callous thank you madam president members of the board and I would just like to echo the celebration of the district Student Leadership Council this has been a year in the planning and this is just the beginning they have great ideas of future events to come we had five representatives from each school including sundown that were part of the Leadership Council but to bring all the student leadership from the entire district together for this conference and it was organized planned and executed all by students and our student representative miss Fleming was one of the key parts of that so we appreciate your leadership as well this evening I'd like to celebrate the district math challenge that was held at Kingswood I can't tell you how exhilarating it was to walk into the gym at Kingswood and to see it more full than a high school basketball game with masters who were grades 1st through 8th throughout the entire event we're crunching away at math problems in a competitive environment is very exciting and we congratulate all those who participated in that event it was extraordinary I also like to acknowledge shadow Ridge High School again we were able to go to their a plus school recognition celebration and it was very exciting to see this whole student body celebrate something that they all work together on there's a lot of arts performances that are going on right now throughout the district as we conclude the school year we've had some impressive athletic recognitions I think we can honestly say this has been a great year for the academics the arts and the athletics next remove the governing board update I would just like to thank the Dicer Education Foundation for a lovely dinner and how they honored our seniors with their scholarship awards it was wonderful to be a part of that dr.
Keller said lots of different concerts and things going on throughout the district and look forward to attending some of those and certainly graduations coming up so thank you all for a wonderful year and look forward to attending some of these end of the Year celebrations just a couple of quick ones my two attended the Dysart Education Foundation scholarship awards dinner I believe it was over 93 thousand dollars that was handed out to their graduating seniors so many congratulations to them I too attended the shadow Ridge a plus school of excellence and I think I don't think mr. Hawkins smile could have gotten any bigger he was the proud papa also attended the Valle Vista senior awards dinner dinner excuse me the award ceremony and I believe that was over seven million dollars of scholarships and funds that were handed out that's just to Valle Vista alone you imagine what it's going to be at the end of the year for all four high schools let's see appreciation of nurses for this weight teacher appreciation thank you for all that you do and also please be with those that were part of the school shooting incident that was up in Colorado please be with those parents and those students and we don't know why but we just hope that all of our students and teachers and parents can come on to campus and any public places and feel safe but please keep them in your thoughts and prayers and just a little tidbit which was disheartening Arizona for some reason ranks fourth in the nation for bullying and bullying it's not just for schools it's in the workplace it's public places and although we we reap the percussions of bullying but it is kind of disheartening that Arizona ranks fourth in the nation among the states so I do looking forward to graduation also sundown is having their ceremony tomorrow so looking forward to that and looking forward to a great end of the year and I just want to say kind of echo every every one but as far as it's been I love this time of year just because it is such a great time of year celebrations and especially senior nights and being able to see like you know everything just kind of come not to an end but kind of done reaching their success and seeing the potential that our Dysart students have reached and and not only with the scholarships and the grades and things but just in their life just as generally people and being good kind and service-oriented people and I know just with it being Teacher Appreciation Week that so much of that isn't just because of the kids or the homes that they grew up in but also their role models that they are able to be with every day and I know that their teachers are so much a part of that and who that they who they have become these students and and who they are becoming so grateful for our teachers who are just great examples and role models to our kids so yeah thank you we'll move on to agenda item G motion to approve consent unto the items I will entertain a motion I move that the governing board approve the consent agenda items as presented second wish I made by Tracy sourcing bill seconded by Christine Pritchard please cast your votes motion carries next we move to information item 1 summary of meet and confer sessions dr.
Calais Thank You Madame president members of the board and members of cabinet our interspaces agreement team has been working diligently over the last several months and this evening we have a team report from mrs. buck and mr. Hicks Madam President members of the board dr. Kellis members of cabinet and community and we would like to present a kind of a summary of the IBA a process and the recommendations that resulted from that team we can't began meeting earlier in probably I think it was October or November when the team started to come together and started looking at the budget situation where we were in the district and what kind of recommendations they would make regarding salary and working conditions so if you want to click our iba teams this year had died straight Education Association representation die cert classified staff representatives this year we had three from our classified staff Dysart school site administrators our DSA a and then died cert cabinet representatives and then mr.
Hixon myself facilitated the process the process itself is dynamic it's not a linear process but all of these things are considered and we move through it as we need to we establish standards and criteria the board adopted those earlier this fall actually they were adopted I believe in 2004 maybe 2007 I have to look it up and then we could just continually bring them to the board annually for a renewal on those standards that we end criteria that we use to measure all of the recommendations against we tell the story we identify interests and look for common ground we present options what are the things that we can or cannot do do those options stand up to our standards and criteria and then we come to consensus on what their recommendations based on them meeting the needs of all of our employee groups the one of the first things we looked at and I will defer to mr.
Hicks as we go through this process is we really began with benefits it's one of the first things we have to do because we want to get those addressed prior to contracts going out so our employees know what the benefit package will look like for the following school year and so it was it was part of the focus right at the beginning is to look at not just health insurance but any other required benefit costs going up and so the board did approve the benefit package that had approximately about 291 thousand dollar cost to the district with no cost to our employees and then the second component of that is the Arizona State Retirement System is having a cost increase we knew that on December when the board voted to increase it the percentages from eleven point eight to twelve point eleven and so we had to factor in those costs as well and so that is the benefit cost one of the things that we looked at was our exempt staff have vacation that ends if they don't use it they lose it as of June 30th and so one of the requests that has come forward is to allow them additional time line to use that vacation because it's difficult to use it during the school year so we have agreed as a recommendation is to move that to an October 31st for those days it would require a policy revision and but it would not increase the accrual or the payout calculations so it would just give them additional time to use those days if they did not use them they would expire on October 31st instead of June 30th if they were to leave prior to that before they use them it would not be part of the payout they would only be paid what they accrued for each annual school year so it was a it goes to morale of people being able to use the time that we've given them in a timely manner and when there's a break in not as many in the school year another thing we looked at for a benefit was our administrators leave pay amounts to be calculated as other classifications we have a benefit that allows people that have been in the district from 10 to 19 years to be paid out at 85% of the sub rate of their accrued leave time so any discretionary time that has accrued over the years that they haven't used throughout the year we pay them out at 85% of the sub rate the administrators have been had to be paid out at the sub rate of a teacher rather than their administrative salary so one of the recommendations that we have is to change the administrators so it's at an administrative sub rate instead of a teacher sub rate so it looks like it would be an estimated cost of approximately 46 thousand dollars to do that and it's consistent with all of our other employee groups it is just we've had a few questions on the costs it is purely an estimate because we don't know at the time how many people are leaving that would have a leave payout at that time so we looked at a three-year average and then put the cost in at that so the cost could be greater it could be less but we wanted to explain the methodologies and it is for people if so if they've been in the district for 10 to 19 years it's 85 percent of the sub rate if they've been here for 20 plus years then they get paid out at a hundred percent of the sub rate next another thing that was discussed was a change in benefits start date for new hires this does not have an impact on current employees but we have what we have found is our current policy allows our current practice is if an employee starts on the 30th of a month their benefits start the next day on the first of the month and so there is no timeframe to actually get them into the system so we've had some issues with an employee that's used their benefits prior to them actually getting registered and getting started on it so we would we're delaying that start by so that if they start between the first of the month and the fifteenth of the month the benefits would start on the first of the next so there'd be a two-week timeframe kind of a delay to get them into the system and get them ready to actually take advantage of the benefits and then if they start after the 15th of the month then they would start on the beginning of the second month after that there is a cost savings to us when we do that because we're not paying for their benefits for that 15 or 45 days up to that amount of time it's actually still very we were very very generous when we started at that early industry-standard is almost 30 to 60 days in some cases it's 90 days so we're still starting benefits much earlier than many other school districts do some of the resolutions that we have that we're bringing forward regarding salary is to provide a 5% increase to base pay to all our proposition 301 classrooms site fund eligible positions that are on a teacher contract it is a change from the previous year where last year we gave it to every single certificated employee we are defining it a little differently so that it does include all of the people defined by Doug Ducey's 20 by 2020 definition of a teacher but it expands it a little bit but it doesn't expand it to all certificated staff then we are recommending a 3% increase to base pay for all other employees so our classified our proposition 301 class site fund eligible and non-eligible teachers or sorry employees that are not on a teacher contract and our administrative positions and then our new hire placements we are recommending a 2019 2020 salary schedules not to be increased from the current levels so the salary schedules that are posted publicly and are used to a determined salary placement for new hires we would keep that at our current levels without an increase and however current employees who have been recommended for a new position for next year would be eligible as a loyalty because their continued with us the reason for this recommendation is we have consist we had applied the increase to our base salary schedule as well as giving it to our employees and so anyone that's been here for a year makes the same amount as someone coming in on entry level and so there's been no differentiation I could be here for five years and someone coming in new is going to be being paid exactly the same as I am and so the the intent is to create a little differentiation and take care of some of that compression that we've been having with our salaries so our employees will get the increase our salary schedule will main consistent with where it is right now we did do this last year with our teacher salaries our teachers received 10% in our salary schedule only increased 8% to allow a little bit of differentiation between entry-level and our current employees it's one way to address the compression that we have and we are very very competitive our salaries are much higher than all our surroundings districts so it's not going to impede our ability to recruit teachers extracurricular stipends we're recommending an increase of 5% to all our high school coaching stipends it's a cost of approximately $48,000 based on what our current coaches are paid we have not as we were going through this discussion week between mr.
Dean who's been here long in Netflix - we can't remember it when the last time was that there was an increase to our stipends and so there's also a recommendation to increase the middle level athletic coach stipends from $975 to $1,000 so we're addressing coaching stipends this year and creating a stipend - four thousand dollars a year for an arts lead because we do not have a position like that in the district and with they're focused on the three A's we need to have some support directing arts programs in the district so another resolution is to in order to kind of address the workload on our special education teachers we are looking to create a special education pilot program that works to provide Monday availability for them to do planning and assessing and and at the high school possibly at additional prep periods to help address their workloads so we are working with principals and special teachers to create a pilot program that can be implemented to address that workload and give them some time to get those things done that they need to do and so we do want to be clear with some of the assumptions that the budget was built on for the revenue side first is the reduction of a DMR average daily membership of 400 students and so it is important to note that we take that into a consideration so that we're anticipating any growth or reduction in that sense currently right now with if you look at the bubble that's working its way through the entire state of Arizona with the lowest birth rates in the history of Arizona or that's been recorded you we have in our system approximately about a 550 kid student decrease from what is leaving in eighth grade and or high school and then what is coming in at kindergarten so we have that bubble work in its way through our system it's a little less than 400 because we also have some changes and some outside enrollment from open enrollment and other things that are picking up some additional students so we don't see the exact decline from that but we are anticipating a decrease the base support level we know that by law it's in there that has the 2% inflation increase I have seen some reports that the 2% is is a little high that there's inflation actual from CPI over 12-month is a little bit less than 2% but right now the governor's budget I think that the legislators budget that I've seen of everybody's still continuing with a 2% assumption so that is still in there I'll tell you if it goes down a little bit it would probably be why we have a carry forward to absorb it's kind of like a shock absorber to allow that and making the adjustments and in the future there is the 20 by 2020 increased it as Miss Baucus mentioned from governor Ducey and that provides about $105 per weighted student count in that sense that is also incorporated into it the restoration of district additional assistance has the dollar amount for the that is something that has been in a lot of different budgets if you're looking at some of the ones that have come out in the last week or two of accelerating this this is what has been passed with the restoration schedule is what we're expecting and to be quite honest I know Mary Dowell our director of finances she double-checked some of my numbers and said you know you're a little low on the district additional assistance restoration using some wrong number so we're probably a little low when that probably has another hundred thousand dollars that's just cushion I will say from that standpoint but it does show how we're making projections on an estimates and enrollments were the best information we have at the time and that goes into our base assumptions but it I think it is important for the board to understand the the biggest assumption is the number of students we're talking about and this does have an expectation that we are going down a little bit in students also as we all remember prop 206 that was passed years ago has its final big jump implemented or required to be implemented by January 1st of 2020 and so what this is us falling in line with that law that law requires that the increase of the hourly wage go up to $12 an hour on January 1st so this has us and this budget that we're presenting are the recommendations that's being presented here tonight is that we are not making the require the increase to $12 on July 1 we're waiting we're applying the 3% that was proposed earlier in an earlier resolution to all groups then those that are still under 12 On January 1st we will be moving them up to $12 an hour and increase some of the grades so that we could also adjust some of that compression so that everybody's not sitting at 12 bucks an hour in that sense also although this was not part of our IBA discussion in that sense because this our prop 301 or our classroom site fund is for our certified staff only so it's not for everybody to debate in that sense and I don't like it in the IBA because I don't want any appearance or of supplanting in that sense because there's a non supplanting clause in this but we did get our information from the joint Legislative Budget Committee on March 30th around there that they're required for how much we're getting per student for next year and plugging in the amounts there is an increase in allocation and we also have some carry-forward balances and so with those calculations were recommending $500 increase and the pay for performance fund and $400 increase between funds 11 and 13 not to get too confusing but fund 11 actually is going down a little bit in fund 13s going up to make up the difference we have very small balance in fund 11 they really should be linked in that sense but we're gonna correct it over the next couple of years but it still per diet provides an overall increase in those two funds when you combine them that's a $900 increase which will take their current amount at 70 7800 up to 87 hundred for context so currently right now $7,800 is up to seventy eight hundred dollars if they meet all the qualifications for the paper performance next year they will be going up to eighty seven hundred dollars there were some other considerations or actions that have been done either previously by the board or already in place one is opening of Asante and redesigning school that had some increase or the opening means that we have to staff it the front office and such so there were some costs associated with that we did hear from schools that at the very beginning of the school day our ABM contract that we outsource has cleaning for just one day before school starts but when you have a meet the teacher night that's maybe a week but and they cleaned before that that means in between the meet the teacher night and the first day of school there's no cleaning they have asked can we put one day of cleaning back so we had to cover that cost there were some previously approved work calendar changes by the board and so we have to account for that part of this whole process there was a as and you'll see in a next slide or schools actually took a cut in their capital funding as we're working through how can we get this to balance budget since one of the thought was can we provide each school without $5,000 in MIPS funding that's our Medicaid in public school funding that is where we're paying our social workers out of it does have a large balance in it the $5 per school would not interrupt that it's still sustainable for at least five years I think it'll go on beyond that but we have we believe as we're cutting them in other areas we do have a balance and it was thought of as please provide this this was something that was years ago a funding source that was provided to the schools and so this is to restore that five thousand dollars per school and so as I mentioned talked about 15% reduction to all school capital allocations we were due seeing the IT the maintenance transportation and add services budget by 1.8 million and other departments reduced by about a hundred and sixteen thousand dollars and our capital budgets so I wanted to probably just a summary of all that was happening so you could kind of see how do we have a ledger to kind of make sure that we have enough money available and so we look at the estimated revenue coming in increase in revenue increase in the five percent da a transfer change that is our district additional assistance so to consequently as I previously mentioned the capital cuts we needed to cut some in capital first we had to cut some to begin with because this year's budget is about six million dollars with about four million dollars revenue so we were overspending that we were in a trajectory that we couldn't continue to overspend so we needed to do some adjustments and so as the district additional assistance is being restored and looking at all of our requests we wanted to transfer some money to M&O to cover the salary increases and so it came to about nine hundred and seventy five thousand dollars we had to transfer it as mentioned before the to benefits and so this is just a ledger summary total of those increases certified the five the three the three the other changes as mentioned the prop 206 and that is a delayed as mentioned January first some totals five point four million of the five point four million so we have a net available approximately twenty four thousand dollars that we finished with the next is just showing the capital of what our allocation is the increase from the restoration and then the transfer how it shows how much we have available school allocations that's a reduction down and then the department allocations showing that we're projecting a four point 1 million dollar budget in those funds as well and I think one caveat obviously is that this is based on all the assumptions that's either in law that we know are going to happen and so we do know that the legislature is still in session we are happy that the I think it started with the Republican Senate came out with a budget and now I've seen the House Democrats have come out with a budget it starts the conversation and so we're hoping that maybe they can be done before Memorial Day and have an actual budget but any of the assumptions are that we've mentioned or if there's any new funding mechanisms might require us to come back to the governing boards so if they identify something let's just say an opportunity index that provides additional funding for schools that are above the free and reduced rate and so those would maybe be considered higher poverty schools getting an additional funding this does not have that incorporated into the budget process and we'd have to come back to the board with a possible how we're going to plan on spending that money in that sense so this is only making a budget presentation with those assumptions that have identified going forward and I will say going forward we have a lot of some agenda items now later all taking into consideration all that's this is recommending into those considerations so as we build forward towards a proposed budget and June 14th it'll make all these assumptions will be in the budget built in as later on we have an agenda item it has these assumptions built into that and so we are going forward with this presentation as with all the assumptions in and all the recommendations going forward as we're building our budgets and we will stand for any questions thank you so much appreciate the information just a few quick questions in regard to the slide regarding the new employees so I remember last year that there was that there one it to create that difference where new employees coming in but they only got in like 8% and everyone else had like to 10% now are you saying though this this year are moving forward new employees into our district won't have any like they're gonna come in at the current level so there won't be any increase at all for them that's correct we would not be increasing the current salary schedules we would leave them as they currently are so they're not making that now from us because they don't work for us right now so it would be their entry-level salary which is the same as it is currently now teachers would be if they are a teacher they'd be getting the increase in the 301 that that is coming forward which is $900 more and so overall with coop with goals but our salary schedules would stay the same last year we did not create that difference in any other schedules except our certified salary schedules so we don't have any definite defined difference in our classified schedules or our administrative schedules right now mm-hmm but now I've here at E and I might be getting this confused but let's say like you're a teacher from another district as far as getting and maybe I'm confusing it but that whole you know 20 by 20 20 I mean that as incremental incrementally goes up would they be losing out on that if they come to Dysart where if they stayed in their current district they would be getting that extra sorry increase so they wouldn't they wouldn't feel that as just a teeth professionally as a teacher if they came here they wouldn't get the benefit that their colleagues are getting right Madam President members aboard partially right yes so thus our schedule was improved last year not at the full amount well it at the eight percent and so they did receive the technical if you want to say that yes they received eight percent so they receive impartial they would not get the five percent going forward for next year that is for valuing the current employees that are here now and not ones that are not with us in that sense however if they would depend they do yet experience from us and education so it with each salary work up for a new employee is different depending upon their experience an education level so we have the posted salary schedule as entry-level and then we add for experience then we add for education so but it would be what our posted public salary schedule is and it may already be higher than what they're making in another district anyway yeah Madam President members of the board just looking at some districts around us we start at about ten thousand higher right now than everybody around us in essence and so there and then the real one will continue to increase with that too okay and then in regard to last year I'd like you had said miss buck everybody got the everyone like all teachers got the increase and now we're going more towards what do see it intended last last year when that happened as far as not everyone would get that five percent and there was like only certain groups and I remember at the time understandably so a lot of employees were upset because people were being excluded and that was one of the big issues that everyone should be included so how are we feeling though about now you're saying kind of excluding certain groups and not everyone will get that increase like where's where was that decision making where was that what was the thought process behind that so I can speak to that and then mr.
Hicks if you want to add to that um there was in the beginning of our process the desire was to have everyone get the same raise not even just teachers but all employees of the district but as we looked at budget and we that reality what what can we do in reality and when we weigh it and what's sustainable as we move forward so it it didn't seem that we would be able to do that to give a five percent to all employees across the district and so when we looked at a different groups that wouldn't be able to get 5 percent 3 percent seemed more equitable to other groups and then let's we looked at will it the teacher so we did include some people in there that aren't that do not meet the definition based on the state but we only so we excluded people that are not on an actual teacher contract so if they're on a contract where they're already making a higher salary than a teacher would be making then they weren't included in the five percent they got the 3 percent so what would be some examples of people that are not going to be included this year in that extra increase in the 2 and a 2 percent of additional like a school psychologist is an example because they're not on a teacher contract um they're not eligible for 301 in regards to that our school nurses are not on it they're all right there eligible for 301 and they don't get the equivalent from the district but anybody that's already in a classroom in an instructional role even if they're not actually the teacher on the assigned teacher that class but if they're if they would have gotten it last year and they're in the classroom with students and again in that more of an instructional role are they still getting that if they're an instructional role and they are paid on that yet they will be getting it yes madam president if I could also add one of the complications this year throughout the state of Arizona is that the 20 by 2020 assumed that there would be a 10% increase the first year a 5% increase than a 5% increase what many districts across the state are frustrated with is that the 5% and then the additional 5% is not cumulative it was based on the base salaries from 2016-17 so while districts across the state are taking on that additional burden by saying we are going to pay you 5 on the 10% increase that you got last year we're adding 5% of that not on your 1617 salary so districts have to come up with the difference in that the state is funding us the 20 by 20 formula on their definition of 10% and 5% 5% and on their definition of what a teacher is so Dysart and other districts are trying to close that that gap that exists but in reality were not being funded for the things that we're hoping to do and trying to do we're taking those friends funds from other sources but in the end we're supplementing what the the budget is not covering from the state okay okay thank you and then in regard to the special ed pilot programs were there any other was there any other discussion regarding special ed teachers in regard to kind of compensating them for the fact that they do a lot of IEP writing and a lot of special meetings before after school it sounds like you're probably trying to capture that when you're looking at giving them some more time during the day to work on those things but were there any groups and was there any more discussion on other ways to provide that compensation other than through time off during the day madam president yeah this was a pretty robust discussion so we started out with money looking at the different issues we did want to get some data back so I think we were requested to how many specialty teachers I can't remember what was provided back but it was somewhat of a robust conversation and really it came down to is what we need to do is solve the problem which is a heavy workload and some of that IEP writing time and so there was I think two schools in the room that said well here's what we'd like to do and we're already starting to think about how to do something like this to solve that problem and we thought well that's great let's flush it out a little bit more create an actual pie program in me we could roll that out district-wide to actually help all special self-contained that meet that criteria to provide more time for them to do that so what I liked about this is we did spend a lot of time looking at what is the issue how can we solve it and what are all the different sources and I thought was this is probably a better one first to see if we could solve something with just some time in that sense of not costing us money from that standpoint and providing more support through these type of pilot programs and so that was the conversation it did happen and then that was I was in the employees idea is to give more time as opposed to because I know when I calculated it out it came to like maybe five dollars extra a day like multiplying out their stipend by how many days it's just so little compensation for all the extra they do so I'm glad that it was brought to the group because I think it's important I don't want to lose good staff because of the extra workload our special ed teachers are facing and if they feel comfortable you know with just the extra time you know then yeah but so I'm assuming that they were they were present obviously to represent their interest with that kind of moving back a second the employees that would not be eligible now for that extra compensation going back to that 5% were those individuals represented through the IBA process were they there to participate in the discussion the ones that aren't going to be receiving that extra pay the representation was listed so the DEA brings they're people that represent the teachers all of the certificated staff and so they gather that information and communicate out to their employee group so they I don't know if any of the people that were in the room serve in those roles but they were there representing that group kind of president if I could just clarify your question that you're asking if the employee or the future employees who would not be getting the increase because of their joining the district no I know no I the employee is that now like before everyone got the increase and now we're saying okay not everyone anymore just excluded did they have an opportunity to participate so just for clarification again each employee group has pre identified representatives and those are the ones who stayed together as the group throughout the entire process so that includes like the non I think it was sort of supportive staff the certified staff the administrative staff and classically it's dead last night services administrative um the classified representation so support staff and then there was a cabinet representation for different groups represented thank you and then the $5,000 MIPS money per school I know we have this later in the agenda but that would be irregardless of any bond election that that's just extra money that would go towards that each school Madam President members of the board it is MIPS money so it is restricted to M&O types so it's really for supplies or PD or training in that sense though it does have some restrictions so it couldn't replace a bond from that standpoint but yeah it would over even the override like that would still be they would still get that the five thousand even okay yeah two separate things this was a part of the IBA process and as we're cutting their budgets and capitals or anything we could do and they wanted to go back to the days when we allocated some MIPS money to them and so this is what is being recommended and what would again examples of the MIT's MIPS money what would that be used for supplies professional development training okay and then kind of along those same lines when you're talking about the transfer change or because of the you'd said that we were a little bit overspent what was that Madam President members of the board currently this year we have allocated out about six million dollars in capital funds and we're receiving about four million dollars so we're not overspent because we have reserves but we're burning down our reserves and so you can't burn your reserves forever because they continue to shrink as you burn them and so we were going to either have to make some change or hope that the district additional assistance full restoration happens really quick and so there was some need to start making some cuts we had to cut a little further because we switched and move some capital into the mo no budget but the extra spending was obviously I'm assuming on things that were driven by programming or needs I mean that's not like what how can if we you said we had we're spending six million we had enough for four Madam President members of the board we have a six million dollar capital budget right now that were allocated out to departments and everybody to spend some not sure I understand the question president okay thank you and then the reduction in capital why are we reducing our capital budget for school that's part of the budget process that we identified with how we're going to make the reductions and it was presented for a capital of school capital reductions can you I'm sorry maybe I'm just not following the reason why we're doing that the 15% reduction of school capital allocations is to cover so part of the process as we identified how much can we give for raises and the M&O side we were about a million dollars short and so we had to identify we either give less raises make cuts to programs or people or we transfer some capital into M&L and it is a permanent transfer so 975 because it's going for salaries it's not a one-time transfer over into M&O it's going to have to stay there and so you flexible we can move M&O to capital we can move capital damn enough so schools have the ability to make that change and so as we work through that process we identified we're not going to get there we're gonna have to transfer some capital it's very normal a lot of districts have done that when the recession cut and we got cut down to 15 percent of the actual allocation that we should be getting you know that's normally stayed in capital because you have so many like census and other requirements just to stay open it's really hard to and we we had to burn our reserves from that standpoint when it was so low and so as we were building next year's capital budget we had to work with the departments to take less and and have to tell us how they're going to spend that to make sure that they're able to provide next year the services for next year and part of that process was to reduce if we're reducing 1.8 million out of the department's we should reduce fifty thousand dollars out of schools I understand them there I understand what you're saying I guess my the only question that comes up is you know for looking at positions like we needed that extra money to fund some of these positions and increases but we're going up where we're gonna be discussing the possibility of a bond would is cutting from capital for already saying that we're so desperate for more capital money would we want to take more from that instead of you know maybe we just have to make decisions about adding physicians or yeah Madam President members of the board this is the balance when you're cut and not adequately funded you have to make choices and and all across the places and so this is the process we use to identify what is the best recommendation going forward and schools not immune wanted to chip in as well and it's a lot less it's only fifty thousand dollars because they don't get a huge allocation in that sense as opposed to cutting departments 1.8 million dollars but we do have to you know spend wisely and have a balanced budget in that sense and so that was part of the process thank you for the information any other board members have questions or comments I just have one well a couple I just well first I appreciate you sharing the info on the changes in the when the benefits become effective because that was my concern you know if we're trying to be competitive with other districts and kind of what their timetable is that was one of my concerns and so I think you addressed that with with what they have so I appreciate that my one question was when you were talking about shifting those those funds because I think a lot of times we hear that we can't shift funds and so when is it OK and when isn't it because you know it's always kind of my understanding or that we don't shift funds from one to the other Madam President members of the board we could transfer M&O to capital and capital to M&L those two you can we cannot there are illegal transfers you can't transfer M&O into title one or ITA so there's a lot of restrictions but when it comes to those two funds they're on the same page of the budget worksheet and you can see there's two lines in both columns we could move back and forth as much as possible anything we want okay so just this clarification to the public which are the ones that we cannot probably 70 different ones so the easy one that majority do is just Emma no to capital and capital - Emma no all the others auditor-general does have some guidelines of what is a legal transfer but it's very restrictive and how and what you can redo you can transfer some M&O to energy water and savings funds you could open transfer some M&O to the school opening fund you could so there are some by and large those are very infrequent and very small not used as frequently that by and large the majority of districts that there's any transferring going on it's between M&O and capital okay yeah I just want to make sure that we're clear on that because especially going out you know gonna be asking possibly for bonds and things like that that we're just very clear that people don't can't just say well why don't you just shift shift things over and around and you know knowing that it is a very complicated process yeah I have just a couple of quick questions actually the first one is thank you for putting that disclaimer in there regarding the additional considerations because of course we don't know what's going to happen with budget as far as the exempt staff roll over to October 31st what's the maximum per year that they can carry over well they it depends upon what work calendar they're on that how many days they're given in the first place so if you we are not limiting them to carrying it over because if they don't use it by the 31st it expires and it doesn't accrue past a year you can never use more than you've been given within a year anyway so if you're given 15 days you couldn't use more than 15 but this allows them to use it if they weren't able to use it during the course of the year because of business they could use it before October 31st but after October 31st it expires and then they'd have their 15 days for the 1920 school year all right and as far as the arts lead is that a per school or is that just one for the district it would be one district lead one visit district leader okay and one of the questions you had already answered in regards to the prop 206 as far as estimating how much it would cost okay and how healthy are our reserves Madam President members of the board as you know or may or may not know when we rolled over so we rolled over into this year about nine point six million dollars it's going to be less when we were all over for next year we did have a little like you just saw a budget revision that we reduced a few hundred thousand dollars for a student decline on a hundred day and so I see as probably it's a guessing game right now it could be around nine million dollars now some of it we do roll forward our school budgets capital and M&O so if they don't spend it they roll forward so just because I say it could be around nine million doesn't mean we have nine million to spend or else now we're taking away from everybody we promised that you could roll forward your balances in that sense so there are some restrictions or it is somewhat committed in some of that our MIPS continues to be high that is what our dedication was for this social worker program that started the year about 5.6 and it's probably going to end over six probably closer to 6.8 million somewhere around there so that's growing we knew that was going to grow because the huge expenses are coming next year when we hire the social workers that probably we estimated this so workers would have fully funded out of MIPS for at least four to five years I think was our projections and then we'll have to make some decision if it's partial or start moving out and that other funds could be Emma know it could be others and also maybe the expenses aren't as high as what we projected so there's lots that could happen in that the other funds are mainly cash funds that probably all is expected though the mips is the biggest one that we look at indirect cost is the next that has been used so that's probably down to less than a million but our balances are decent our capital is the one that was probably over ten million a few years ago and is now down to two million and so capital is one of the biggest concerns we're hoping that the governor and the legislature maybe restore district additional assistance a little sooner we could be up to five point two more at two five point two million for next year we should be getting over 11 million so we're still cut dramatically in capital and that's nice and so we're hoping for a full restoration as soon as possible I think the House DS had it going up another hundred and forty million dollars so that would provide another one point follow-up for 1.5 million dollars to us that was not planned for in this sense and so if that happened that would be great we wouldn't be cutting maybe we could come to the plan for the to not cut the school's capital budget in that sense but that will all be determined of an actual budget that's being passed well that would be good because that needs to be restrained used to be restored some time ago so mr.
Hicks could you give an estimate of how much capital funds we have not received that should have been per the formula Madam President members of the board dr. callous I think since the recession has hit we've probably been cut about eighty million dollars when the full by the time we get fully restored it will be about 95 million dollars they'd have been nearly a hundred million dollars and that's just capital that is not the mo no side it's not cutting full-day kindergarten or any of those others that is just a district additional assistance and a building renewal fund that we used to receive just those two funds how much has been cut and Madam President members of the board even though yes this is a school capital cut we did increase their flexibility that they're able to roll over their balances and that is something in the past they weren't allowed to do if they didn't spend it they lost it we're no longer sweeping we're letting them continue and may and roll it over to hope mitigate some of these changes a little bit last question or less comment was for miss buck you are correct it's it is very difficult to start someone's benefits if they start on the 29th or the 30th they have a start on the 1st so by having that moving the start of their benefits date is a very good idea it's chaos it's created some it's created a lot I'm sure ok thank you that's all I had thank you extra moved to action and discussion items item one recommendation to approve 2018-2019 revised expenditure budget dr.
callous madam president members of the board and members of cabinet the next several items will be based on information that the board has received from mr. Hicks over the near recent past and mr. Hicks will introduced this first item Madam President members of the board as said during the public hearing there's nothing else for me to say as we're revising this year budget the only thing that I forgot to say is remember I don't do the work on this there's a team of people or there's a Mary Dowell Lisa Ava everybody else puts in a lot of time and effort to make sure that we're all doing everything great and accurate and so just want to thank them for all their hard work in this as do we thank you thank you anybody want to make a motion I move the governing board approved the 2018 through 2019 revised expenditure budget second motion made by Jennifer Tanner second by Tracy Sawyer single please cast your votes it's to move to j2 recommendation to approve resolution ordering and calling for a bond election to be held in and four dice at unified school district number 89 the 19 declare the deadline for submitting arguments for and against the election as rise expenditures necessary to order notice and administer of the election dr.
Paul's thank you madam president members of the board and members of cabinet the last board meeting the governing board received information about a proposed bond initiative and mr. Hicks will continue that discussion this evening madam president members of the board thank you very much so I'm not going to go through the whole presentation again but I did attach it to this agenda item for the public or for anybody that would like to see what the basis of the recommendation was and as you remember from last week's presentation there is a decision so there are two resolutions attached to this one is that the hundred and 25 million and one is at the hundred and fifty two million and that is the second elementary school that the board would have to decide and not just decide that when a motion is made if the dollar amount can please be identified so that we make sure that the public and that our documents are square with exactly what we're requesting and so I think I did provide the board a little bit more information on the update this last week so they could have a little bit more information of questions that were asked of me and so I provided that information and really just stand for any questions that you have any additional questions that you have we do have our attorney James Gill and Mr Bryan Lumbergh are financial advisors here also they could help with any technical questions as well Madame president I could just insert a comment that whereas the district is currently at about a 90 to 100 million dollar capital dollar deficit and also where as it is our obligation to provide the best education for our students and for our communities it is the recommendation of administration that the board approve a bond election initiative I would also with regards to the elementary school question if the demographics continue to trend in the way that they are we are seeing growth in areas that will need additional capacity the challenge with the current school facilities board formula is that it takes into consideration the square footage of the entire district and other districts have encountered the same challenge such as castel where there are declining enrollments in one area and splitting of the seams enrollments in other areas and where it would seem reasonable that you take the entire square footage of the district it is not reasonable to transport students from one end of the district to the other on a daily basis so as we keep up with the growth in particular areas there's a recommendation to approve the two elementary schools if the demographics don't hold true as far as the growth patterns then we don't build it and those funds are not expended there's no obligation that just because it's approved that we have to build it just because we would continue to monitor growth patterns and make judicious decisions on where the funds would be best spent within the categories that have been presented to the board Madam President members of the board if I could also just clarify because I think after my last presentation I got a few questions from a few people regarding the high school and and the elementary just it's a little confusing saying we're asking for high school and and in elementary which don't align the high school and conversation was that the demographics and the projections within the window we were looking does not show a need for a high school I think there was about a 600 student growth projection in high school students but as dr.
kelas was just alluding to the SP calculation of requiring 20% over within a period of time we were worried about her the committee was worried about what if we miss and what if the economy continues to take off and we miss and there was a 1200 kids and we can't handle that within our high school that would actually potentially trip us over it's over 15 1,600 projected that we would go over capacity by the 20% and maybe even get partial funding from the SFB one of the thoughts was well maybe if we bought the land because we do not have land for a high school we do have pieces of land for an elementary school so we do not need the land for an elementary because we already own that but we do not own land for a high school and the thought was if we bought the land with a bond it would probably position us especially if the SFA if we tripped and got SFP funding if the growth was so hyper then we would already have the land it would help the process along even if it's just partially funded and then the thought was if we're wrong and that we don't it is a taxpayer asset at one time if the voters decided to sell that piece of property it go the money goes back to the voters so it goes to buy down their tax rate so much like this would go the voting and and if the voters approved it it would increase their taxes when we sell the land it would provide assets that would go to buy down their tax rate and so really it was looked at is it's a great position to be in to maybe buy the land and possess in position that we know where the high school would go and then see if the growth is there within the next six years if not then we're projected out going forward in that sense and position us in a good position and then the elementary as I mentioned we already have the land for that Elementary so what is what his administration recommended between the two the 125 5 and the 152 5 and the president the administration would be recommending the two Elementary School's which would put it at the 150 plus and is that also we had talked the previous meeting regarding renovations to the pac-10 just because we're moving into making arts such a big focus of our district and doing more with that building so that would include that would fall into the renovations piece of the language Madame president yes I believe that's a 2.7 million upgrade and the intent with that is we have a very large High School Auditorium and we would like to make it a large community professional venue for professional touring groups to be able to perform in that that venue it would provide revenue for the district and it would definitely improve our community with greater arts opportunities but then I know we had talked about st.
the safety pieces and the improvements to just schools to improve safety as needed and maybe you're you're putting that under the renovation piece but I thought there was going to be benefit to actually listing that on the ballot so because people can identify with that more and that might be you know make them more inclined to support something if they can actually relate to what that means and knowing that it's going to go towards something that you know valuable for students Madam President members of the board we can't control the ballot that is very statutorily controlled the process was that this is doesn't come out of the major capital facilities for safety and security that's coming out of each schools allocation so each school is having a requirement that as they're getting allocation for upgrades to their building and their site that there's a safety safety and security component within it and as we talked about we have two experts I would say with miss winter Stein and mr.
croto on staff for next year that we would make sure that they're part of analyzing what the requirements are to ensure a very safe and secure environment and so that would be part of the components and then it was also if you remember also a ten percent requirement spent on technology as well within that site allocation so are you saying though that as far as like what you have here the sample ballot and the question number and it listed like money for the following purposes are you saying that we don't have control over that on the sample ballot no on the voter information pamphlet yes and so some of those appendix we could still work on some of those changes so I'm scanning it going to right now oh I see what you're saying yes yes we do have a little bit of the following purposes we could look at making a change to ink a little bit I'd probably have to rely on mr.
Lumbergh and mr. Gale to make sure that we're not at creating some advantage of making sure we're trying to influence voters to advocate for it so we would work with them to make sure that their sign-off on the language we and I'm not saying like fluff it up I'm just saying people know what school safety means nowadays and I think if they see improving school safety or however you word it they're gonna identify with that more so than maybe just providing utilities you know capital items necessary they're like what is somebody like what's that school safety it's like wow turn your news on and you're gonna see like what else can we do to make our students safe so that was my only piece of feedback and I don't even know if I have any say in that but as my opinion and as just as a voter identification also our obligation to inform their vote the voters on what it is that the main is going to be spent on and we fully intend to be very factual and identifying specifically as possible at each school site what the the monies will be used for so if each school signature program committee identifies their capital needs their technology needs and their safety needs those details would be communicated to their communities and would be part of the information that's provided publicly right but do you see what I'm saying as far as like if not everyone goes to those meetings or may not get those little pieces of information from community and meetings but if they all get this you know it's question number on their ballot you know talking about paying for legal and financial and other costs or architectural design they might quickly dismiss if they haven't been as involved with our district they might think I'm not paying for that but I'll pay for students to be safe you know and that's where we would access our consultants to make sure that it's legal but that we provide as much information as possible thank you any questions from comments um I do have one and it's I'm sorry I'm picky I just want to make sure that whichever one we vote on if we vote on it just some this is gonna be cleaned up for spelling Corrections all right so we've got two different versions of Superintendent in there so I'm sorry I apologize okay no looking at any other comments or questions I'm just kind of going back to what you were saying earlier about the safety in looking at the presentation at our last board meeting I got really happy and excited when I saw EMS on the presentation because I interpreted that as safety emergency you know management safety or something like that so I was really excited that we were gonna have a consistent program across the board throughout our district where we could communicate with each other for safety issues and mr.
Hicks explained that that has nothing to do with it that's energy but I think that the use of acronyms in any kind of public documents and pamphlets it's really important not to have to do that and just really spell it out because obviously emergencies and energy is very different matter president stands one that's very wise counsel and let me appreciate what I've just been talking with the board my opinion as I think especially after hearing mr. Hicks review the budget and know that we're you know making cuts to capital already and knowing I mean we've all been in our school buildings and you know the state of our buildings and our technology I really think a bond is necessary and I hope you all share Mike my feelings regarding that so if there are there any other questions or should I make a motion well my only concern is that with the SFB because of the square footage of the district and I just you know having served on the SFB I don't want them to look at both I start has all this capacity so no they don't need it so we're not going to sign off on it so I just don't want to get caught in a catch if the voters approve it and SFB comes back and says no you've got enough capacity Madam President members of the board for k-8 we would not come close to getting capacity in that sense because the totality of where schools are and how full and having to be 20% over capacity at all schools before that's not possible the high school is where it's could be and that's really depending on how hyper-growth there is that could impact so the bond would not have a negative impact in fact it might help speed up the process if we purchase the high school and that would speed up the process if we do especially the governor's budget is to no longer look at you have to be 20% over capacity in the current year its projected within three years and so he's looking at hey you don't have to be overcapacity 20% then you give yourself a little buffer with some planning in that sense this would help in that sense and so the bond would actually assist when it comes to that sense I would just add as you saw we revised our budget to increase for some sfb projects we continued that does not mean that we don't submit for building renewal grants just because we have a bond we have some pre-approvals going on with some roofs being replaced even though roofs were in the major capital facilities in some areas as they qualify and and are available we will continue to submit to the school facilities board for reimbursements and those eligible projects the difficulty is their criteria is that it really has to fail and sometimes we want to replace something if it has a 20 year life cycle and we're in year 19 and we've been replacing it we don't want to wait for it to fail and caused an interruption to the education environment we want to try to replace it as much as possible and there's some times it's very difficult and things can take months and months and months or a year or two years with them we will evaluate that on every single one but we will not stop submitting to the school facilities board we continue to do that and look for any opportunity for the state to help us with our facilities it seems like it's gotten a little bit longer to get in an editorial comment mr.
Hicks - if we don't is there really any harm and going out for the larger bond because we just don't need we we just won't use all of it if we don't need it right um Madam President members of the board there may be no actual harm because yes before we sell bonds we have to disclose to the board before you approve to sell the bonds what are we using that for and so we'll say hey this is for an elementary or this is for the site if it comes to the point and we don't need it we would not sell those bonds so there's no increase in taxes that would be borne by the taxpayers to not fund anything the only concern would be are you asking for something you don't need although we show that that demand that wheel it's not an if it's a when kind of thing so so I don't think there's any actual cost in that okay all right with that I move the governing board adopt a resolution ordering and calling a special bond election in the amount of one hundred and fifty two point five million and authorized expenditures necessary to order notice and administer the election second motion made by Christine Pritchard seconded by Jennifer Tanner please cast your votes motion carries next we move to action item three recommendation to approve resolution ordering and calling special maintenance and operation budget override election to be held in and for Dysart Unified School District number 89 on November 5th 2019 declared a deadline for submitting arguments for and against the election as August 9th 2019 at 5 p.m.
and authorized expenditures necessary to order notice and administer the election dr. callous thank you madam president members of the board and members of cabinet also at our previous board meeting information was presented to the board regarding the bond committee's recommendation to also include an MNO override in the November election as a voter initiative mr. Hicks will also continue the conversation on this item Madam President members of the board superintendent dr. callous colleagues community so as dr. callous just stated there this was a addition to our bond committee that got together looking at as they tried to assess everything was and desire to be as efficient with our funds as possible knowing that we'll be paying for an election why pay for an election twice and wastes precious dollars if we're going to ask might as well go out for an Emma Nova right at the same time there is some benefits to that is that going out a year early is a continuation which means that there's no reduction in the following year so it does not say that it's an increase because it's not going down the following year it's just maintaining and continuing that overwrite so it does have a little positive in that sense also you could see attached to this agenda item in the body there is what was stated at the what we currently have for our over right now that 15% that's generating about 20 million dollars looking at the language in there it does provide a lot of flexibility and meets our needs and so I don't see the need right now and haven't heard the need to make any changes although we can make changes if the board so desires and then just also on a further note part of for a bond election the governing board is not permitted to write a pro statement or a for statement for it for an override it is required and so that is not attached to this agenda so at the next meeting we would bring back an agenda item for the governing board to craft we would start it to help you out along but the next meeting would have a pro statement for the override in that sense and so just continuing everything as is 15 percent at 20 million but this override technically we wouldn't we wouldn't necessarily have to act on this we have another full year before we have to start reducing it right Madam President members of boards you're correct we do not have to go in 19 but we would then have to go in 20 November 2020 and so the thought that the committee thought of was if already paying for an election for the bond we might as well add another question does not add another hundred thousand dollars pay for the election and so this actually saves us some money in 2020 if it passes in 2019 we just saved money because we were paying for an election anyway with the bond and I know last time I had said almost exactly that like well we might as well cause it's not you know but the more I and and help me with this and the governing board I definitely you know I want to hear from you all too as far as what you think of my thought process on it I guess but I know we so need our bond with our buildings and technology like that is so incredibly important and then after learning tonight that we're reducing our capital budgets in the schools already it's I've worried that being says nothing that we have in place right now is going to be cut next year we still have opportunity to go out for a bond or a own override I just I hesitate having both the bond n override on only because I worry that the voters will not want to pass both and since the priority is the bond I'm thinking personally because the ad like I said the other things remain untouched for now it's a risk that I worry about and so that's kind of my thought I know that mr.
Hicks you provided information about the percentages of you know when does school districts go out for both you know that good you know how the likelihood of the both passing course not and I could have missed it but I didn't did we have any information that was specific to Dysart historically if we have ever had both on the same time as far as looking at just our demographic Madam President members of the board that was not provided because I'm not aware of whenever we've asked for both questions at the same time did we have we ever I don't think we've ever has not in memory history so we don't know well the last time we went out for a bond to 1386 estaban 2006 was the last successful passage of a bond of a bond and Madam President members of the board was approved and was successful and we were selling and using it but if you remember in 2009 the recession hit that took down assessed valuation so we did not sell the full authorization of that I think that was a hundred and sixty million dollars and so I think we left about thirty two million dollars on the table so we sold about for about a hundred and twenty eight million is what we actually sold left 33 million on the table which good and bad a lot of it was for growth and for we were adding and augmenting all the school facilities board with bond money and when the recession hit that growth stops so not all of it was a hundred percent needed at the time so it wasn't horrible but we did lose that ability to sell those 32 million dollars with regard to the dual question I don't think anybody remembers when that has ever happened I mean I understand your concern too about the you know the passage of both my my concerns is like something that mr.
Hicks had brought up to tonight just in the fact that the the verbage as far as with the override would be a continuation rather an increase and I think sometimes if we waited on that that once there's verbage of an increase in tax payments that's when I feel like people have a harder time accepting rather than a continuation it's a continuation something that they're already used to but then once you say an increase I think that's when things can really start become more difficult yeah because I see that side of it too but then again we know our district always I don't remember the margin the last time but I know most times we've like when we pass our overrides and things it's like barely Madam President just for clarification mr. Lumbergh did provide information that we did have a Capitol override and a bond in 2002 and they both passed that was 17 years ago and the community looks a lot different now but so thank you very much for that clarification right so you said I mean like some it's like in recent years we have a hard time passing or it's not a slam-dunk we're not a slam-dunk district when it comes to that in fact we've lost over bites before unfortunately so again it's just more like how much do we want to risk not maybe not getting our bond madam president members of board I think that the landscape has changed and there are no slam dunks anymore I think there was across the valley across the state there was just some that would go out and always pass and a lot of that would pass automatically started failing and started it used to be people thought that it was just a referendum on the school district and if everything's great everything's great but economics get in the way and the recession really made everybody rethink that we really need that and honestly at our committee we talked about the saturation of how many times you go to the ballot we talk today at our ASBO meeting of although sometimes we're getting money it's not new money it's just replacing old money but we're asking you know prop 1 2 3 actually didn't have all new money half of it went to replace existing money that just went away and so people think well didn't you just get all that money and all that money and they don't understand that's just a continuation that's just keeping funding it's not actual additional funding all the time and so there does create voter confusion out there as well too and so there's just a lot out there and hopefully will do a good job or the pack does whatever job it takes we'll do a good job of getting factual information out to all schools and out as much as possible and accept any invitation to talk and communicate what the purpose is and why we need it we won't advocate for the passage of it because that's illegal using our resources to do that but we will communicate why as much as possible on to do we know though how much because it was a minimal cost right with the override as far as if since the current one is in place and there's no dire need to go out for early if if we did go out for it next year in 2020 what would the cost really be though if the taxpayers looking and saying wow this is gonna be a new you know new it but really wasn't that it's it's it's like a Starbucks I mean then we figure it out one time it's like very low I'm sorry madam president I thought you're saying the cost of the election the continuation there's no cost cuz it's just continuing the tax case what it is if it was projected to we wait until 2020 which member 2020 also has a very crowded ballot because you'll have a presidential you'll have Senate you'll have legislative you'll probably have County City and everything so you'll have a very crowded ballot you won't have it all to yourself and so at that time it would be projected to go down by 6.7 million roughly that will have to identify and plan for that if it doesn't pass we'll have to make those cuts and so the thought would be then we could identify the cost of us yeah normally is roughly around very minimal $5 a month but we would do the same factual calculations then as we would for this November you know madam president I tend to agree with mrs.
Stanner that putting we are being almost like Pro proactive and putting the continuation on the ballot you and with our technology and our students going without but at that point then we would have 2020 to do it and just like you said it's gonna be it's gonna be a crowded ballot so I would rather go ahead and do it now and if not then it gets ramped up by if it doesn't pass miss Densmore would you have thoughts regarding what are the cost differences between going out at normal election time versus a special election are there cost differences Madam President members of the board are you talking the actual cost of the election how much paper voters would be printed on the ballot process the difficulties yes there are different costs so this could be an all-male in ballot I think that is what I've heard rumored it all depends on what other jurisdictions would like to join in November 2009 teen I don't know I think it might be an all-male in yes I'm seeing lots of heads shaking yes so all mail-in is a little bit cheaper but at the same time the following November would probably we'd be splitting the cost of the ballot in that sense so they are different costs it's hard to project because you also then if we're continued to grow we pay on a per voter how many eligible voters do we have we have to pay a dollar something for that voter and so maybe it's a dollar ten versus a dollar thirty so the cost per voter could be but maybe we have more voters but maybe we're also sharing the ballot and they share the cost of the printing of the ballot I need to get into the weeds of everything I normally just say roughly a hundred one hundred and fifty thousand dollars is the cost of the election so that if having them both at the same time we would save roughly a hundred thousand dollars maybe a little more I know I did I see benefits of you know it either way but I I just see more benefit as far as verbage on a on you know the information about you know a continuation it's not get a change anybody's thing rather than voting yes or no when the packs out explaining it it's all at one time all that information is given and I can also see like if we waited on the override how that could also be detrimental to us because then people would say well last year we voted for this bond why are we doing this you know why are we doing this again so I mean it could it could also work against us by waiting as well for the overrides sake so have you received any comments from the madam president regarding this and the continuation I mean I talked with staff members all the time some of them see board some of them we give updates on what's happening at the board level and so there's a heightened sense around this have I heard enough comments one way or the other no right now it's probably just to wait and see and see what the board is going to do from that standpoint I do wish we had more time to kind of process that I know last time it was had the information but now we're back to make a decision right now about it but because I know there was a lot of time that went into gathering all the information it's just I see both sides I'll go ahead and make a motion um are there any other moves are we good moving for and we have to vote on this piece tonight Madam President members of the board technically we don't have to notify a couple County elections until the first week in June maybe like the 8th or something so this could actually wait until the next board meeting if you would like more time we do have one more board meeting we could--we I know the bond was more pressing correct as far as the timing of passing that but the override isn't so much for the week yes madam president as long as it's on the next board agenda we'd be fine we could potentially vote on one of these today on just the bond tonight Madam President I guess my question would be what additional information would you need before the next meeting to be able to make a decision like why would we need to wait unless you were getting more additional information yeah I want to get more additional information but regarding what our administration regarding community impacts probably more on just what it would mean to voters as far as like but either way we have to vote on it whether it's so now so the troops had like five months and I'm just one another week we've got we've had this like one thing was what additional information like is there something missing that you wanted to see like what is it specifically is it that that's all I'm asking is what you've if there's something you feel is missing that would have more of an impact in a decision on this I just felt like I want more time to consider to consider it in general I feel like I'm on the spot I've had it like a week and arrest since one meeting and at that time I thought yeah let's move forward because we don't have to pay again for another election might as well go out more bang for your buck and then I got to thinking okay you we really need the bond and then tonight seeing okay we're already cutting capital by 15% as it is so that means the bond is even more dire I mean as far as getting that passed and I worry about putting that in jeopardy if it was an issue of our override was due for renewal and if it didn't pass you know and we'd be looking at cuts to staff and and programming then I'd say we're just gonna have to go for it and take our chances because I don't want detrimental effects to our staff or students or programs either but our override right now is safe like no one's getting cut no programs are being lost an extra two weeks unless unless there's a reason that you all can prove you know provide that says we absolutely have to move forward now but mr.