Business Committee-November 14, 2005

[Guest sullinss]

Proceedings of the Business Committee

School District No. 2, Yellowstone County

High School District No. 2, Yellowstone County

Billings, Montana

 

November 14, 2005

 

Call to Order

 

The Business Committee Meeting of School District No. 2, Yellowstone County and High School District No. 2, Yellowstone County, Montana was held at Lincoln Center, 415 North 30th Street, Billings, Montana, on Monday, November 14, 2005. Chair K. Dale Getz called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. and led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance. Committee members present were K. Dale Getz, Katharin Kelker, Joel Guthals, Jerry Hansen, Peter Grass, Kari Altenburg, Joan Sleeth, Curt Prchal, and Shanna Henry. Absent was Committee member Randy Durr. Also in attendance were Business Manager Thomas Harper, Bob Whalen, Rich Whitney, Carol Blades, Superintendent Rod Svee, Marti Edgmond, Pat Bellinghausen, Dan Vierthaler, Gretta Beschmoen, Barbara Bryan and other interested parties.

 

Security System at Skyview

 

Skyview High School does not have a video surveillance system. Its campus is 46 acres with a 258,000 square foot building, an 800 space parking lot in front and an additional 80 parking spaces at the rear of the building. It is a two-story structure with 22 entrances and exits. The campus is used approximately 18 hours per day, six or seven days per week, depending on events that have been scheduled. The rolling terrain does not permit a good view of the parking lot. Funding from Homeland Security was not successful since their priority is large metropolitan schools.

 

Pat Bellinghausen, representing the Skyview Parent Advisory Council, Gretta Beschmoen, and Dan Vierthaler urged the Committee to recommend Board approval to purchase a video surveillance system at Skyview. Some of the issues this system would help address are: student and staff safety, weapons or drugs on campus, student behavior, theft, parking lot issues, vandalism, assaults, employee related issues, improved ability to monitor who is in the building and on the grounds at all times.

 

Principal Bob Whalen believes Skyview can absorb annual operating costs once the system is in place. No additional personnel would be required. Rich Whitney stated the initial cost varies with the number of cameras required. Joel asked administration to obtain a cost estimate of a surveillance system and give options of various levels of expenditures. Rich could obtain a design for Skyview with a base bid of a home station which would be expandable to cover the parking lot and then add some alternates with different levels of coverage. He needs Board approval to solicit proposals.

 

Katharin stated the Superintendent believes the Skyview security system has priority over the Skyview Water Side Economizer as relates to funding. The security system could be purchased from the leftover Skyview bond money from interest savings. The economizer could be purchased from money the State has promised for refurbishing buildings.

 

Katharin Kelker moved that the bidding process and alternates for the Skyview Security System be placed on the consent agenda for the Regular Board Meeting and show it as a request for proposal. Joel Guthals seconded the motion. The level of comparable technology of security systems at West and Senior was questioned. Katharin amended her motion to include the cost to upgrade systems at Senior and West to make them comparable in terms of technology. Joel seconded the amendment to the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

 

Crossroads Stipends for Activities

 

Crossroads Principal, Carol Blades, is requesting $5,000 as a start in the effort in providing Crossroads staff with money for activities they are providing for students. The Education Committee recommended the Board approve stipends for staff that provide after school activities to Crossroads students. Students used to attend Crossroads for a short amount of time and report back to their home high school for activities; however, Crossroads has since become an accredited high school. Crossroads is a school-wide Title I school. Thomas Harper believes there may be funding available from steps and lanes salary savings that was put in Board contingency.

 

Katharin Kelker moved to recommend the Board fund the Crossroads request for activities budget to the amount of $5,000 on the assumption that we have available to us that amount in savings from other high school budget line items. Shanna Henry seconded the motion. Jerry Hansen is opposed to the motion because he believes the activity funds are already established and could be reallocated from other high schools to Crossroads. Voting in favor of the motion were: K. Dale Getz, Katharin Kelker, Joel Guthals, Peter Grass, Kari Altenburg, Joan Sleeth, Curt Prchal, and Shanna Henry. Voting against the motion was Jerry Hansen. The motion carried.

 

High School Facilities – Consultant Scope of Work

 

Joel stated the Board authorized the engagement of a consultant to: 1) evaluate and compare high school facility scenarios proposed by the Board of Trustees to address current needs in the high schools, and 2) make specific facility recommendations regarding the future use, care, location, cost, and configuration of high school facilities based on said evaluation and comparison. The work of the consultant is to be completed in accordance with the Scope of Work document as presented in the agenda packet, which has incorporated input from the 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee. The purpose of the document is to be specific in the assignment given to the consultant in reviewing the scenarios regarding high school facilities and to specifically include an evaluation of the recommendations of the 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee.

 

Superintendent Svee stated the document is a great guide for the review. However, at an Ad Hoc Committee meeting an estimate of $30K was given for each scenario evaluation depending on detail requested, and we do not have $120K to evaluate four scenarios. Hopefully the Legislature will provide us relief in the amount of 10% of $23M for deferred maintenance and safety, but we won’t know unless we have a special assembly in December. One method is to pick a firm and decide on the scope of the project. Another option is to engage an educational consultant to lead a discussion on which methodology is most appropriate to use, and by that method pare down the number of scenarios to evaluate.

 

Katharin’s concern with the outline of the Scope of Work is that the Board approved scenarios are not mutually exclusive – they may want to mix and match them. There is interest in knowing how much costs have risen since they first did the analysis if the high schools were refurbished. The other scenarios are add-ons. An educational consultant could possibly pare down the number of scenarios to evaluate.

 

Joel said the Scope of Work document states the scenarios verbatim from the Board’s resolution. It includes the Board’s intention to have the 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee recommendation costed out/evaluated as part of this process. The understanding with the 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee is that the Board would have an independent consultant complete the evaluation. This document only details the scope of work to be given to the consultant. The consultant can establish a cost and the Board can decide what they can fund.

 

Superintendent Svee said there is no intention to change the process but the intention of an educational consultant would just be to narrow the scope of that review if certain options are not worth doing.

 

Barbara Bryan, of the 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee, addressed the Business Committee saying the consultant firm that’s risen to the top has the educational experience, has evaluated large school districts, and is independent of politics in this area. They can do a broad-based analysis to determine which scenarios are feasible. The Board needs to give the consultant criteria to work from.

 

Dale said the challenge is to ultimately narrow this down to something that meets the criteria as well as prepare us for some action. The Scope of Work will establish the criteria for the consultant.

 

Katharin said the Board did not adopt the 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee criteria. The criterion adopted was from the Long-Range Planning Committee before the bond issue, and nothing has changed since then as far as Board action. They are similar but would need to be clarified and there may be recommendations to approve.

 

It was questioned if this item should be tabled because of lack of funding. Joel does not want to table this because the committee selecting the consultant needs to go forward. This is not a contract, we are asking for a proposal back from the consultant the committee will select, and the Board can decide on funding.

 

Joel Guthals moved to recommend the Board approve the Scope of Work for a high school facilities consultant as presented in the agenda. Katharin Kelker seconded the motion. It was clarified that all SD#2 high school facilities are included in this document including the middle schools since the high school district owns one-third of the middle schools. The motion carried unanimously.

 

Skyview Water Side Economizer

 

This project was approved at the October 17, 2005 Board meeting but no funding source was determined at that time. The funding possibilities are the Building Reserve Fund, which means we reprioritize other projects, or use the potential funding we may get from the Legislature. The Skyview Security System is a priority over this project and the Committee is reluctant to commit the Economizer from Building Reserve funds until they see if the State gives us more funding. Jerry asked for a detailed accounting of the Building Reserve Fund.

 

Katharin Kelker moved to table the Skyview Water Side Economizer project until funding sources become clear. Joel Guthals seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

 

Building Reserve Projects – 2005/2006 (Year 5)

 

The Business Committee recognizes and appreciates the dedication and expertise of the Executive Facilities Committee over the past five years for their work on the building reserve projects. Committee members are: Director of Facility Services Rich Whitney, Principal David Munson, Skyview Head Custodian Jim Miller, and community members Rick Leuthold and Steve Corning.

 

The Executive Facilities Committee is submitting for approval the 2005-06 (Year 5) projects lists for the Elementary and High School Building Reserve Funds as follows:

 

Elementary High School

Owners Project Rep. $38,000 Owners Project Rep. $19,000

Bench – HVAC $675,000 West – Electrical Distribution $40,000

Will James–Annex Rooftop HVAC $120,000 Skyview – Repair Roof Flashing $35,000

Eagle Cliffs (Connect to City Replace Carpet-District Wide $20,000

Storm Sewer) $60,000 Exterior Doors-District Wide $20,000

Newman Roof $300,000

TOTAL $1,193,000 TOTAL $134,000

 

The Newman roof project was moved ahead of the Washington roof due to need. The unencumbered balance for Elementary Building Reserve 161 Fund is $2,048,187, less requested projects of $1,193,000, leaves a fund balance of $855,187. The fund balance can be used to fund emergencies that may arise with the remaining projects on the original $64M list. Future Building Reserve levies should possibly be set up to allow for a certain percentage of the funds to be spent at the District’s discretion as needs arise.

 

Joel Guthals moved to recommend Board approval of the 2005-2006 year project list for the Elementary Building Reserve Fund in the amount of $1,193,000. Katharin Kelker seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

 

Joel Guthals moved to recommend Board approval of the 2005-2006 year project list for the High School Building Reserve Fund in the amount of $134,000 excluding Senior HVAC which has already been allocated and paid for. Katharin Kelker seconded the motion. The unencumbered balance for High School Building Reserve 261 Fund is $1,148,497, less requested projects of $134,000, leaves a fund balance of $1,014,497. The motion carried unanimously.

 

Superintendent Svee said if this Committee suggests going to the public for more money since the Building Reserve Levy ends this year, he suggests looking at a bond issue since we get State support from that at about 40%. The potential State money we will get for deferred maintenance, weatherization, etc. is one-time money and is a three-year grant. He suggests holding that over the three years to cover emergencies to free up building reserve money for other projects and give the ability to not have to take those building projects back into the General Fund.

 

Shanna suggests some public relations work to thank the public for the building reserve funds and detailing what we’ve accomplished with those funds. Rich will work with Nancy Hines on this project.

 

Resolution to Dispose of Surplus Property – Unused Land Northwest of Career Center – due north of College of Technology

 

We have 34.7 acres of land at the Career Center site. In addition, 2.439 acres of Park set aside exists. Located directly north of the College of Technology we have 7.3 acres of vacant land we are proposing to declare surplus. Superintendent Svee reported the Board approved the Running Start Program agreement and wanted to know the best way to address the land issue. The best way to approach it is a sale which requires the land to be declared surplus. The land is not good for housing. They will pay appraised price plus interest over a period of 20 years or less. Tuition costs of BPS students who sign up for courses up to nine credits (3 classes per semester) would be deducted from the price. He believes we can fund most students from the interest rate and not from the principle. At the end of the period of time, the Board can choose to renew or request it be paid off. We have total control over which students we allow to enroll and what courses we allow them to take.

 

Curt said that land has potential for almost $2M. He asked if we put it in the Building Fund if we would qualify for matching funds. Rod replied it would not; matching funds must be part of a bond issue. However that money could be used as an enhancement to reduce a bond issue or be used for a future building. Curt expressed concern about our kids leaving our high schools and taking classes at MSU-B that are already being offered locally at our high schools. If they go this direction, it would be their Association’s view that they should look at having District No. 2’s faculty teach those classes and credits given to both students and faculty.

 

Superintendent Svee reminded the Committee that the Running Start agreement has already been approved, and this agenda item is to declare the land as surplus and not what we’re going to do with it.

 

Joan believes there are other uses for receiving money for the land rather than this proposal of an exchange for tuition. Jerry is not opposed to declaring the property surplus, but prefers cash up front.

 

Katharin Kelker moved to declare parcel A-1 as surplus property as depicted on page 66 of the agenda packet. Jerry Hansen seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

 

Consent Agenda

 

Joel Guthals moved to recommend Board approval of Consent Agenda items as follows:

1. Employee Suggestion Regarding Travel

2. Addition of Communication Plan Trust Account at Lincoln

3. Addition of Jim Dow Scholarship Trust Account at Senior

4. Addition of Ponderosa 1st Grade ECA Account

5. Minutes of October 10, 2005

Peter Grass seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

 

Health Insurance – Financial Statements – September, 2005

 

The Balance Sheet and Statement of Revenue & Expenditures for September, 2005 as prepared by the Business Office was reviewed by Committee members. It was noted that the reserves have increased since the last report. Superintendent Svee noted discussions on the State-wide insurance plan are on-going. Curt added that the State-wide insurance plan is not as good as our current plan benefits and it is more costly.

 

Bills Paid – October, 2005 (summary sheet)

 

The Committee reviewed the bills paid for October, 2005. Katharin Kelker moved to recommend approval of the Bills Paid report for October, 2005. Shanna Henry seconded the motion. Jerry questioned claims totals, and Joel has not had time to review all of the bills paid. Voting in favor of the motion were: K. Dale Getz, Katharin Kelker, Kari Altenburg, Curt Prchal, Peter Grass, Joan Sleeth, and Shanna Henry. Voting against the motion were Jerry Hansen and Joel Guthals. The motion carried.

 

Financial Reports – October, 2005 (Unaudited)

 

The Committee members reviewed the unaudited financial reports for October, 2005.

 

Montana Indian Education Association Request for Sponsorship

 

The Montana Indian Education Association (MIEA) is requesting BPS sponsor a conference activity at their 25th Annual Education Conference in Billings on March 30-April 2, 2006. Jerry Hansen moved to not sponsor part of the MIEA Conference. Joel Guthals seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

 

Budget Formation Process

 

Business Manager Thomas Harper distributed a budget formation process outline as a starting point for discussion. Chair Getz asked members to review the information and provide feedback. Curt suggested a sub-committee of the Business Committee, represented by various stakeholder groups, be formed to enable the Business Committee to be integrally involved in the budget formation process. Joan would also like to see the Business Committee involved in overseeing this process. Thomas said the early task of developing outcomes/objectives is not a budget function. We will start with measurable District-wide results everyone can agree upon, then knowing our revenue we will agree on what programs are important. Chair Getz stated the process does acknowledge staff and stakeholder input. Curt said they have not had an opportunity as an Association to provide input and they have a lot of questions. Shanna asked for confirmation that Budget Managers would get involved at the “Generating Budget Proposals” level. Shanna suggested criteria be developed for the “Evaluating and Ranking Proposal” level since this area was very vague and may be difficult to put together a budget from this information. Jerry is excited about the process because it gives a chance to examine all budgets. He would like to meet the educational needs of the students with restricted funds first and supplement those requirements from the General Fund. Chair Getz said this process is a starting point and hopefully this will lead us to a better understanding of the budget.

 

Establish Energy Innovation Sub-Committee

 

The formation of a sub-committee was suggested to provide expertise in facilities energy systems analysis and planning. It would consist of two Board members, the BPS Director of Facilities, and three community members who have professional expertise in this area.

 

Katharin suggested this should be a Board Ad Hoc Committee rather than a sub-committee of the Business Committee. Joel Guthals moved to recommend the Board establish an Energy Innovation Ad Hoc Committee of the Board which will report to the Business Committee and the Board and consist of two Board members, the Director of Facilities, and three community members who have professional expertise in facilities energy systems analysis and planning. Katharin Kelker seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

 

Adjournment

 

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:38 p.m.

 

 

 

 

K. Dale Getz, Chair

 

 

Sherrill Sullins, Recorder