the deadline stays, he will vote for calling a mill levy. Leo Hudetz said OPI is talking about extending the March 24th deadline date until the Legislature makes some decisions. Chair Goodrich said we can call for a mill levy election to meet the deadline and then pull the election if we decide to. It will be a difficult sell to the public because they may perceive we are getting a lot of funding from the Governor, and we also have the Facility Planning Committee proposing $55-65M high school scenarios when we have no money. Jerry said we have a $110M budget and we should be able to tighten our budget and cut $2M from it. Thomas said we’re talking about the General Fund and other funds are earmarked or have special provisions which do not allow us to pay for things that are in the General Fund. Peter Gesuale addressed the Committee and encouraged them to run a mill levy. He said it’s important to have accurate numbers before the public. He said there are other budgets to get money from rather than cut staff. He said additional health insurance costs of $600,000 in the budget are inaccurate. We have a contract that states what those figures will be. He encouraged the District to reduce the dropout rate which would increase our funding. Judy reported that Dan Martin said health insurance premiums were going up 28%. Thomas believes from a planning standpoint, it would be irresponsible to produce a budget and not recognize that cost. Those dollars were put in contingency (about $600K in elementary and $300K in high school). Chair Goodrich said Superintendent Svee did not include the costs of complying with “No Child Left Behind” for Special Education students in the budget. Chair Goodrich said our actuary projected an increase of 18% for health insurance for next fiscal year. Peter Gesuale requested the District earmark that $600,000 as an early retirement incentive. Curt Prchal requested detailed information on budget expenditures. Thomas provided printouts to the Committee. Peter Grass believes we should call for a mill levy, knowing that we can back out later. Leo Hudetz said we still need to know by April 4th to print ballots. If nothing else changes and they don’t change the date of the trustee election also, we may have to have two elections, one for trustees and one for mill levies. Shanna Henry believes we need to try for a mill levy. Chair Goodrich asked for any more concerns and a motion. The Chair stated there being no motion, at this point the Business Committee is not prepared to make a recommendation on the mill levy. Budget Forecasts FY 2005-2006 Bev Flaten, Title I Director, was present to talk about Title Grants and the effects of raising the Indirect Cost rate. The Title grants serve Senior High and eleven K-8 elementary schools. They serve children that are academically disadvantaged as established through poverty programs. With the anticipated costs and level of funding uncertain, they are told that, at best, they can expect level funding for Title I. “No Child Left Behind” and “Adequate Yearly Progress” will impact that level of funding. Before we start current level programs in our school we have mandated sanctions that come off the top of the budget for supplemental educational services. If Riverside and Senior don’t make AYP this spring, we will have to provide supplemental educational services up to $1200 per student. If we don’t make AYP this spring we’ll be in our 2nd year of needed improvement. If we increase Indirect Costs to our Title programs along with our normal increased costs, it might impact staffing which will impact kids. We are now under sanctions that we have never had before. Shanna stated if you take higher Indirect Costs, you are taking money away from the kids who have the hardest time making AYP, which then means you’ll be put on school improvement status, which means you will need more money to make AYP. Financial Reports – February, 2005 (Unaudited) Financial Reports for February, 2005 (Unaudited) have been reviewed by Committee members. Jerry handed out a spreadsheet which summarized the 2006 preliminary budget by object code to show what percent of the budget was for each line item, the percent increase from year to year, and the dollar increase. His calculations showed a 9.9% increase in the elementary budget and a 9.7% increase in the high school budget. Jerry’s figures do not include Flex, MAC, and Medicaid dollars. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:41 p.m. Malcolm Goodrich, Chair Sherrill Sullins, Recorder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.