I Hm. I hope I'm not crossing the line then if I am, you guys let me know, but I think with the language given right now, it's gives the PAC great opportunity to teach and use this as an educative space on letting our community know what each thing means and maybe that's a conversation we can have with the PAC when this comes up that we want our voters to actually know what this stuff means. Uh that's a another thing it So, we're not really worried about changing the language. That could be another avenue. And and word count is a factor, too. So, I'm not saying you can't you can't write at a lower reading level with a small word count, but one of the things that tends to happen is a lot of the the vocabulary that's in here that's a little more complex, it's more complex cuz it captures a more complicated item.
Indeed it does. But, if you were going to go out on our current traject- trajectory, if we didn't make any significant adjustments in a certain area in certain areas, if you went out to 31, 32, 33, what would be the consequence of uh just staying on the path we're on right now? What would be the consequence of staying on the path we're on right now? >> blue that red line went below the uh the blue like so. Fund balance goes below. I know you said paydays. Could you just go into that a little bit? Cuz you lived through a period of that time. Yeah. Yeah. Um I don't recall the year off the top of my head, but maybe 7 years ago uh we were in that state where we had to do what were called tax anticipation warrants because we had essentially we get paid the vast majority we saw of our revenues comes from local funds, and those only come in in May, June, and August, September.
And so, if you were to take it down to say a fourth-grade reading level, you might need eight words to replace two words and that becomes I'm I'm I'm try- not making an excuse. >> lower the reading level though, what what would they are they really going to trust us with this, you know, That is a very interesting perspective and point, right? Cuz this is written by our governing board, so it also reflects the board's writing, right? Yeah, um and I just want um the board also to notice that early childhood programs including full-day kindergarten, I think it's the first time we've had language in early childhood programs. So, that's that's awesome that we're thinking about that and I think that's been great advocacy work through this board on the direction that we want our district to be in. So, that's a big off- I I just think that's great.
So, essentially, while we do get money from the feds and from the state that come in on a regular basis, it's pretty small. And um when we get into like this month right now, like March and April, we're we've essentially spent all the money that's come in in the prior year, and we're waiting for that new money to come in so that we can continue to pay our bills. And in the past, for as far as I can tell looking back at records, maybe more than 30 years, maybe more than 40 years, our finances were such that that's exactly what we had to do. It's a kind of a payday loan, a tax anticipation warrant that goes and says, "I'm going to borrow money and I'm going to pay interest like money like like a credit card and I'm going to pay more back than I'm I'm buying, but um I'm going to pledge back to you my taxes.
So, I appreciate that. And I do think Oh, sorry. >> Sorry, I was just going to say I would I encourage those who have the power to fund full-day kindergarten to fully fund it so that way we have a little more money we can flex into other early child- Sorry, I couldn't resist the opportunity. I Yes, and I would say um also uh there's intentionality in both of the pro- the arguments of pro statements with the bulleted content. I think that's what's uh the focal point um and that really drills it down to what the intent and is of what these dollars will cover. This is again, um we come back to the board annually and report back uh what we spent those dollars on and we align with the voter pamphlet. So, when you have these bullet point items, that is what's called out in the pamphlet and that's where the um the details of the pamphlet lie.
The very first thing I'm going to do when these taxes come in is I'm going to pay this loan back." And it requires a a lot of some administration and and you know, obviously costs in terms of interest, but it's not a situation that you want to be in. Worse is that, you know, right now we've been able to invest some of this money and we've been in invested in some cases for more than a year and in some cases up to maybe a year and a half, 18 months. And when we do that, we put them in CDs, we know we're going to get that money back and it earns interest and that interest then we can put to work on other things that we need. Whereas here, where we have the complete opposite scenario, where if we spend below that red line, we're not earning hardly any interest.
So, the statement I think is what the statement is. >> Bullet are above um expansion fleet support is not something everybody's going to quite understand. And I'm not trying to like I'm just being like real right now. And I think about, you know, working with adults that have a lower reading level on a daily basis. Like if I were to give this to some of my clients, they're not going to know what the hell it's talking about. You know, if I'm just going to be real with you. And and as Mr. Man stated, I You just said transportation. I think that's too broad. >> Yeah. Um But this is and just to be clear, this is the statement. It's not what goes in the actual language on the ballot, which is what we're held to the language on the ballot, not the support statement. That's what I'm getting at, right?
We're spending money on interests because we're borrowing and it's just not a situ- good situation to be in. It means you're living beyond your means. And worse, you know, who knows what the future economy looks like, we won't have the ability to weather any volatility at all. That was my question. So, in 2030, you know, to use your analogy, we're living paycheck to paycheck. If the roof goes or the furnace died or the transmission goes out in the car, like what I know that's a personal example, but like it's to me it's like, well, you got to put it on the credit card then, right? Yeah. So, you'd have to you'd be compelled in those instances to borrow money. Uh you sometimes on an emergency basis and usually at a higher premium so that you can get that work done. And now you're pledging money in future years to paying that debt back and limiting your options to deal with real issues, which are student needs.
Yeah. This is where we can be a little more flexible with what >> Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah, it just has to be factual. It can't be opinion, whereas the PAC can speak to opinion. Mhm. Yeah. Um question, um sunder uh access to or sorry, um would would like exceptional student services will this funding be allowed to be used for exceptional student services or or sped? Is that something What I What I'm thinking is also like it is a an increasing number of students are being um I guess not not targeted, but you know, we're we're we're seeing a lot more students come up with special needs. It is a big thing for parents when they're looking for school to to find um a school that, you know, can work with their students with special needs. Anyways, I'm just thinking that can we put that language in there somewhere as is as the funds being able to support in addition to like, you know, where we have um full-day kindergarten early childhood Oh, for the All right, I wasn't sure which one.
Would our tier change uh so the question is more on uh if the we're down this path um would we be eligible for more state and federal funding? As we get into a different financial circumstance. Unfortunately, no, that's not how they calculate it. They calculate it based off of essentially what you spend on a on a per student basis and how much tax revenue you can generate for for your school district. And so because of our e- equalized assessed value or the value of all of the homes in our school district is is high as it is we have the local resources to pay for it ourselves. And even if let's say for example we fell into tier three so I I think last I recall our adequacy percentage is 106. So we have 6% more than 100% adequacy. When you get below 100% adequacy you're in tier three.
Yeah. Um so these are for all students and it's there it is. Yeah. for support There it goes. Yeah, support for special needs students. Right right. So one of the things >> for special needs classroom that we get guided on is to try to create to make it as broad as possible so we don't box ourselves as needs shift and change. So let's say, I know this is going to blow people's minds. Let's say the federal government didn't fund only 40% of the special education funding required to comply with the rules and laws that they've set around special education and they funded 100%. We wouldn't want to limit ourselves in any way to that. And so the way the language is currently constructed is to be broad to all students so that way where there is need to provide resources and supports to special education.
But even tier three doesn't get that much more than tier four. So tier three and tier four combined is approximately 1% of evidence-based funding. So even if we fell down a tier it doesn't change anything for us materially. If we fell to tier two yeah, you you you would you would get some more money. But uh tier one gets kind of a double dose of money for tier one and tier two. The way that funding formula works. It's pretty complicated. But if you'd like to learn more about that formula I'd happen to be happy to spend some time work through the mechanics with you, but it is it's pretty complex. It's all relative. 26 factors, right? 20 26 points of data that comprises what a district's composition looks like. So, you know, one of the other factors is they'll look at your SE low SES rates.
I mean, our all of our teachers and staff including our special education teachers are partially funded out of the M&O budget or out of the M&O override. And when we talk about the resources through the district additional assistance override, a lot of the equipment and resources that are required in special education are funded through through that funding source as well. So these do apply to special education. We're just not limiting it or Right. I mean, I don't think putting the words up there would limit it, but it might attract some people to be like Oh, yeah. >> It would limit it though. So if you just say, for example, the way that I understand this and please correct me if I'm wrong. Um you know, an early childhood program could be specified to our special education department. That's how those dollars could be swayed into that.
Um And what's tricky about it, too, is that it's all relative wealth. And so, it's not just how much money Batavia has, it's how much Batavia has compared to Geneva, St. Charles. And as every school changes, all the schools change relative to each other. So, it's a very challenging formula forecast what's going to happen in the future. My colleagues gripe about Chicago because when their tier tier status changed, they're the big gorilla. They received massive amounts of money. When they went from tier one to tier two, things changed pretty dramatically. And then they fell from tier two to back to tier one. And so, they're entitled to a lot larger slice of the pie, and it changes what everybody else gets as a result. Any other questions I can answer for you? I have one more question. Do you have something wrong? No, please. I was going to say, so thank you for this.
If you specifically say special education and let's say something happens or I I don't know what happens, we could only use those dollars for that specific special education. With this language flexibility, it gives us an opportunity to do physical education in the special education space, right? But then that becomes more of a I would say operational district of how we're supporting those spaces and those can be deeper conversations, but for the most part they do have to be broad because they do hold us accountable to what we're saying. So it would completely limited us just to that specific area. Early childhood programs could be birth to three, could be birth to five, five, it could be special education services. That is broad in enough language that gives us access to meet all those separate needs. But I mean, if those are still up there, I'm not saying replace it.
This is very concise. I remember when I started on the board, the documents were much longer and it's Well, I'm going to bring that. I'm going to bring you some more. >> That's coming. Okay, good. I saw your eyes light up when you said that's coming. I said, I know you like to dig in. But if you to the board and anyone paying attention to this meeting watching, uh one or two takeaways from your presentation, um what would they be? I know Mr. Arlando kind of stated one position, but if you could say like, "Hey, you review this These are the two key bullet points you should be aware of." Key bullet points? I I don't want to It does feel bleak. I don't want to scare you into thinking like, "Oh my gosh, we should, you know, start stuffing money under the mattresses and and hide" kind of thing.
I'm just [snorts] saying put it on there and I'm I'm I'm I'm looking at it as someone like reading through it. Like, okay, am I going to vote for this? Oh, okay. Okay, cool. Yeah. And if I if special ed is something that's near and dear to me, then that might sway me to vote yes. Also, if I'm in a a parent who happens to live in the district, my kids don't go to the district, but I read like, oh snap, they're going to put more money to sped. Yeah, I'm going to send my kid there. I'm looking at it through that that Couldn't couldn't that be put in an argument though? Like if you wanted to write an argument for, like that could be listed in there. Yeah, I know Yeah, I I'm just putting it up there cuz I know we Cuz this just has to be very 193 out of 200 on this one.
The reason why these forecasts are important is so that we can understand what the dynamics are and what the pressures are, and we can react to them. But this isn't fixed, it's not static, things can change. Um but, we do know that the state of Illinois has some pretty limited fiscal capabilities, and we are not in a position relative to other school districts in the state, where we're not first in line. We're almost last in line in terms of help from the state of Illinois. And the federal government's changing in terms of how what what their philosophies are in terms of support. And even if they did didn't change anything, it doesn't amount to a whole lot. What it really does it come down to is that, you know, our local property taxes are going to continue to bear the bulk of these costs, and we need to be really careful about where we invest those dollars.
Yeah, but what I'm talking about is like when you write in the pamphlet, like people that are for or against. >> Yeah, yeah, yeah, but this isn't argument essentially. I'm just I'm just saying Yeah, this is the four. That's what It has to hold more weight. I I would just suggest we need to remove something if we're going to add that cuz Vanessa's initial count is 193. We try not to run right up to 200 because sometimes the county's word count is different. So we try >> [laughter] >> I'm sorry. can't take any risk that something gets truncated cuz what they'll do is they'll truncate from the bottom. Yeah. If you don't make the requirements, they'll toss the whole thing. >> They'll toss the whole thing. It won't get in the pamphlet. >> But we have it reviewed by our attorneys before we turn it in.
We have some very serious capital needs that we need to address urgently. And we need to be diligent about that. But, we also have to take care of the needs of students. And but, we have to be cognizant of the fact that their needs shift over time, too. So, everything has to be, to some degree, adaptable, and we have to keep an eye on all these factors as we move forward. So, that isn't the one or two points, but this isn't some sort of future that's locked in place. We got to keep our close eye on it and understand all those dynamics so that the board can make the best decisions possible where where the resources need to go. Thank you. Anything else for anyone? Are you ready to move on? I'll take that as a yes, so thank you everyone for those reports. We are now on item nine, close session 9.1, enter close session pursuant to 5 ILCS 120/2C1 to discuss the appointment, discipline, performance, or dismissal of specific employees.