001Call to order this meeting of the Stoton Area School District Board of Education. Miss Dermo, will you call the role? >> Mr. Tambuan >> here. >> Miss Mia Croy >> here. >> Mr. Jim Moser excu is excused. Miss Don Garcia >> here. >> Mr. Zach Masa Myers is excused. Miss Lisa Pew >> here. Miss Allison Sorg >> here. >> Dr. Sharon Milin Bartlett >> here. >> Student rep. Michaela Becker >> here. >> And President Joe Patterson >> here. All right. Item number two is public comment. Are there any members of the public who want to give public comment this evening? All right. And there were no written public comment submitted. Okay. Then we will move on to item 2B, the legislative update. Uh the legislature will be quite busy this week. Uh both the Senate
002and the Assembly are having floor sessions. It'll be what is expected to be their last floor sessions of the year. Um and that's the time when they have to move they will vote as a full body to move bills forward to potentially get to the governor's desk. So the full Senate is meeting tomorrow, Tuesday the 18th. They have a lot of education bills on their calendar to vote on. Uh, one is allowing access to schools for federally chartered youth, chartered youth organizations. For instance, the scouts, boys and girls clubs, uh, boys and girls clubs. We've talked about that bill before. There's one requiring the WIAA open records law compliance. There's some changes to academic excellence scholarship regulations, uh, changing technical education grant regulations, and ending the governor's 400year veto. Um there's just a handful of
003those bills that have also passed in the assembly, which means that they if they pass in the Senate tomorrow, they will head to the governor's desk. Of those of interest that we've talked about is um we talked about this last time, the bill that would require parental notification of alleged sexual misconduct by a school staff member. And then there's another one around academic and career planning services provided to pupils and requiring the reporting of certain data on college uh costs and college outcomes. Um again, if those pass the Senate, they would go to the governor's desk. I do not know how he's expected to sign or not sign um either of those bills. The assembly is holding their floor session on Wednesday. Again, they're voting on a number of um K12 proposals, including related to
004school consolidation, the requirement of math screeners, um a teacher bill of rights, some dual enrollment regulation changes, bills related to accessing school buildings for um federal youth organizations and military recruiters, requiring the governor to enroll in a federal tax credit program for granting scholarships, and requiring sexual abuse prevention education. And that's a bill that we've also talked about before. A couple of bills that they're voting on that I wanted to highlight is um related to dual enrollment programs. Uh this I believe has bipartisan support. I'm I'm not sure on that. Um it would create the council on dual enrollment and transfer of post-secary course credits. It would require um school boards to provide information to parents and students on uh on the ability to apply to any dual enrollment program offered in Wisconsin. Uh there's
005uh two uh concerning bills that do not have any bipartisan support that brought out a lot of um parent and disability advocate bills rel related to um notification of parents if a pupil is removed from a classroom. Another one relating to a teacher's authority to manage the teacher's class um for disruptive or violent behavior. Um both of those bills were amended related to concerns brought up in the hearings. um disability advocates were really concerned about um that students with disabilities would be inordinately affected by this bill and could be um kicked out of classrooms for, you know, behaviors that maybe they were needing more support for in their IEPs. So, a lot of controversy with those bills that um I think are expected to pass on party line vote in the assembly tomorrow. No, again,
006no Democrats on that bill. Um the other bill I thought I would highlight tonight relating to mathematics assessments, achievement plans and interventions. The bill requires school boards uh to develop and implement a numerousy assessment plan under which numerousy screening assessments are administered to pupils in grades kindergarten to 8th grade um to identify kids who are not who are at risk for not meeting grade level mathematics. Um that bill has been amended. Um and the Senate has not heard anything on that bill. So that's still just in the assembly. I'm sure folks know that the federal government shutdown ended on November 12th. Um, it's expected that it'll still take some time for some of the unwinding of the shutdown, including getting Head Start programs back up and running and open, SNAP or food share benefits to
007be fully distributed to people who are eligible for that. Then also for programs and services at the federal US Department of Education to once again be fully operational. The last thing um I have on the list tonight is that the school boards association legislative agenda is approved. Um recommend taking a look at that. That determines how the school boards association will advocate and lobby for education interests in the coming year. Um their the basic tenants of their agenda are on local schoolboard authority. um opposing unfunded mandates, addressing staffing shortages, supporting um uh legislation that will uh incentivize and increase opportunities for um retaining and recruiting staff. Um shared services and consolidation, helping to make it easier and to remove obstacles and provide incentives for school districts to share and consolidate services where possible. uh they
008will be advocating around school safety, comprehensive school safety legislation, including permanent funding. And then they're in opposition to federal agency mandates that um disadvantage. All that I have that's it. That's all. Does anyone have any questions for Lisa? >> Alison? >> Yeah, the the enumerousy assessment plan. I mean it how is this different from what we already do with the testing that we have in place? >> Essentially the um legislature is looking to create like an act 20 for math. So okay essentially what they've done is taken >> the act 20 language and substituted mathematics or numeracy in for literacy. And that's kind of this the gist and why they've made some revisions to it. But essentially that's the that's been the um narrative coming out of of the capital at this point. What the
009legislature is trying to accomplish is have a parallel numeracy bill as they've done with literacy. >> Okay. Thank you. Yeah. >> Hey, so a question for D. Are there evidence-based numeracy screeners like there are for reading or literacy? >> It's been a been a minute, but yes, we do have we do have um screeners similar to what we do with literacy for numeracy um that we utilize within the district. But I Yeah. And I'm look looking to Kate and Kate's nine her heading in confirmation but to the details I would have to uh connect and get back to the board if you want more details. >> Let's just see what happens with this group. >> Okay, we will. >> Any other questions for Lisa? All right, then we will move on to item 2C workg
010groupoup reports. Climate and culture met since our last meeting. Yeah. So, we went over some policy issues that you will see later on the agenda. We also looked at um some metrics for belonging that move us a little bit beyond just the survey data and the um YRBS data. And Dan, I'm sorry. I looked for those, but I they weren't in the minutes, the ones we had decided on, and I couldn't find if there were notes anywhere else. >> So, I put that in in board docs under public comments. So, the um in addition to the YBS data, the ontrack indicators um looking at attendance. So the percentage of um students who have 90% attendance um or more um out of school suspensions, the castle standards competencies and then um we discussed at the high
011school level participation in one or more co-curriculars. >> Thank you. So those are the other metrics that we are proposing to look at um as indicators for belonging. >> Okay. Uh any questions for the work group? Lisa, >> what happens next with the adoption of these potential on track indicators for belonging? Vote on that. When does it come to the full board to say this is what we're going to look at? So, first, um, the work group asked me to mock up, um, so I'm going to work with Kelly and, um, Bob Johnson, who are on the workg group, to mock up what this would look like. And then once the work group is good with that, we would bring it to the full board for conversation and um, board adoption at that point. >>
012So, early 2026. >> Uh, could could be. It's right now we're right now I'm just this is all the data that um we have in different spots and I'm kind of building a dashboard built off the template that we use for our academic indicators and then the next work group I'll present it to them so it could be as soon as right after that work group. So early 2026 possibly. >> Okay, any other questions for the work group? Seeing none, we are on to item 2D, student representative report. >> All right. So, it's been busier now that it's kind of in the swing of things. Um, we've had a lot of activities going on last week. um some student council members got together to um do cards for some of the assisted living and retirement
013homes here in Stoton. In an hour we made over a hundred cards. So those will be going out around the holiday season. Um we also had a wear green day um this past week and that was for um youth homelessness. Um and so that we had a lot of staff and students wear green. Um and then DECA had their um scare away hunger food drive in October and that raised um over 1,300 pounds of food for food shelter here. Um and then we also had lots of Veterans Day activities including assemblies at some of the elementary schools and the middle school. And then um Interact Club made some cards and handed those out to the veterans who were at the high school. Um and then student council is also doing a food drive um during
014November here. And then we also had our agricult one of our agriculture classes. They went to Badfish Creek and did some cleanup. They also learned about different invasive species that um are in this area. Um and then for athletics this um past weekend um we had the girls swim state meet and uh Cheyenne Burroughs placed first in the 200 medley and the 100 um breaststroke. Um and that is her fourth year going to state. So she's pretty impressive. And then for boys cross country, they had their state meet two weekends ago and um Elijah Jud placed third in um at that. And then winter sports have officially started and girls basketball actually already has a game this Thursday. And then um hockey I believe has some games this weekend. Um, and then for the arts,
015we had Chicago. Um, the musical was two weekends ago and that was um, pretty big success. I would say we had three nights of performances and everyone seemed to love it. And then there was the orchestra concert last Thursday. That was their fall concert. Um, and then at the high school, we had six students chosen for the state honors band. Um, two of those students were from orchestra and four of those students were from band. And then River Bluff had three students chosen for the Sun Prairie Honors Band. And that is all I have. >> Thank you. Any questions for Michaela? >> Allison. Um, what is Interact Club? >> Um, so it's basically the new Key Club. They're just under a new name this year. >> Um, yes. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So, Interact Club
016is an offshoot of Rotary International. So Key Club was sponsored by Kowuanis which went under. >> Um so they um Kuanas reached out to the Stoen Rotary and um Rotary International oversees the Interact Club which is the high school service organization. So they're actually a member of Rotary International and then um they will work in conjunction sometimes with the Stoen Rotary but they work on both local and international um projects. >> Okay. Excellent. Thank you. >> Um I don't see any questions virtually so we can move on to item three Dr. Keyser's report. Okay. Um so November is as I've push out at our last meeting when um DPI released district and school report cards. Wanted um that many of you um received the emails um out to our families uh regarding these releases. The
017DPI has a website dedicated to housing all of our uh all school districts districts and school report cards. Happy to share that our focus and attention to our academic goals and literacy and um numerousy have shown um increases across the board which in turn also increase our overall scores within the school district report cards. Mind you again that these report cards were developed at the state level and have only one very thin slice of what we um look at in terms of educating um young minds to becoming engaged citizens within our local and larger global community. But it does give you an idea of where um our progression has been. So this is just a little snapshot. It starts off with overall um demographic details and then talks about how the scores are broken out
018in terms of achievement growth um target outcomes and on um track to graduation measures. And then you can take a look if you're interested at um each of the different um pages for the district and for the schools to see um different measures. What I want to highlight is on page four of the district report card is the table in which we take our information for our um academic goals as a district. And while we are in the process of updating our um our data dashboard for that, I did want to give the board and the community kind of a highle overview of what our journey has been. So what you see here is our literacy. And if you kind of remember three years back when we were first talking about establishing three goals at
019the board level that would guide our work across the district from the board table to the classroom. We showed some data and if you were to take and draw a trend line, taking two data points, drawing a best fit line, adding a point, drawing our best fit line, that's what you see on the 19 to 22 data. Those are trend lines. There's it's not the actual data, but it is the trend lines of the actual data. And you can make some generalizations as to what that looks like. You can take a look at the lines. You can take a look at the at the slope of those lines. And now you can fast forward three years into this work. What those trends are doing. So the first half of that work is still there. You
020can see that. But now you have 23, 24, and 25 data on there. And you can see where we're starting to trend. Now remember within this data, we've had shifts in how the data is measured. A year ago, we had the DPI talk about how they um shifted the the cut scores in terms of proficiency. And we've also had a shift in how the state report card is is being calculated in an in and amongst all of that. You can take a look at what this trend data looks at. So while the data from 19 and um 21 and 22 may have a different different look and feel than 24 and 25. You can't escape what the what the trend lines do. Our goals are to increase all students, that's the top blue line, and
021work to cut in half the gaps between that top line and all the sub subgroup demographics. And as you can see, we still have a lot of work to do. Some of those trend lines look very steep and look like they're going to intersect with the top blue line, but some of them don't. And that's where our work continues and will continue as we move forward because for us to achieve our goals, the only way we achieve our goals is everyone being proficient. That's truly how we close any opportunity gaps between all students and subgroups. We're we're tying those two things together. So that is ELA and this is what math looks like. Again, on the 2-year trend, 19 to 22 was our starting point and 19 to 25, that second graph, you can see
022the additional three years of work that our our staff, our students have been working towards um focusing in on the continuous improvement plans that you you heard about a month ago. So, with that, I'll open up for questions. >> Questions for Dan. I have a question. I don't I don't remember if I raised this um last time or not, so forgive me if it's a repeat, but I wondered if since the cut scores, they're being calculated a little differently or handled a little differently. Do we have like a conversion that would let us say you know under the new metrics you know you have to take that divide it by 75 * 3 to the 10th power and then you get like how it was with the old system. Like is there a way that
023we can kind of get a better approximate of how they compare to the old system so that we've got a better sense of our progress? >> Yeah. Can I can I give you the calculus formula that will convert one to the other? >> Can you translate it into layman's English? >> In layman's English. I'll work I can work on that and we can do our best um to try to make it as as straightforward as possible. I will temper um expectations to say I don't know if there will be um the algebra one version of that, but I'll do my best to get you an you and the board members an answer to that question. >> Thank you. >> All right. I can't see Mia. Does Mia have a question? >> No. Okay. >> Shockingly,
024no. All right. She can hear you, >> Alison. Go ahead. >> Um, >> just curious. Um, I understand why we don't have 2020 data or ELA or here, but this the math data doesn't show 2019. What's the reason? >> So, it's two-year data. So, it takes 19 and 21 and draws a best fit line. So, what you're not looking at is the actual data points. you're looking at the best fit line taking every two points and drawing a best line curve. >> Okay. >> Um a linear best line. So that's why you don't see in numerousy or in >> um >> oh >> literacy the see what you're talking about. Okay. And then just for people watching the the y ais here is proficiency correct. >> Proficiency percentage. Yep. So these are students um proficient
025or better on um again this is measuring grades three through 11. So across that you have forward and um preACT and ACT along with DLM for um students with um disabilities. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Go ahead, Don. Um kind of piggybacking on what Allison said. So, what I'm looking at, what we're looking at is um let's just take um all students on the right hand chart. It's um so a little over 50% are proficient. >> Correct. >> In ELA, >> correct? And when and where we started was less than that. >> Yeah. Correct. >> Y okay. >> Yep. And then as you can see the green line that's underneath it which represents students who identify with two or more races that the slope of that line looks to intersect all students which is exactly
026what we want for every single line. We're just not there yet in all areas. But we started on this journey with a very lofty goal to do a both and and a year out from when these goals were established to be to be met. We're I wanted to give the board kind of a highle view of kind of where we're trending because in our conversations with our schools and looking at the interim data, we want we want to pair what that interim data which is far more accurate in as far as helping the board see where our growth is because this is a snapshot in time and it's been adjusted at the state level a couple of in a couple of different areas. So, where our interim indicators that Kate talked about give us numbers
027and trend lines that help us know where our students are projecting. This tells us where how they performed and we want I want to make sure that the board kind of sees what where we're heading with all of our work. Okay, any other questions? Seeing none, we can >> move on. >> No, thank you. And thank you to all the the administrators, teachers, support staff working with our students because this work happens across hundreds of classrooms across their district. So, this is this is good work. All right, let us go to item four, the consent agenda. >> Move approval of the consent agenda as presented. >> Second. >> Is there any discussion? >> I had a question about one item. It's page five. There was an expense for the Fab Lab Logic or excuse me,
028the Fab Lab and Innovation Center consulting services and it was in October for $3,616. I was just curious what that like collaboration looks like. Like I recognize Fab Lab as being something I associate with the district and then I'm less familiar with the innovation center. So, I was curious how that works and what the cost might have been for. >> I'll have to take a look at that, Sharon, and and be I'll get um an email back out to the board on that one. >> Sounds good. Thanks. >> Okay. Are there is there any other discussion around the consent agenda? Seeing none, I'll call the question. All in or all in favor? >> I I >> I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? Consent agenda is approved. We are on to the topic of the evening,
029item five, budget forecast. >> All right. So, similar to about this time last year, um asked Erica to on the heels of the annual meeting to go into and give the board kind of a lay of the land of now that we've set our budget, what does budget look like building for next year and the years beyond? And so she's put together a great um snapshot and information for the board which will lead into the larger conversation in the spring which is staffing and so forth. So I'll turn it over to Erica and >> thanks. Um and if I I can't see the virtual people so if there's questions along the way please just speak up. Um, I'd prefer to make this more conversational than just have me being the one talking the whole time.
030Um, like Dan said, we we kind of went through this last year and a lot of the slides I actually just pulled from some of the information we we talked about last year, but a little bit more abbreviated. Um, just kind of focusing on the the most important pieces and um and then just where we're at as a district. Um, one of the things we always talk about is enrollment. Um it really does impact everything we do. Um obviously when we are working with kids in our building, but then also it impacts our finances and our budget pretty significantly. When we look at our major sources of income that we use to pay for our operations, they are primarily tied to enrollment. So you've heard me talk more than you probably ever wanted to ever
031wanted to about the revenue limit. Um and then we talk a little bit about our per about our pure per pupil aid as well. Um, again, both of those are tightly tied to how many kids that we have. When you look at our revenue limit, that's about just over 82% of our total operational funds. And again, we've talked about this, too. Our revenue limit, simply put, takes a three-year membership average, and it multiplies uh that number by a specific amount per student. And we'll get into that a little bit more. That same um enrollment average is also used to calculate our per pupil aid. And when you add the sum of those two sources together, it's almost 86 and a half% of our total operational funding. So I know we've talked a little bit about
032um federal funds and other grants and resources and those things are certainly impactful, but the the lion share of how we function um really does boil down to how many kids we have and then sources that are tied to that. When we look at our revenue limit per student, again, this amount is multiplied by a three-year membership average, the amount that we receive is different than other districts. And really where this started was back in 1993 when revenue limits were put in place. Um, when that happened, I was still in high school, but from what I understand is the intention was it to be a short-term fix to help mitigate how much property taxes were rising. And so at that point in time, they looked at each district, looked at how much they were spending
033per student, and that kind of became our base. Every year since that point in time, or I shouldn't say every year, when it started, the intention was the amount you receive per student would increase by inflation. And that's how it went for a very, very long time. in the 089 state budget I think was the first time that that inflationary increase was removed and that was primarily because um the state was having a hard time balancing their budget. So in order to mitigate potential property tax increases that inflationary amount um we received per student was removed. The reason why it impacts property taxes is because again, when you figure out how much you're able to receive in that revenue limit, a portion of that is funded through state aid and whatever is not funded through
034state aid is made up in property taxes. If the state didn't have additional resources to pump into that state aid formula, essentially what would happen is that that delta would be made up with taxes. So, and since that point in time, it's been sort of a two-year process. We every time the state comes goes through their uh budgeting process, we kind of learn how much we we will or won't receive in terms of increase per student. Um this year 2526, you see a pretty big jump in that number. And that's because when we went to referendum in well, we went to referendum in the spring of 2024 for the 2425 school year. The type of referendum we pursued was a recurring referendum. So essentially, we look at that formula. We had our three-year membership average.
035We had our amount per student to calculate our total. And then last year, we tacked on $4.3 million onto that total um to create our final revenue limit number. Because it is recurring in nature, we start off this year by taking last year's total divided by that three-year membership average. So what essentially happens is that starting point that base revenue limit per student is increased based on the prior year's um recurring referendum amount. So that's essentially what is the major driver behind that big jump. I should say too in addition to the recurrent referendum, we did have a $325 per student increase from the state. So it was a combination of those two things. Um, I think I'll just pause there and make sure that everyone's kind of tracking >> questions so far. >> Nope.
036Okay. Okay. >> This is not the prettiest slide, but I couldn't really figure out how to demonstrate what's happened over time. So, I'll just kind of walk through it. Again, this is looking at each year and how much we receive as an increase per student um in our revenue limit. So when we go back to 20145, we had a recurring referendum in that year. So we received a $75 increase per student from the state and then we also had a recurring referendum of $3.1 million. It was the first year of that recurring referendum structured the same way we did it in 2425 where there was a bump in the first year and then an additional increase for for three subsequent years. So when we go forward to 1516, you'll see kind of that same thing
037that you're seeing in where the increase we received of $938 per student was that increase to that base um due to the 3.1 from the prior year. Um I talked to our administrative team today about this a little bit. I wish I could take credit for being a genius or having a crystal ball, but we I'm not and and I didn't. But we were we were pretty fortunate in that that recurring referendum um we had passed that prior to knowing that the state was actually going to have a zero dollar increase in their next bianium budget. And when you look at that you'll see we actually had four years in a row with no increase from the state. So um fortunately the support of our community really helped us um you know navigate that with
038without it being too painful. So, um, we had four years in a row where we received that increase for our referendum. And then both 1920 and 2021 school years, we did receive, um, an amount from the state in that revenue limit per student. I also want to mention when you look at that 175 and 179 and you compare that to four zeros and a $75 the years prior, that looks pretty good. But when we were getting those CPI increases prior to 20089, that was usually about $250 a student. So it was certainly better than $75 but not really what we had been experiencing in the past. 2122 and 2223 um also no increase from the state in those years and if you recall the rationale at that point in time was because districts had so
039much money coming through from federal COVID relief funds. Um, so that was primarily why or at least that's that was the public rationale behind no increases at those during those two years. And then 2023 24 was um the next round of state budgeting where there was intended to be an increase during that 2-year budget cycle of 325 per student, but the governor used a veto pen to basically modify the length of that to be I don't know it was like 300 and something years. So, so at least as of right now, what's in the statute is that we will receive that $325 per student each year um in our in our revenue limit per student amount. And again, we had the 4.3 million last year that equated to a little over $1,500 per student for
040us this year and then moving forward. And then on top of that, we we've added $600,000 this year and we'll do so for the next two years. Okay. the 325 static or does it build on each on each year? 325 plus 325 >> that so when you look so if our base was $10,000 last year we added 325 our starting point for next year would be 13325 and then we would add another 325 on that. Yeah. Yeah. So that is base building as well. Not really looking at my notes here but that's okay. Um per pupil aid history. Again, this is a little bit different than the way the revenue works in that it's a simple x amount of dollars times x amount of kids or y amount of kids. Um really it's there's no
041property tax impacts. It's everyone gets the same thing. So at those point in times where it was difficult to increase the state aid pot, this became attractive to some of our lawmakers because if they lived in a community where they had really high property values, that meant that any increase in the revenue limit or a majority of the increase in the revenue limit would likely be funded through property tax dollars. um if you were considered a less wealthy district, so having a lower property value per student amount, you might have more of that increase made up in state aid. So it would mitigate the property tax impact. This didn't have that. So for a while, this was kind of the way to add money to schools because everyone received the same amount, no impact on
042property taxes. It was just a a straight aid amount from the from the state. You can tell though that that you know I think this is one two three seven years in a row now that that has not gone up. So right now we like every district in the state is receiving 741 per student and for us this year that's just about $2 million. >> Thank you. Um enrollment. So again, this is a pretty important part of our our determinations when we make our budget. Um this year we we went down about 52 kids. It's about double what we had expected. Um we knew that our outgoing senior class was larger than our incoming kindergarten class. What was a little bit unexpected um and really hard to predict is that when you looked at our
043cohorts basically first grade through 12th grade, you know, first grade that became second grade, second that became third, there were just minor reductions in the vast majority of those cohorts. Um so you get a couple kids here, a couple kids there, that adds up to to 25 kids pretty easily. So, um I don't know what that really means other than it's hard to anticipate things like that happening. it's about the same. Um that's been pretty flat the last few years actually. I shouldn't say that out loud, but um the the net loss has has been within a few kids for for quite some time actually. Um our 4K class, it's pretty common and we've been doing that long enough now where it does grow about 20 to 25 kids from 4K to kindergarten. just kids
044that are not necessarily involved involved or enrolled in a district 4K program. And so if we move our cohorts along and then assume that you know that 20ish kid increase from 4K to kindergarten that was that leads us to anticipating another drop of about 25 kids for next year. So I included this last year and I and I decided to include it again this year. I I don't know that it tells us a lot other than it does compare us with our our Dayne County peers. Um it's kind of interesting because some of these peer groups, I mean, they're Madison is it's kind of a I'm never sure if I should even include them. They're in Dane County, but it's pretty hard to compare them to us. They've got 26,000 kids. We have under 2,800.
045Um and as you look at them, there's there's kind of almost like a a couple of chunks here. you have the the Sun Prairie and Madison amount that are pretty large districts with with pretty significantly more that they're spending per student. Um, and then you have the next tier where they're sort of in that 16,000 range. And then when you start to look at like us, McFarland to Forest and Wan Key, we're all within a couple hundred per student. So, um, it's kind of interesting and and the reason why this is a a pretty busy looking slide is that when you go out to DPI's website, you can pull you can pull a pre-populated revenue limit worksheet where you can pick any district in the state and you can look and see what they have.
046That revenue limit per member amount. That's that starting point. And what it doesn't have in there are any recurring referendums where this is the first year the the first year of an additional amount or what they call a non-recurring referendum. And I think those are really important because when you look at like Middleton, they have over $19 million listed there as a non-recurring referendum, which won't show in their revenue limit per student, but significantly acts, you know, impacts how much they have to spend. So, a non-recurring referendum for for those that that don't know, um that is that's not base building. So, if you ask for a $5 million non-recurring referendum and you want $5 million a year for the next 5 years, you will get $5 million each year for the next five years.
047And at the end of the five years, it's gone. And districts can either make reductions or they could potentially go back and ask for another referendum. Um, every community is a little bit different. Some communities find that I mean, obviously, Middleton must have believed that would be a successful way to address some needs. Um, what makes me nervous about looking at that number is that, you know, at the point in time that expires, that's no longer available unless they pass another referendum. I know Wan Key has had a strategy in the past where they will do a non-recurring referendum and then when it expires, I believe that that they have then asked for that to be a recurring amount. So, it's just a strategy that that perhaps works in their community. So, so again, these
048are, you know, these are my calculations, but I just wanted to give some perspective in terms of where we sit compared to other districts. And that changed a little bit from last year again, just based on, you know, who went to referendum in the last year or two. I'm just going to keep going unless someone says something. Okay. So, again, I know we we spent a lot of time talking about the money coming in. Um the vast majority of our expenses, we've talked about this quite a bit too, is really in our people. Um over 75% of our total operational budget is salaries and benefits. So, and when you think about having fewer kids, it just becomes difficult to maintain um staffing levels or trying to be competitive in terms of of what we're we're
049paying people in a candidate pool that has shrunk over time. So when you think about some of the the disparities around maybe how much different districts are receiving per student and then trying to compete with them for candidates, you know, that can just be a little bit tricky. Um, and I did mention too, we talked a bit today with the Edmond team that this isn't you it's not unique to Stoen. It's not unique to to Wisconsin. It really has become a thing across the country. And um Dan and I were both part of a webinar a couple weeks ago where some resources were shared and there was an article talking about Los Angeles which I believe is the largest school district in the country and their anticipated decline about 30% over the next 10 years.
050So um not unique to us but that certainly doesn't help when when we're dealing with the challenges associated with fewer kids. So, and I and Dane County is a little bit of an anomaly in that most districts haven't experienced declining enrollment like we have, although um this year some of those districts that I've not heard have experienced it in the past are starting to see it as well. So >> yeah, might be more of a question for Dan, but I was looking at the report cards across all of those being county school districts, and I noticed that our percentage of economic disadvantaged students at 26.9 is considerably higher than almost all the other Dane County districts with the exception of, of course, Madison and Sun Prairie, but we are higher than everybody else. Is it
051more expensive to um educate a higher population of kids who are in that category of economically disadvantaged? Are we using more resources differently? >> That's an interesting question. One I I'll want to reflect on um before answering that. we there are different resources for students with with different needs. So it I don't think I can make a blanket statement to say yes or no. I think it's much more nuanced than that. So, let me let me um think about that and then be able to respond back at the next board meeting around that question specifically in ter in terms of economically disadvantaged. Um but in terms of students in general um we have an average we obviously as Erica is sharing we had the state formula average a averages it it out in terms of
052needs and um as we've talked about in the annual meeting and and others there are categorical grants and aids that help support different populations of students differently. So we might receive more state aids due to our higher >> potent potentially and that's why I would say it's it's it's more nuanced than that because there what we're talking about is that 86% and not necessarily digging into um all of the nuances surrounding um populations of students who who have um specialized needs and services. >> Yeah. Yeah. And I do think, and again, I'm I'm no expert in this, but I do think there are even at, you know, it's interesting because I haven't looked at that recently. If we're higher than other Dane County districts, I think there's still we probably fall below some of the
053many others. Like there's a lot of districts in the state that are in that 40 to 50%. Um, so when you look at the statewide averages, my guess is that we're probably below average. Um, in terms of low SCES, I did when I was messing around with the um, comparison comparison information, I did go out to DPI's website and I can't they don't have average um, or pupil amounts in the revenue limit available yet for 2526. But last year when I looked at 2425 data, the Dane County average was $1,225 per student more than the state average. So even when we're looking um locally and kind of comparing ourselves, it it sometimes it's good to just to take a step back too and realize like okay like that matters. But again um super grateful for
054our community and the support that they have provided us because we are in a much better place than a lot of districts um once you kind of get past our own bubble a little bit. So the the last thing I want to look at here just don't know what's going on in front of me here. Um >> trying to be subtle and failing. >> So again, this is this is really the the purpose for our our conversation a little bit tonight. But one of the things that we we've always looked at and for many many years is our bear model. And I always tell people this is just really kind of an ugly chart. And the main thing that I think we can look at is this line here in the middle that says surplus
055or deficit. And you kind of go across. Um, essentially this is taking a look at all of the assumptions we make knowing, okay, so the state says that we're going to get $325 per student. We already know that the next couple of years we're going to get that additional $600,000 in our revenue limit. Um we're estimating that we're going to drop 25 kids next year and then hopefully remain flat um because our our larger classes will have moved out of the high school. And then looking at just our expenses. So what do we anticipate our expenses to do on an annual basis? Um we've I put in three and a half% for salaries for the next couple of years because that CPI has been fluctuating quite a bit the last couple of years. And then
056when we look at things like medical insurance, I put in an 8% medical trend increase, dental insurance 5%, utilities 5%. And then most other things around 2%, like our supplies, materials, all of those things that we pay for out of our building and department budgets, we can kind of control a little bit how much of an increase we put in place. Um, so again, using a lot of those different assumptions, um, this is how this kind of shakes out. And I will say that after doing this for a lot of years, this tends to be what we look at on a regular basis, once that referendum falls off with revenues not escalating at the same percentage as expenses are, you know, that that number far out gets a little bit ugly. I also say we
057don't need to panic about what may or may not happen, you know, 3 years down the road. I think what this is showing us is that um our planning and the community support that we're receiving is is predicted to be sufficient to to make us manage well for the next couple of years. Um I also want to mention too when you look at 2627 in particular that shows um money in like our revenues exceeding our expenses by a little bit more than we saw last year and that is primarily because of the increase that the state put in place for special education aid. If you remember they talked about increasing that percentage of reimbursement um when we went through this last year that was not unknown. So we did not anticipate that. So that is
058helping in 26 27 and really beyond because we are estimating a higher percentage uh return in special ed costs. Um what I think it's a little bit tricky and this is the game we're always playing when we don't know much beyond 2 years out is that we could look at 26 27 and say oh well we have some resources available to do x y or z. Um but thinking about that, we just need to be cognizant of the fact that if we reduce that amount, then whatever we're spending in 26 27, if that's an ongoing cost, that is then um that will add to the potential future deficits that we see in place. So again, thinking about that um just that fiscal responsibility, understanding that what we do in one year has potential effects down
059the line in future years. And we've we always talk about that too. We recognize that that's a reality that all schools face, but just want to be aware of it. >> All right, it's a lot >> questions for Erica about all this wonderful news. >> Should I put the question slide up? >> Seeing none in the room. Are there any raised hands on virtual? No. Okay. >> All right. >> Well, thank you. >> Yeah, no problem. >> No, I just Erica, thank you. Um, this I think provides a good again grounding in on the heels of setting our budget in o at the end of October, we immediately go into what does next year and future future years look like knowing that knowing that there are, as Erica highlighted a lot of variables that that
060go into it. So as we start to build out different scopes moving forward, staffing being one of the the largest pieces, we keep this in the back of our mind and as as we talk about um with our staffing, we talk about we might be in in the moment, but we're always cognizant of what is happening um multiple budget cycles out because So, as Erica ended, fixed costs that are one-time expenditures are very different in a budget sheet than when you have ongoing costs that will increase either with inflation or or whatnot. So, um, as we bring this up, we'll we'll we use this to ground that even though we might not be pulling these sheets up each and every time. Okay. Um, that takes us to item six, uh, policy updates, which I'm going
061to need a motion for. >> Uh, move to approve the policies as presented. >> Is there a second? >> Seconded by Sword. And now I'll open any discussion. Um, seeing Oh, go ahead, Al. So, um 5,500 just >> um where it it this is just added language. >> Correct. >> Put in as it coming from some guidance or >> this takes us back to when we approved our to new um tobacco our update to our tobacco policy. There was language about using supportive disciplinary measures. So we call that restorative justice, restorative practices and at the time we wanted to include that in our um code of conduct policy. So the work when the work group met that was the reason why we inserted it here. So we are now paralleling this policy if approved with
062our tobacco policy. >> Okay. Uh, Lisa, >> I sent this to Dan previously around the SRO policy 8407. Um, just, you know, I was confused by what glows and grows means. I get that it's a simple term. I don't know if there's more like um layman's term because I'm guessing the public might be, well, what is that a special program? That's why I was thinking, is this a program? I haven't heard of clothing. Anyway, that seems very teachery. Sorry, I'm not a teacher. But um I wonder if that could be clarified in some way, like what does that actually mean? Also, I was confused that on our agenda tonight, we had the really nice um report out from the climate and culture committee that where they had discussed the items that they were hoping that
063the SRO report might include. number of contacts per grade, number of contacts per type, including safety presentations, proactive outreach, responsive behavior, number of contacts by race, language, disability, and then I thought it would be in the policy. So, I'm just like, when will a policy reflect a level of detail in terms of the type of data that we want an SRO report to the board to include? Right. So, um I'll jump in and then um can let um work group members um jump in and and supplement. We Yes, we can switch out glows and grows to like highlights and challenges. Um something that's uh a little more um universal in scope. Um the conversation around the data um ebbed and flowed. We we started going down that road and then um started to think are
064we painting ourselves into a corner. If we are creating um requests for data that then adds more time for the SRO to be compiling all the data instead of spending the time during um spending the time out out in the building and saying let's have the conversation. Let's see. Um because this is more proactive positive data streams where it seems like the da d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d da that seems to be most prevalent is around like citations and and disciplinary stuff and and what the data that you just um talked about is more of well if you're in all the
065class kindergarten classrooms like and that's a positive thing like what's the demog how many kids is that what's the demographics all of that and do we want the SRO to be spend the time doing that or being in the classrooms. So they added um the line where the work group landed was um the board may request additional updates um and then augmented it to say instead of reports updates, reports or data to give the board flexibility to say this is an evolving thing. Let's have the conversation. Let's let's um evolve the conversation. Then when we feel like we've got something that we're happy with, we can always revisit and then put put more things into policy. So this policy gives us our guidance and our essentially our our laws and rules that we follow. And
066this is in the spirit of saying we are asking to create a different set of um data that perhaps was first anticipated and let's let's test that out using what we've talked about and me having the conversation with the SRO and saying is this data that is actually doable um and doing that. So, um I'll I'll stop talking and see if um Mia or um Sharon have some thoughts or did I reflect the conversation well? >> I think you did reflect the conversation well. Um really the intention was to make the policy a little more evergreen. Um and these are and then also providing the data that we want to see reported out and I think the policy gives us the mechanism to make that request of the SRO. Um and we want it we
067want the data collection piece to be as collaborative as possible. So I think it is we talked about how you know to some degree it's a conversation we want to this is what we'd like to see are you already collecting this how much of a burden would it be to collect this if you're not already collecting these you know and together come up with what we'd like to see in this first year or so and recognizing that what we want to see as the program is just getting up off the ground might be different than what we what a future board might want to see in year five or six or seven of the program. So having the policy structured in a way that it gives us the mechanism to sort of make that request
068but doesn't uh as Dan said paint us into a corner about what that request would would specifically be. Does that make sense? >> Yes. Thank you, >> Don. >> Uh, Mia, I have a question. Um, in all of our discussions about this SRO, one of the big things that I heard over and over is that um, at the end of the year with the last SRO before COVID, um, we didn't get the board didn't get any sort of a report. didn't get any sort of data and um I think all of us were vehemently against having that happen again but now we're backing away from it. I that uh doesn't sit well with me. So what the policy actually says is that they will provide us with the report. The report shall reflect on activities
069conducted through the year and shall include recommendations for the upcoming year. The board may request additional updates, reports, or data. It just doesn't say these are the data points that you're going to tell us specifically. Does that make So that's why we were trying to be really firm about the fact that yeah, we're going to ask you for data and allow some flexibility about what data we're going to ask. And it's it's really about allowing ourselves as the board the flexibility to have another idea for next year and not have to change the policy. Um, we have we put in the policy that we were going to ask for data. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yep. >> Uh, Lisa, >> does the student staff or student survey asks a question about an SRO? Doesn't it?
070>> Not specifically. It just it asks or generally if you feel safe in school like >> Oh, okay. Okay. >> And then >> it can be somewhat of a baseline. Then >> can be somewhat of a baseline. And there's also open-ended questions. So we can so if someone were to in the nar in a narrative highlight them that would be the the second >> that's the only way we would get that from the students. if it's affecting if that element is affecting their belonging or their safety if they would tell us that. >> Right. Okay. Um seeing no other comments or questions, I think we can move on. Um do we want to formally revise the glows and grows language? >> Yes. Okay. So yes, then I need uh a motion to amend. >> You
071could say yes. Um approve policies discussed. >> Go ahead, Mia. >> I was just going to say so I'll make that amendment. I amend to um I move to amend the language deleting the words glows and grows and inserting um positives and challenges. >> Is there a second? >> Seconded by Bubon. Any further discussion around the amended language? Seeing none, this is the roll call vote. >> Mr. Buban, >> yes. >> Miss Croy, >> yes. >> Miss Garcia, >> yes. >> Miss Sorg, >> yes. >> Miss Pew, >> yes. >> Dr. Milin Bartlett, >> yes. >> President Patterson, >> yes. >> It's amended. We have to Oh, okay. All right. So, the >> So, now we're approving the policies as amended. >> Okay. So, I need a motion to approve the policies as amended. >>
072I move to approve the policies as amended. >> Seconded by Pew. And now this is a roll call vote again. >> Okay. >> Miss Garcia. >> Yes. >> Miss Pew. >> Yes. Dr. Milin Bartlett, >> yes. >> Mr. Buban, >> yes. >> Miss Sorg, >> yes. >> Miss Croy, >> yes. >> President Patterson, >> yes. And I would assume that means the policies are approved. >> Yes. >> Okay. We are on to item seven, meeting closing. For action items, I have that Dana is going to translate the cut scores to give us a um comparison of our current scores related to the way they previously were using the scoring matrix. Second one, Dan's going to look into the Fab Lab Innovation Center uh item on the consent agenda. And a third one is that Dan
073is going to look into how our percent of economically disadvantaged students may impact our budget compared to schools with a lower percentage of those students. Are there any other action items that I have not documented? Seeing no movement, we have a future board meeting on December 1st at 6:30. Um, and December 15th at 6:30, our outreach work group is meeting this Thursday virtually at 5:00 p.m. And if there are no other items to discuss, I would entertain a motion for adjournment. >> So moved. >> Moved by Bubon. >> Seconded by Pew. Any discussion? All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? Meeting is adjourned.