001Okay, we'll now open the April regular school board meeting. Um, call to order. 1.1 roll call. Um, Aaron is absent. Okay. 1.2 Recognition of Visitors and Guests. Lori. >> Yes, I have a couple pages here. >> Oh, never mind. I'm sorry. That's under 1.4.2. >> Okay. Well, wait. >> Welcome everybody that's here and people that are watching, I should say. Uh, 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay. 1.4 correspondence and recognition. 1.4.1 public participation. I don't believe we have any now. 1.4.2 recognition of students, staff, and community. Lori. >> Okay. Teacher of the year. Congratulations to Heather Kiggi for being named Worthington's teacher of the year.
002Additional candidates this year included Tasha Ramo and Heidiers. We are proud to have you on our team. Worthington Middle School Dollars for Deputies. Our Worthington Middle School student ambassadors launched a fundraising campaign with a goal of 5,000 and exceeded it by raising $6,259 18 cents. Proceeds were designated to Nobles County Sheriff Deputy Logan Waldner in support of his recovery. Worthington Middle School history be over 28 W students participated in this year's history be B. Congratulations to Donovan Hubard first place. Brennan Nelson, second place. Tyler Bence, third place. Assistant principal of the year. WHS assistant principal Doug Brans was honored by the Southwest Minnesota Association of Secondary School Principles as assistant principal of the year. Math masters competition. The intermediate school and Worthington Middle School sent 36 students to compete in Marshall. Congratulations to Alexander Pucket
003for earning eighth place overall in the individual competition. FCCLA success. Four WHS FCCLA members competed at the Minnesota State Convention. All four qualified for the national convention in Washington DC this summer with their innovative projects. All conference basketball. Congratulations to Caleb Meyer for being named to the Big 10 Conference allconerence team. National Honor Society induction. Worthington High School held its annual induction ceremony, welcoming 29 juniors and seniors to join 42 current senior members. A wonderful evening celebrating leadership and achievement. Worthington High School mural project. Students have completed four additional mural panels to complement earlier work. The full installation will be displayed in the cafeteria. Join us for a public open house this Friday from 5 to 7:00 p.m. Minnesota National Guard signing. Seven students will sign their intent to join the Minnesota National Guard tomorrow
004at 2:30 p.m. We commend their commitment to serving our state and nation. Band bash. More than 450 grades more than 450 grades 5 through 12 band musicians performed in the final concert of the year. An incredible night showcasing talent and dedication. FFA activities. Worthington High School FFA members are currently participating in the Minnesota State Convention. We look forward to hearing about their experiences and accomplishments. Congratulations to all these students and staff. We are proud of you. >> Okay. Thanks, Lori. >> Sure. >> 2.0 Approval of agenda. Do I have a motion to approve the consent and main agendas? So moved. >> Second >> motion by an seconded by Matt. All those in favor of approval of agenda say I. >> I. >> All those opposed. Same sign. Motion passes. Okay. 3.0 approval of minutes. Approval
005of the March school board meeting minutes and the committee meeting minutes. Do I have a motion to approve minutes? >> So move. >> Motion by Matt. >> Seconded by Eric. All those in favor of the approval of minutes say I. >> I. >> All those opposed, same sign. Motion passes. 4.0 consent agenda. Do I have a motion to approve all the items under the consent agenda? >> So moved. >> Motion by Lori. >> Seconded by an. All those in favor of the items on the consent agenda say I. >> I. >> All those opposed. Same sign. Motion passes. 5.0 main agenda. 5.1 monthly financial overview. Carmen. >> Take a break. Um, yep. So, in front of you guys, you have our revenues and expenditures for the period ending March. Um, with only three months left
006in our fiscal year, um, both our revenues and expenditures are on target, um, with our budgeted projections for revenues. Um, our total operating funds for revenues are 72.5% compared to last year at 67.97%. Um and some of the the changes in the revenues are just how they hit. Um one month the state will one year the state pays some of the revenues during one month and the next year it's a different month. So that's a little bit where that difference is coming from. And our expenditures are also on target um what we would expect um compared to our our budget. We're at 64.89% um compared to last year's 68.69. So we're right on target where we expect to be for our revenues and expenditures. Okay, questions for Carmen. Okay, moving on. 5.2. Discuss or approve
007the watershed project. Joel, Nathan, and Tom. >> Yeah, we'll invite our guests to come forward. I'll kick us off and then we can uh I'll turn it over to Nathan and Tom if that's okay. Nathan, um, a group of us from the operational committee, uh, met with Nathan, Tom, and other members of the wershed approximately 2 weeks ago, uh, to review a plan that you have in front of you in regard to how to help mitigate water that's running through the land to the west of the intermediate building. This has been a long road um with a possible path to a finish line. And so, um, that's why we are here this evening is that we have an approved plan that, uh, could potentially, um, be something that we do on that property. And so,
008Nathan, you can provide way more detail than I can and, uh, Tom obviously can can provide the DNR's aspect as well. So, I'll step aside. >> Yep. So, so basically, we we have a um there's a there's like a waterway now, like a kind of a grass waterway now. We're going to remeander that and um could pull up the Yep. So, there'll be a there'll be a remandered stream um through the course of of both properties. I'm working with engineers to add that um the um 80 acres north of the original site. Um we're going to add that in and then there will be a off channel wetland basin. um on the east side that green area there will be a off channel um wetland basin that if there is enough flow in the um
009reandered stream um a portion of that water will come out of that remandered stream and go into that wetland basin. Um it'll kind of sit in there for a while. the silt and some of that phosphorus. So hopefully kind of fall out or get used up by the plants and then it will rejoin in the um remandered stream down um a little bit farther to the south on that property. Um the the phosphorus reductions were not quite what we were hoping for or what were first initially designed in the last two designs. um um a yearly total inflow of phosphorus on that that property was was modeled as 995 pounds of phosphorus. Um this this current concept design removes 106 pounds of phosphorus modeled. So it's around 11% of the yearly total. Um that's down
010down significantly from around 326 pounds of removal the first design and then the second design was obviously less than that. But um as we kind of move forward here um our our engineers are currently working on some of the preliminary design work to kind of keep this process moving forward. Um but we're I'm kind of here to answer some questions and Tom's here to answer some questions. Um just if you guys have any um about the project as we move forward. >> Okay, questions guys. Fire away. >> Do you have an idea of how many acres this is entailing throughout this? >> So as of right now, we do not have an amount of acres that will do um that will like encompass that that project. Um as we move forward with the um preliminary
011design, we'll have more of a more of a definite um kind of design and we can get some acreages amounts from there. >> What is the width of thating Mirandering waterway then Nathan? Will it be like 80 ft 220 something like that? Um, so it's a it's a 3:1 side slope for that um for that grass waterway there. So it won't be too or for that for the remandered stream. It won't be too wide. So, so the bottom will be 3 foot wide on that and then it'll be a 3 to one side slope going up. I don't have an exact footage of the the width of it right now, but um it shouldn't be it shouldn't be much wider than what it is right now. >> Okay. Then how will that you incorporate the
012north 80 acres or whatever into this? >> Yep. So, there's a there's a tile um inlet up on up on some private property kind of right northwest of the 80. that the school district just purchased recently. Um, we're going to work with our engineers to get that tile daylighting into that new that kind of corner that the school district owns that is currently in grassland. Now, we're going to work to daylight that tile there so that water comes above ground. That'll just help with um kind of getting the nitrogen out, maybe hopefully slowing that water down and getting some of that um suspended solids and the phosphorus out of that water, whether it be through through that wetland basin, the off channel wetland basin, or just kind of natural um stream meandering. So, the width
013of that 80 acres is wider than the quarter on the south side. So, are they going to widen what I would call the old Vulk property out? Cuz a lot of that water comes off that 80, comes right onto the land before it gets into the waterway. So, are they going to take a chunk of that on the north end to try and widen so that all comes in? >> From from what I've kind of seen, it's um it's basically going to kind of follow. If we could scroll, it's going to kind of join up that where this line is here. It'll just kind of join up this coming that way. >> Okay. >> So, it'll um it'll bring that water that's going out kind of into the field now. It'll bring that back into
014theoretically kind of where it should have been. >> Okay. >> Nathan, would you be willing to share? We also as we talked a couple weeks ago that water off of the intermediate hard ground, right, the concrete y >> is ponding and then when that pond overflows, >> it it undergrounds but then daylights before the waterway and that that correct is inside this it's going to end up inside this off channel wetland. Correct. That water would >> not be in farm ground moving forward if this plan was approved. >> Yeah. So right as of right now there's a there's like a storm water pond on it' be the west side of the it' be the intermediate school there that would be like from all your imperous surface would drain into that like storm water pond and
015then that outlets like Joel said in it's it's currently into the field like I would call it like at the ends where the ends would start it at right now daylights in a um in a concrete culvert there and the water just kind of flows over the field ground and then kind of slowly works its way along the edge of the of the stream now and then slowly kind of filters in at a at a low spot there. So, um that was one of the things that I added to have the engineers put into the preliminary design was having that water discharge directly into that um green um off channel basin there just so we're not we're not capturing any more sediment or or or creating any more erosion gullies as we as we move
016that water into into another treatment area. And then I think the other question that I just wanted to make sure everybody understood is that everything inside on the drawing of that dark kind of bolded dash line where where you're calling it a permanent easement, if the plan was approved, everything inside of there would kind of in perpetuity be taken out of production. >> Correct. Yes. Most most of the most of the the stuff in that um solid black dash line would be would be taken out of production. there might be some places in there, you know, where where that might might allow it. Um but once we once we get that um preliminary design back, we'll get more of a definite area on, you know, where where buffers will need to be and where where
017we'll see fit like to have a more of a buffer on a on a sloped area than than kind of on a flat area or something. Yes. >> Any more questions? >> Sure. Mr. Um with the reduction in phosphorus, is there a specific reduction goal or target that we are trying to hit or is it more driven by like regulation? Is it more driven by ecological events? It's a significant reduction. Um so like I struggle to understand why this is better >> better from like the the last plans you mean or plan. >> Yep. So, um, basically, and maybe Tom can answer this question a little bit better. Um, basically the the designs that we had before, we first had a had a single stage dam. That one did not get approved by the DNR.
018Then we went to like a multi-step dam. That one did not get approved by the DNR. So, basically, we just kind of kind of worked together with the DNR on on what could be a permitted project and then kind of went um kind of toyed with some concepts back and forth there on what the DNR wanted, what the wershed wanted. We kind of came to this came to this preliminary design. Dom, do you have anything to add to that? >> Yeah, absolutely. U Mr. Parish, it's a good question. the from the DNR's perspective, we do require permits for a project like this. And the concept of building a dam in a water course that does not have a restriction like a dam on it is something that we are trying to move away from. Um,
019dams. We talked a little bit about the rapid dam failure and we're trying to look at dams for the life of a project and what gives gives the most bang for the buck on a project like this and building in more natural characteristics to meanders the the wetland area um proves to be a long-term commitment that does not require as much maintenance and public safety concerns. Every time you build a dam, there's always the concern that it could fail at some time, especially here near a school. You don't want to be uh increasing the risk near where children and people are present at all times. It has been a long road and I do appreciate uh the school district and the watershed district working with us for a long time to try to get a
020concept that builds on our goals but also meets the watershed district's goals and the school district's goals. Uh the idea is that we did um come up with a plan that uh reduce still reduces phosphorus albeit not as much as the dam construction would. But also in a dam construction scenario, you consistently have to remove sediment depending on the rain events, depending on the sediment delivery. Uh sometimes those events are closer in line. Sometimes you you can go longer periods of time, 10 or 20 years without removing sediment, but the reduction in phosphorus decreases as that pond fills up. And then again, it's a maintenance cost that goes to the district. The design that we put forth is one that should have little or no maintenance to it for the life of the project, which
021is a very long time because we're building in natural characteristics that should be uh stable. We're decreasing the slope. We're increasing the slow the channel length. All those things are helped to have that better balance, that better um long-term um delivery of water and treatment of nitrogen, phosphorus. There's also a number of other contaminants, sometimes bacteria, and increasing that channel length, increasing the ability of the plants to interact with the water, pick up the nutrients, trap some sediment, and then use those nutrients naturally um is exactly the goal that we want instead of requiring uh mechanical removal. And then just a followup that what happens during like a large storm event with the water and is there a chance that the wetland would be bypassed or overflowed in that and create a bigger problem? Well,
022the idea of the wetland construction, we did provide uh a concept to them uh to look at and the idea is that it's not going to be um an all uh containment scenario where all the water that comes through there, it's about a 2 and a half mile square mile wershed. So, it's not a huge watershed, but the but there is some slope as you especially go to the west. And as that water comes through there, building this channel concept, a two-stage channel, which has a a a small narrow channel and then a small flood plane above that allows for the water to come out of that small channel and spread out. And as it spreads out, it slows down. And slowing that water down is a big part of having uh that connection to
023the flood plane scenario. So you have that that two stage channel through that main part, but then that off channel is where that extra amount of gallons can go into that wetland area. And we do want it to be able to go into that area, spread out, slow down, but also be able to get out of that area so you're not um putting all of this energy behind a dam a dam that you know certainly could have issues or could fail during an extreme event. And we seem to be having more and more of these extreme events uh than we want to. So the whole idea is to have a system that takes care of itself. It's should not if it's constructed right and we don't have any major beaver problems or anything like that.
024Um, it should be something that does not require significant maintenance long term. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else? >> Mr. Chairman, it also should be pointed out, Mr. Parish, that $33,000 has been spent on designing uh proposals for this project. This will be the third proposal. Is that right? >> No. >> Yes. Should be the third proposal. Yes. And and this one also needs to be fully engineered before DNR will give approval to it. Is that correct? >> That's correct. Yes. >> So there's still no guarantee that another potentially 60 70,000 could be spent in engineering and there's no guarantee that this one will move forward. Is that correct? >> At at this time I can say that I'm the one that would be writing the permit. I'm the one that would be involved with
025the development of development of the permit. Uh I feel very good about this design. I feel very confident that this is a permit that we would issue. I do not see significant changes from the DNR's perspective going forward. I I would add in in reference to cost, this is significant significantly less expense than the original dam construction. I guess you know those numbers better than I do. >> Yep. So the the estimated um just sole sole construction cost minus the um engineering and permitting cost for this this concept design project would be $324,15 which um once again that is that is not with the engineering or um it'd be permitting kind of regulatory um costs in there but it is it is um significantly less than the than the prior designed projects. But the engineering
026itself could cost similar to the other two >> potentially. Yes. If if we run into some snags and um some some things we have to work through with the um engineers. Yes. >> Because it was January of 2023. And that's where the dollars came from. The Bowser grant of 978,000. >> Correct. >> Right. And so we're going to be close to 400,000 in engineering potentially. >> Could be. Yep. >> And then 300,000 PL in the actual ground or project work. >> Project work. Yeah. Um, I didn't see it in the the pages, Nathan, of what do you what is flowing through there now in the channel as far as pounds of sediment and pounds of phosphorus. >> We don't have any of those numbers now. We we haven't done any um on channel um sampling
027before. So my next question is how can you determine a removal rate when you don't know current flow and content of the the water? >> Tom might be able to um give a little bit more expertise on the on the modeling that's used on those um on those designs. >> Uh the short answer is um you need not just one or two samples. You need uh a full season of samples summer winter. You need samples under low flow and of course the most important is the high flow because the high flows are when um the higher delivery of nutrients is reaching the downstream lake Ogabina and we call it loading. When you see the water flowing through there um even when the water is perfectly clear it can have a lot of nutrients. The good
028news is those low flows usually um as far as pounds of phosphorus or pounds of nitrogen are relatively low. It's those big rain events that that bring a lot of material through the system, a lot of water. Sometimes the water is very dark, sometimes it's chocolatey color. In those events, you know that there's significantly more things dissolved into the water. Now understanding that loading requires a significant number of samples would it be helpful to this project? I'll be the first person to tell you yes it would absolutely be helpful to this project. Um I have done this sampling uh in the past um all throughout the lakes check wershed. Um taking in lake samples instream samples taking uh peak flows right when that water gets to the hottest you want to take those samples get
029them to the lab get those things analyzed takes a lot of time. What I can tell you from this concept going forward is that uh this has proven to be a successful reduction in nutrients in other areas um of the state with similar characteristics to this. Um I would absolutely applaud samples before and samples after to confirm the reductions because if you were to take a sample now there's only 623 feet where water is running and it's not through the 2,400 ft of the channel. It's only from the tile that's dumping prior to uh Fox Farm Road. So, >> well, and that's that is right now a a a issue with sampling is that in the main channel there are certain values and certain nutrients, but also in those tiles, it'd be good to sample
030those to see what's going on. >> It could be very different. That's part of the reason why we I I encourage them to look at options to daylight that tile to give it better treatment before it gets to the lake. When it goes through the tile, there's basically no treatment in that tile system of those nutrients. It's just delivering those nutrients as far as possible to that tile outlet. And once it gets into those channels where there's higher velocities and more volume, it's less likely to settle out or be treated and it's just most likely most the high percentage of that is going to make it to the lake. September of 25, letter from the DNR to the watershed said that the reduction could be between 17 to 200 lb, which is an amazing range.
031And so I'm just curious how how was the I forget the number, but >> 106 arrived at given that range. >> Uh the modeling was done with Houston engineering. >> So it's modeling stuff. >> Yeah, that was not DNR numbers. those those were generated by the engineer. I can tell you that part of those ranges are absolutely all those things that have to do with um generating the samples. What is happening in the watershed the upland area and I the I know the watershed district has been fantastic about working with producers to reduce the nutrients that are going on the landscape but also doing better practices on the landscape to try to bring those numbers down. Um, I would say that this wershed has been um managed much better than many of the other wersheds
032in southwest Minnesota. Um, but until you actually take samples and you actually start to do th that loading for individual storms, monthly loading, yearly loading to know how much of those nutrients are bypassing or going to be treated through this system. Uh, I can't tell you which which number in that model is going to be accurate. I can tell you Houston spent a lot, you know, time and money to develop those models, they probably are decent models in my opinion. But the reality is until you have ground truth the the water quality numbers, I I can't tell you which one's right. What if we just took the acres out of production, just grasped the 60 acres around the entire uh channel area and just and didn't do anything, just let it make its own way
033and naturally slow down through the the natural path. >> Well, I mentioned earlier that the waterershed is 2.5 square miles. So, if you were to put native grasses all on the school property, um the only problem with that is you would still have let's just say 2.4 4 square miles of watershed that is delivering into this system. Some of it's going into the tile system and bypassing this land. So in that you would have a very very very small reduction in the nutrients that are going underneath the uh Fox Farm Road. >> Okay. >> Is that right? Fox Farm Road. >> Yes. Sounds wrong. >> Basically we're going to rebuild this waterway, change the direction and add an overflow wetland area. Correct. >> Yes. >> So we've approved two plans. So this is the third
034plan we have to approve. So it's up to you guys. Do you want to approve this plan because that's what you need to go farther. Correct. >> Yes. Correct. >> Mr. Chairman, though, do we need to approve it? I mean, it's a we already approved the easement and the easement still falls within these acres. This is a watershed project using their dollars. I I don't other than the pat, you know, the go get them. I I don't know what I'm missing here. >> No, I think the only reason we brought it back for a possible approval was if the if the amount of acres needed for the easement had had changed cuz when we went back and looked through previous board minutes, each time a new plan was brought forward, it was approved because the
035easement had changed. And so if you can guarantee that the easement is within what's already been approved, I guess we don't need to formally approve it. But in the event that they're not, we should give approval knowing that we're going to change the amount of acres that are taken out of production for the plan. >> I had asked multiple times to the engineers just to make sure that we were still within the last easement that um we had approved with you guys and they had said multiple times that we're still within the easement that you guys had approved last time. And so that's acres to acres. The easement amount is the acres that was approved. >> Same or same or less? >> Same. Um we're we'd basically just be going off of the same easement.
036That does not mean we'd be using all of those acres that were in the old easement. It'll be whatever this this design is is shaped to. But we're still working under the last easement shape >> with no damning. It's actually probably going to be less. It it should be it should be um a fair amount less. Correct. Yes. Because we're not actually going to be, you know, pooling water on both sides of the of the channel. It'll just be on one side for that off channel wetland. >> Mr. Chairman, if I can ask one more question. I had asked Tommy this question last time and I'm as as I left, I don't know if I completely had had made made my question clear. I'm curious if this exact same land was in central Minnesota in
037a different DNR jurisdiction and they wanted to do the first plan of damning it, would the same rules apply to them in that part of the state as we're operating under here? >> Yeah, the the the perspective on dams has evolved. I can tell you over a hundred years ago, uh the DNR was probably one of the biggest proponents at working with the federal government to build dams. They were believed to stop carp and improve water quality. And we've found that not only do they not stop carp, but they also can be a detriment to water quality. There are some dams that in that area behind the dam um can be a sink for sediment in certain times of the year, but then discharge those nutrients at other times of the year. We have anorobic
038and aerobic conditions that sometimes will change that nutrient balance as well. So, it's a complicated relationship and I can tell you that um where we have been moving in the last couple of decades. I've been with the state for 25 years and uh I I can tell you that where we are right now has been a progression of the last 25 years. I don't see this changing in the near future. uh the way that we are understanding dams better, understanding these processes. Um I can tell you that uh we discourage dams whenever possible and I worked with uh the city of Windham, the city of Leverne and the city of Jackson all on their dam removals that went to a riffle system because of all these concepts that we talked about and the risk and
039the uh the hydraulic roller that can present itself and trap people in. Um, it can be a public safety issue, but also a water quality issue. So, I can tell you that this shift has taken the better part of a century, but it is certainly accelerating more toward natural ecosystems than it ever has. And could it swing back? Well, anytime those things can change, but it has been a progression over the last 25 years. I can tell you firsthand where we're going, and I do not see this changing. >> Thank you. >> Okay. I would say if the acres fall within the easement, just keep moving forward. >> Okay. >> Is everybody okay with that? >> Okay. >> All right. >> Thank you guys. Appreciate being here. >> Thanks for coming. >> Okay. 5.3 information
040slashdisuss budget forecast and planning. Joel. >> All right. Mr. Chairman, I would encourage my colleagues over here to feel free to jump in at any point as well. But knowing that we are deep in the budgeting uh season, staffing season for next year, wanted to provide an overview of kind of where we're at. U provide an opportunity for questions. Um but just wanted to share some things that we continue to to be watching uh in our planning, things that are out there in the legislature uh within the federal government and uh those different pieces and how they impact our our budget uh moving forward. And so, um, to start off, wanted to just share that we've been embarking on this conversation in regards to specific building staffing since the end of February. Uh, we wrapped
041that up approximately a week and a half ago. Um, we met with each building principal multiple times. We talked about their needs and wants and hopes and dreams uh, for their buildings, talked about specific programming taking place within that building and the staff that were going along with it. And um through that process we were able to identify some areas uh where we could modify and adjust um with with some staff that were in multiple lensure area. And so those adjustments uh for now have been made. We did go through each and every staff member within the district uh assigned them and will be assigning them a budget code of how they're funded. Uh we're calling those our staffing sheets. Um some of you have seen those in some of our one-on-one conversations. Those sheets
042again will inform us on how to move forward, knowing that as we link staff to specific budget codes that as funding shifts and changes, it allows us to then modify and adjust based on those programs that are assigned to those different areas. This is an example of what one of those staffing sheets look like, taking off the names of the staff. Um, but you can see their position, their length of contract, and then going across each one of these columns are the different funding sources that we have. And so every staff member in the district uh is represented on here with a corresponding budget code. Quickly highlighting some of the the variables that are out there that are are high on our radar. And the first one that's been out in the uh public probably
043the most is the compensatory revenue. Um this is a a topic that has become such a a regular topic. The term that we've heard is compensatory fatigue at the state legislature because they're also sick of talking about it. Uh but it continues to be something that is um it's a big thing for us here uh here in Warthingington and with the students that we serve. Uh and so in fiscal year 26, that's the school you're in right now. Uh we ended up in a hold harmless for another year. That basically kept our funding uh steady from previous years. projected for next school year is to revert back to a 2023 law um for direct certification. Um I just put a bullet there that that kind of shares what that means and um and how it
044can affect um the again the students and the families that we serve. Um and so right now with the way the law is currently uh written, we are currently looking at a a compensatory deficit between 2 and $2.4 million. Um, there is, as I think I share in the next slide, there is a potential hold harmless that has now resurfaced back in the legislature. Um, but as we move forward, kind of what we're looking for is to continue to really hone in on our staffing, looking at what staff are coded to that compensatory revenue, knowing that that that is for extra. That is the whole basis of compensatory is to provide extra opportunity, extra access, extra programming, extra staff. Um, oftentimes on our on our general fund, you'll see that as a basic skills account.
045And so what we're going to do is we're going to use some basic skills fund balance for the year to cover any shortfall that may happen to come. Um, we have enough in that account to probably float uh a deficit for just over two years. Um, but our focus is to use that overage and that basic skills money which has lots of tags that go along with it. When we say tags, we're talking about uh very specific programs, very specific kinds of staff that can use it and utilizing that for another year as we continue um to see where the state is going to go in regard to that direct certification. the direct certification for our families is different um in how they get put into and being identified for supports within the state. Um
046and so it's just important to know that families in Warthingington um do get treated different than families in St. Cloud or families in Rochester or some of these other um um populations where uh they they fall inside this realm. And so we're going to continue to look at those pieces when it comes to uh compensatory revenue and uh continue to make sure that we are utilizing that funding first. Um it's a it's a little bit of a blessing right now that we have that that overage of funds to use for a year, but truly that money should be spent on the students that are generating it um because they have identified needs by the state. And so we will move forward and make sure uh that that that funding is used for the students that
047are generating it uh moving it forward. And again, we'll continue to to watch what happens within the legislature regarding the the hold harmless that has just recently been been introduced. Um another fairly significant um funding source for us is in regard to special education. uh in the governor's budget, he had proposed a $250 million cut to special ed special education. Uh he had assigned what he called the blue ribbon commission uh to do a deep dive into where that 250 million could come from. In his most recent revised budget, he's upped that ante to of another 50 million to 300 million. Um this is a a funding change that will be not next year if it goes through, but the following year, fiscal 28. Um, and essentially, uh, if that blue ribbon commission doesn't move
048forward with any recommended cuts, a lot of that money will come out of the cross subsidy, which is a fairly new source for us, which essentially just means if the current regulations stay uh where they are, that without that special education funding, we would supplement out of the general fund and and something else would have to come off uh of the overall budget. Minnesota paid leave is another um mandate from the state that we continue to watch. We've we've been navigating it through um negotiations with multiple groups and we've got multiple groups to come. Again, just another review that it's a it's a payroll tax split by both the employer and the employee uh and an annual unfunded cost from from the state that goes onto the budget. There are some federal questions that have
049arisen just in the last month or so. Um, again, the federal funding for the coming year that we're budgeting for right now is set and so everything we're talking about is kind of a year and a half out or a year from now will really be be focused in on this. But, uh, the president has proposed $6.5 billion worth of education cuts. uh they've identified up to 18 different programs that that equates to some of the biggest ones into the title funding that we use um for multiple programs throughout um throughout our our programming here in in district 518. Um federal funding right now um in talking with Ryan makes up approximately 5% of our budget. Um and so while not a huge percentage of the the revenue we get, it does fund some very
050specific programming that we deem um quite necessary. And so without that funding, we would have to do some deep dive looks into how we modify and adjust what we're doing. And so moving forward as we continue through that staffing season, hopefully bringing a budget to board in June, uh we plan to continue to monitor revenues and expenditures that we continue to audit our staffing allocations in all of our buildings um and seeing how we can support that programming that's happening. again, making sure that we we are really honing into the funding source and the tags that go along with it. Making sure that we are using it for that and that we are using the most restrictive money first before we're using that general education uh allocation because ultimately anything that comes through the general
051fund with no tags can be used on anything. And so we want to use that money uh last as we as we continue to do our planning. uh other things that will have could have potential future budget implications that are out there and on the horizon. Um there are two current uh pieces going through the Minnesota legis legislature uh a statewide health insurance plan uh that would require certain that at least right now as written requires a certain level of district uh funding as well as minimum salaries for some staff. And that's where we're at with our current budgeting process. that I can answer any questions if you have anybody anybody got anything for Joel like we got a lot coming up >> I guess I would ask if there's anything you recommend that we
052can do to help with the compensatory revenue contacts phone calls >> yeah I think anything we can do to contact our local legisl to under let them understand uh the impact it has specifically for us in Warthingington because it is different. Uh the hold harmless affects every district differently. Unfortunately, the term winners and losers gets used in this and ultimately the the districts that quote unquote lose money, the students are the ones that lose. Uh and you know, $2.4 million if that was a potential cut is about 25% of our compensatory revenue. Um, so that that is a significant amount of money for us to to balance out in the near future. >> Thank you. >> I did send uh a letter on from me on the district behalf to our local legislators today. Anything
053else? Okay, moving on. 5.4 Approve the first reading of policy 721, procurement policy. Joel, >> sure. This this uh first reading um is for uh an old policy which was around grant awards. Uh MSBA did a a huge overhaul. Um you can see all the all the jargon on the right hand side. Uh Terry Marorrow is the MSBA's lawyer. Uh and so they did a deep dive into the legal aspect of this. Uh this went through the instructional committee without any recommended recommendations for change. I did want to call out two pieces in that I believe it's on page four. Um those that are highlighted in in yellow there were um was verbiage that we added and so uh myself or designate uh can make some of these decisions. We added that we are asking
054that any district employee that is looking for some sort of reimbursement for purchase um does so with prior administrator approval. We changed the dollar amount from $1,000 to $ 250. Um $1,000 was MSBA's recommendation. We felt like that was a little high. And then um for us at the district office, anything more than than 50,000 would come here. I give the example of um with the the contract we had made with our our new um website program that's that's going through. We signed that contract. It was less than $50,000. And so we felt like that was a good dollar amount. So other than that, there were no other uh changes or recommendations made by the instructional committee. >> Okay. Do we have a motion to approve the first reading of policy 721? >> So moved.
055>> Motion by Lori. Do I have a second? >> Second by Eric. Is there any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion for the first reading of policy 721 say I. >> I. >> All those opposed, same sign. Motion passes. 5.5 transportation update. Josh, >> yeah, this is just a really quick update. We brought it to instructional and operational, but for those of you that were not in those committee meetings, uh the first thing just we are about 3/4ers of the way through the year uh with a new transportation company. Just wanted to share that things have been really going well. It's been a great uh transition. I've seen the company be extremely responsive to anything any questions we have. Um they're really working hard to make sure that they're meeting our needs.
056Uh the big one that we want to also mention is next year we will be changing um kind of models with how we transport our special ed students. In the past we have taken care of pretty much that full responsibility and interestingly enough um really for a very long time in the contract that actually stated that the the transportation company would be responsible for sped transportation. I just think it kind of became one of those things that as we started to do it we just took it on. Uh so we have asked them to take on the major responsibility of transportation. Um the biggest shift with that will actually be some of those staff members that assist currently. So they might be our pair of professionals during the workday in their morning and afternoon shift.
057They still might continue to do those transportation routes but they would be on uh 40's payroll during that time. They have talked about some potential shifts at least with the internal route utilizing some slightly larger vehicles comparative to ours but still having adults on those uh vehicles. So >> Mr. Chairman a question. So that will not mean any additional dollars since it's already in the contract. >> Correct. Well, there will be some slight shift in the dollars. So what we currently pay for vehicles and some of our staff's hourly wages, we will have some additional costs from the bus company as they charge us for those routes, but we will not have the cost in terms of paying those employees in the morning and afternoon routes. So it's more of a shift in the budget
058>> and we won't need as many of our vans and the suburbans, the suburbans and the vans and some of that. >> Right now we're being very cautious to move anything too quickly. We have started to take a look at if there are some that have completely depreciated out but we are not in the uh mode of trying to move them all. I will say that for row they have some vehicles because they're just a larger firm but they have told us that if any of the vehicles we are interested in um moving they would be interested in buying from us at market rate. >> Okay. Anybody else? Okay. 5.6 Six. Approve resolution for the approving of the tax abatement. >> Sure. One more time. We have a tax abatement from Marco Ramos um from
059Ramos Construction requesting a tax abatement. Again, the parcel is 31-1068-080 will be on the 1600 block of Cesley Street in Warthington. And all necessary paperwork to the county and to the school district uh for the tax abatement has been submitted. Do I have a motion to approve the tax abatement? >> So moved. >> Motion by Eric. Do I have a second? >> Second by Anne. Is there any further discussion? >> Roll call vote. >> Miss Dudley. >> I. >> Miss Seagard. >> I. >> Miss Mills. >> I. >> Mr. Bloom. >> I. >> Mr. Parish. >> I. >> Mr. Wbboom. >> I. >> Motion passes. Okay. 5.7. Approve to declare surplus property. Joel. Yeah, we have uh iPads, lots of them that are going out uh this summer with a new batch coming in. Uh
060so this is a proactive step so that we can move those devices as we prepare uh our students with the new the new ones that are coming through. And so um we are looking for approval tonight um to take those iPads that have aged out. Um Amy Ernst, our technology director, has an organization uh that purchases those iPads. Um and so they are willing to to buy them in bulk back from us, providing a little bit of revenue back to us with those devices with whatever value they have. So looking for your approval to declare those as surplus so that she can move forward with her process. >> Do we have a motion to declare the iPad surplus property? >> So moved. >> Motion by And I have a second. >> Second. Seconded by Lori.
061Is there any further discussion? >> Just a question, Mr. Chairman, on so they're we're declaring them as surplus, but it's not an actual bid process required. It's just she already has a an avenue for them. >> She does. And >> it's not necessary to do it. >> It's not because it does not meet the threshold of of of enough revenue for us. Yep. >> Do we know what the approximate value is? >> I'm going to look to my colleagues. Did she happen to say I wasn't at that operational meeting? >> I don't know. She said um what the value was, but she I think she said what we get for them. Was it like a $100 or 75? I mean I think she said we used to get like 50 and then it has increased
062and maybe someone that was there like was it 75 a unit? She never said what the current value was of them though. But she just basically said what we got for them. >> But I can follow up. I can ask and follow up though. >> It's just curiosity. If it if it's about 50 to 75 bucks per iPad, is that what you're saying, Carmen? >> Yes, I believe that's what she mentioned. I think she said in the past the company was 50. >> Um, one of the reasons she's mentioned that we go through a company like this instead of going out >> and selling them just, you know, some districts will just put them out for bids or, you know, let let the public buy them is this company comes in, takes them all, basically
063wipes them all clean. It saves our technology that step of going through each individual um, iPad. >> And do we know how many we have? >> What's the number? right here. >> Um, yeah. So, >> roughly >> we have more coming, but this is the first batch that she's working on getting rid of and then as they go through them, >> 40 Gen 7s >> and then 397. >> Perfect. >> Okay, thank you. >> Y >> Okay, anybody else with questions? Okay, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor of the motion say I. >> I. Those opposed, same sign. Motion passes. Okay, online auction update. Josh, >> this next one will allow bidding. Uh, historically, we have tried to do periodic rumage sales when we have uh vintage chairs and tables
064and file cabinets. We have um actually one of our capital outlay projects, we are trying to make one of the sheds at the middle school back into what it was originally designed. and it's to keep our equipment nice uh in the weather. But that building has really filled up with extra things. And rather than a rumage sale, we've been chatting uh with a local auctioneer and we're going to try an online auction. Um we're hoping to go kind of live in June and we will be working with buildings now because we know there's some things in there that will draw some attention, but we also want to just kind of get the word out to buildings that if there's other feature items that might draw people's attention to that online auction, we want to make
065sure that they're listed. Okay. Anybody got questions for Josh on that? Okay. Moving on. 5.9. Approve a student expulsion. >> Sure. Board members, you should have a packet in front of you with the details uh of a student expulsion from an incident that happened in one of our buildings. >> Okay. I need a motion to approve the student expulsion. >> Move to approve. >> Motion by Matt. Second. Do I have a second? Second by an >> Is there any further discussion? >> Roll call vote. >> Miss Dudley. >> I. >> Miss Agaren. >> Hi. >> Miss Mills. >> I. >> Mr. Bloom. >> Hi. >> Mr. Parish. >> Hi. >> Mr. Woodboom. >> I. >> Motion passes. Make sure Lisa gets your papers back when we close the meeting. >> Okay. Moving on. 6.0 6.1
066Superintendence Report. My report this evening is uh highlighting the the event that myself and three other members of district leadership were a part of. And so uh district leadership recently participated in trainings through the I love you guys foundation focused on strengthening school safety systems, crisis response procedures, and reunification practices. The training provided our team with valuable tools and frameworks designed to support safe, consistent, and effective responses during emergencies. One of our key takeaways from the training was the importance of common language, clear protocols and practices and procedures across all of our district sites, establishing consistent expectations and responses to help ensure that students, staff, and families experience confidence and clarity regardless of where they're at as far as what building they're in. As a result of this work, our next steps will include reviewing
067current sitebased safety plans, aligning protocol crawls AC, excuse me, aligning protocols across all buildings, and identifying opportunities for continued staff training and drills. We will also focus on strengthening communication systems and ensuring that reunification processes are understood and practiced districtwide. Safety remains one of our highest priorities. The training reinforces our commitment to proactive planning, continuous improvement, uh so that all district sites maintain strong systems of support, preparedness, and protection for students, staff, and visitors. And so, more to continue to come, but uh it was a a very uh insightful two days last week and uh stemmed lots of conversation moving forward. >> Okay. 6.2 instructional committee. >> Um from the agenda, everything's been covered. We also though did get a website preview from Anne Foley and I think that was both on the operational side
068and the instructional side. So um thanks to those that are involved in that website. We look forward to when it comes online and do we have a a date or a time when that's going to you ready? >> Band Camp early June >> early June. >> Okay. So otherwise everything's been covered. >> Okay. Okay. 6.3 operation committee. >> That was a good meeting. I think we covered everything. Well, >> awesome. >> Let's see. >> Okay. 6.4. Other reports? None. Okay. 7.0. Other business. We will now go into close session. The meeting will be closed as permitted by section 13D.05, 5 subdivision 3A to evaluate the performance of the school district superintendent.