Finance Committee Wed 11/19/25 City Hall RM305

001Good evening everybody. This is uh California Education Finance Committee. Today's Wednesday, November 19th. Um it is 5:48 in attendance. I'm Jennif Chair. Uh we also have committee member Willie Nita Marissa May online board members Joseph Kovic Ala Benan in person and online Rob Traver and Audi Woodson. We'll get started with approval of the minutes from October 29th, 2025. >> So move. >> I'll second that. Any changes? Anything? >> All in favor say I. >> I. Now we're have an update from Dr. Mau on the fiscal of budget for 256. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to give uh the board uh and the committee an update. We we had a meeting today with uh the deputy commissioner and uh the the three technical assistance uh gentlemen and the new state technical assistance team

002uh public works uh and they are helping the district and staff or my administrative staff in developing a whole new transparency uh budget process that we're going to be uh implementing this year. Uh I think it's a great opport with with uh that work with Netor on. Well, what they're going to do is take that also take the 34 recommendations from the audit uh and help us to to devise a a whole new transparent way of being able to start the development of the budget. So, it's a good opportunity to bring principles and directors into the play of how we develop a budget. And so it's uh it's also going to probably be uh help the board because one of the things that the commissioner is wanting the board to be able to do is

003to go out into the community to talk about budget the development process all that. So but we're going to create that whole know um budget process timeline uh and we're very excited about we had about a four and a half hour meeting today just to start the the mechanics of it all. uh and then being able to kind of you know I think we have another meeting early December uh because they want something in place ASAP and so I think it's important that uh I share that information is is hot off the press uh we we left them about four uh with this whole new process uh it's new for us it's going to be new for principles directors uh for everyone uh and I think that's one of the reasons why this new team

004has come to play is so that they will be able to have a system in place uh for the district as we move forward. Uh and then also making sure that process is transparent so that everybody in the community understands it. Uh maybe not understand it, but still have a a a good flow of what needs to happen, the timeline that we're under to make sure that we do we're doing and being real specific about what needs to happen uh and who needs to be a part of that whole process development. And then we'll also they're going to also come in and work with the board a little bit and try to make sure that you guys are aware of what needs to happen uh in this budget process because I can say I can

005say well you'll hear once u uh next year kind of gives his report uh we're we have to be very strategic about our budget moving forward. So, um, I want to make sure that, um, good or bad, we have a process in place in order for us to be able to kind of manage what we're seeing within the dollars that we have to run this district effectively. So, uh, I'll take any questions that you have, but if not, I'll turn it over to Nester. >> Thank you. Thank you, Dr. information and and like always you're doing history as always doing history >> but um thank you said you're always going to be ser I'm very glad you step in and I want the people in the state understand that the situation going all through you

006know it's new for you for all of us the people can understand I don't want people they think like oh we have this problem no fix it you came with you they came into this the plate and you feel like okay I'm going to fix it I'm going to do it but I want you people understand you know you're trying to do the best you can you know it's not easy what we all we're going through and I want the state understand that for the short time and trying to fix so many things and I'm like I always told you I'm very proud of short time you're doing something that all the superintendent performers before being on the states they never face the situation when they know what you know what bridge we're going through.

007But I want to say you thank you for that and I hope this does they understand that they know what we want is what we need. So I don't want to come to you and say you don't do this, you don't do that when this is fresh for you and you try to fix it. Thank you. Thank you madam chair. >> Mr. Chamber. >> Yeah. Um first Sam, I don't know what was going on but I lost him twice outside. Forget the elevator but I lost Dr.'s these presentations guys out on the street and coming in um um we had a proposal on the timeline. So are we throwing that out? It's it's the same proposal that that I shared with you guys. They are trying to understand how we're incorporating district policy, you know,

008city charter, the finance dates that are actually in in that proposal that I provided you guys. trying to streamline that a little bit to make sure it's accurate and there's there's some deliverables that's going to be coming at those different, you know, juncture in the c within that calendar. So, it just really redefining that a little bit more and really giving us some target dates to make sure that we're aligning to when the mayor is going to to be able to we have to submit that our budget to the mayor. So, we they're just backdating all of that. now in order for us to make sure that we're moving forward with it. >> Okay. So, are we working off of that? >> Yes. We we we were pleased with the progress we were making with

009that. We hadn't had something like that in a long time. If if ever I I'm I have to reach back in my mind to think if I remember when we had that detailed the timet for the board event. um in my 25 years of working with the Norv that you know so I'm just wondering are we going to now see what they're proposing in the context of that proposal or are we throwing out the baby with the bath water? I think it's a I think it's going to be a combination, you know, because they're wanting to make sure that that again, like I said, the timing of of the things that we're they were missing a lot of the deliverables that should be should be coming along with those dates that we put on the

010calendar. >> Explain to me what a deliverable is. you know, my in the past, the district has never really solicited, you know, uh, from principles or directors their needs at the building level. And so there's there's a process that we that we're going to undertake by giving principles staffing allocations at their building at the building level, you know, things that they're going to need for, you know, like their um like materials and and just there's a justification process that principles have to justify what they're spending, why they're spending it, and then that comes to central office and then we we collect all those things and then we we're able to make sure it aligns to the district goals. So this that whole budgetary process is very detailed and in depth but we don't have one

011of those in place in the district. So they're helping us to develop that. >> I would disagree with you. There have been various permutations on that thought in the past. Principles were given here's how much you have to spend. Figure out how you want to spend it that much leeway but with a restriction on the actual money. you have this much per student, you have this much, you know, so there's been variations on a theme. Um, so now we're developing a new theme. >> Um, and so I I, you know, which I'm not opposed to. I'm just saying that that that that that concept has been bounced around in various forms for a long time as to how we decide what the local budget is within a a building. So I I when you say

012a deliverable, that's why I'm trying to figure out it's a it's a fancy word. I'm just trying to understand what it means in in real life um with regard to what we're changing because I know you guys had that in there. Um and so >> what I'm hearing the difference is that you you said the principal given this amount you're >> I gave that as one example. You know, I saw principles get depending on the superintendent and the board. I saw principles given different options over the 25 years that I've been involved as a teacher and afterwards. But, you know, I'm just saying that that's one example of what principles were put through over the years. >> I think the I think the key point here is that there's there's no current written processes and

013procedures of what they're going to be doing. So, we're setting that up and so and there's a timeline that goes with it. So deliverable for me means okay at on December 4th per se this should happen this should go out to the principles at the review by December 8th it's going to be returned to the so all those things are going to be and it's going to be a written document that they're going to have to follow >> and I think what's what I'm saying for me is that I thought we were already doing that and I I thought that what we were already putting together this proposal that would have that kind of interaction between central office and buildings in your process if I recall. So again, I'm hearing I'm I'm not the same.

014>> It's not a bad interaction to have with them. I heard their presentation two meetings ago. Um, I'm I'm just, you know, my reaction when the deputy commissioner made his first presentation to the state board was, "You're not saying anything that we weren't already doing, and I'm not hearing anything that we weren't already doing tonight." Um, you and and Nester had made a presentation to this board. We had had a full discussion of your timetable. We were working on that timetable. I heard what you're telling us tonight. um after four and a half hours stuff that we were already talking about doing. Not that we had refined it completely. Not that it didn't have some flaws that we needed to work on and we couldn't use their input with all their experience to make it

015better. I'm not saying any of that, but I didn't hear anything new in what you just said tonight. when I get past the fancy words that we weren't already trying to work on and they couldn't help us make it better. I'm not saying any of that. But I I haven't heard really anything in there that is a whole lot different than we were already working on. >> But and I think you have an accurate point of that, but I think it's just more of trying to to provide some clarity and some transparency of how that process is is we're rebuilding a lot of ideas, some interesting thoughts, and it'll be fine. I'm not opposed to that. But I don't what I don't want to hear is that the somebody up in the in in the

016central up in the central office of the state, you know, be blessed us with some ideas that we hadn't thought about here in the hit in the states. Um because we were already going in the good direction. >> Yes, we were. >> Okay. I just want to be clear. >> Thank you. >> Yes, we were. >> Mr. Yes. I just like to point out, you know, we're developing this process, this procedure, and this calendar. Today is November 19th and we've been ready to go into budget season. So, we need to use the one we got and make sure we stick to it and just get moving on this. Trust me, we're we got our we got the we got our martial artist and how we're going to do it and things are going to roll

017pretty quickly. probably by December 3rd, we're gonna have more things out and ready to go and and rebuilding and training people of the new process processes and things. We're we're ready for that. The team rallied. We we got a good plan of action moving forward. >> Did we find out anything about that? >> That's a whole another story. >> So, we have a side conversation about that. [laughter] >> Well, >> okay. Good evening. Good evening everyone. What I've done here is compiled there are some rules breakets here. So I'm going to go through them one after the other. The very first one is the one that says three major cities special education comparison for fiscal year 2023 2024. Very first line is basically three major cities. Bridgeport very top line is Bridgeport data. The second

018line is New Haven data. The third line is waterberry danger per pupil expended German meaning the average cost that Bridgeport spends to educate a child oh it's two students I'm sorry is $18,922 New Haven spend 21,000 per pup bill $20,266 for pupil transportation this is the average cost it cost for bridge to transport forth their student well be special education the regular students but it's all what they call with it average total average is spending $2526 per student for transportation New Haven is spending $1,838 water is spending $1,334 when it come the next column is district central office staff these data at 20 2023 2024 data because we extracted these datas from the state website in order to be able to compare. So state data I use for those who don't know state data are

019usually near the dies. So we don't have the updated data is what I'm saying the 2025 data until every town finishes filing what they call the EFS report which is the annual report we file to this data every town file. So, but even with that Britport central office stamp is 17. When you consider the cuts that the weighted this year in order to arrive to this year's budget, you're probably looking at 410 a project. So, but New Haven staff is 34. Everybody working with half cap less than half capacity of New Haven. Uh Waterberry is is 32 34.2. too. When it comes to special education tuition, Bridgeport spend total of 27 these are millions now 27.2 million. Uh New Haven spent about the same a little more 27.7 Waterberry spent 11.6. When it comes to

020total special education expenditure, Bridgeport spent 96.6 million in 2024. New excuse me, New Haven spent 85.9 spent 74.3 million for 2025 that just pended which is spending $120 million by special education 120 >> 120 what we spent last year on special education so percentage of student with disability bridge percentage of Bridgeport student with disability is 20.7 75% 20.7%. Behav is 16.3%. Watermelon is 20.9%. Percentage of English learn among the student in the district or students in the district is 31.1 English as a second language and in heaven is 24.1 America 21%. One thing I have to point out here when your population of English language and special education is that high the cost is much more higher. So that's the only thing I have to point out here because of educating those set of children

021is much more higher but it's all advocate for that's what I call the weather average cost percentage of student meal bring is maximizing of the free meal uh which is the nutrition center free meal 87.5 Brford student do receive free meals New Haven 75.5% Waterberry is 79.5%. When it comes to alliance alliance grants, there are two tiers of ECS money or alliance is two tiers of ECS. One is the regular ECM Bridgeport get4 million. The other one is the alliance money which is kind of supplemental grant of alliance. Bridgeport received in fiscal year 2020 30 37.4 million. New Haven received 26.4 million. Waterberry received 76 million total disproportionate distributions would be one and brief has the highest number of students in the entire state. >> That's that's important to know guys. I mean, when you

022start looking at what Nester said is that when you start to have special ed and bilingual students, which is 51% of our student population of the 19,000 almost 20,000 kids, it takes more money to to educate those those those students. Uh, and I don't think when when when funding allocations are distributed at just look at the difference between the 37.4 4 million that Bridgeport receives and the 76 million that Waterberry receives. That's a huge discrepancy right there, you know, but it's based on how the state has created the formulas to to be able to get to those numbers. And to me, there's a there's a huge discrepancy there that that we're going to start having conversations around in order to kind of get this fixed. >> Numbers, we're going to say one page at a

023time. Yes. >> Well, I'll take questions. >> How does the board want to handle it? >> Committee members, there's Miss Medina. >> She she she literally just No. Um, so I I just wanted you you clarified some of my questions right from the beginning. That's at the top 23 24 >> but then after that >> because 25 we have. Yes. >> Yep. So on the top you put down 23 24. So I'm looking at 23 24 but then after that I see the breakdown that there's five with 23 24 and then the last four is 2425 >> right >> why wouldn't we just also follow 23 24 to add >> to those parameters that we can see yeartoate information and then add 2025 I'm not sure but I just want to have those numbers for

02423 24 if possible when we ever get to it um the alliance dollars >> yes um why are we not also giving the information uh with the ECS funding for that year or the excess cost share um because I know there the state they came and gave specific dollar amounts and I need to see that or I would like to see that definitely because they're saying that we got a certain amount of money on 2425 and I'm trying to see it in the document but I don't see it I just >> it's coming >> it's they'll get created. Okay. I mean um >> total ECS combined. >> Oh, it's combined >> relative to >> Well, I see I have numbers. No, let me just think I don't want to share. I do have numbers that

025says the ECS formula dollars and it's excluding the data that I have in front of me uh my own data that is excluding alliance. So here I only with document that you're showing sharing with us today is only have alliance dollars. So that's why I wanted to see the ECS doctor. Andy, I want you you possible to clarify for some people why is it important when we speak about a 2425 the percentage of student with free and reduced lunches. That way they can see the data and understand why that's important. >> It's just basically honestly some students choose not to but kind of is maximizing you know opening the door for every student. is an individual student and choice to be very honest with you. Go ahead. >> The higher the number, the more funds

026the district gets. So you probably make sure you have kids know fill out the free and reduced applications. So we have a lot of kids and parents in need of that. So they are really amped to be able to, you know, a lot of the there's a lot of misconceptions about I have elementary kids, I have high school kids, but they don't want to be singled out. So sometimes they don't make the connection. But but we've done a really good job of educating our parents about filling out those applications because if we get up into the 90s, you get so much more money just to be able to utilize as the district wishes to utilize. So that's why you see a little bit higher than because the data management team, they are really making sure

027that that's the purpose of the enrollment center as well. We can capture those families at the beginning. if they need help with fill application out, we can help them do that as well. So again, it's just one of those things. But that is a that's a really positive number that we need to make sure that we stay in the 90 range. It's awesome. >> No, he wanted him to explain because that's how we get that extra funding extra money to take care of the population that we have compared to some of the communities here. He's only sharing three. And I like the way he did at the other one that we had six or seven other towns that they need to look at. And you know, when you're talking about per people transportation, you know,

028we're we're in in the double of let's say for Waterberry. Uh and then when you're talking about staff, you know, they're actually in the double uh for for for district central staff. And it's just been a huge >> misconception and narrative out there that we're spending so much money at the top. Correct. Absolutely. like if we're not have people that we're servicing and that's what I want the public to know that we're servicing such a unique population and a number that we need the staff to take care of what we're handling. It's not like if we're not handling these families, these students that are coming inside of our schools, come to our schools, see the population that we have, the number of students that we have in our classroom, why do we need more staff

029and to make sure that we can manage those staff and then just think that with all due respect that is a joke, that is something that we're not looking at. We're looking at it, the data doesn't match the narrative that they're trying to say that we're spending so much more. that I know we're spending up there, but that we're spending so much more compared to the other district. And you can see the numbers here in these two that they're in the 30s each other, New Haven and Waterberry, we're in the less than 20, but we're servicing 10 sometimes four or 5,000 students more. But I'll I'll let him continue in the other spots or Miss Ernes, do you have any questions? No, not at this time. Thank you. >> This container covered most of mine.

030Um, just want to point out an additional on on a lunch and free price lunch. It's also um one of the cohort one of the contributing factors to the need for more money. Not just um not just to get the revenue, but the human side of it. Children that live in poverty have different needs than other children. It's not just on money. It's just because we got to identify the students that are going to need more supports over than the other students. So when we got 90 and another district 30 or 20, they got less needs. But in the state of Connecticut, funding formula is so upside down. The students that have less needs get more funding per. On that note, we got the three districts, Bridgeport, New Haven, Waterberry, Mr. Victina pointed out so

031eloquently that we have half the amount of waterberry and half the amount of New Haven in administrative staff. But he did point out, which is one of my favorite things to always point out, we got the exact same number as Greenwich, Connecticut, onethird offsides. And uh one of the people who come from Grandwich, Connecticut criticized us for it, but having the same amount of kids, same amount of administrators for our children as he did for his, which is totally unfair. Um what else do I had? Um and that central office, you could answer that question. We got about 14 right now. >> Yeah. >> Now point out the the transportation per people transportation. What is that a function of? Or is it possible that all the special places that are there is closer to them

032than they are to us or are we spending more trips out because the populations don't look as I think it's a combination of things. So I think when you look at when you start looking at out of district placements of of our children and where they are in those out of district placements and then also when you're you know the number of kids that are actually in need of that. Sometimes when you start looking at one to one, you know, where they have, you know, they may be experiencing behavioral issues within for that one child or a number of children, they need that specialized transportation which is cost a little bit more, but we are still based on the recommendation from the PPT, we're still obligated to provide those services for them. So it's a

033combination of things you know and that's one of the things as as we start you know uh fine-tuning the services that we provide to the district and we look at where these you know where the kids are going to and we have a lot of crosspollination of people live in quadrant one it goes in quadrant 4. We there's a lot of you know summing up we're going to do over over the next year or so in making sure that we the efficiencies of the routes who's doing it who's who's charging and with the cost of that transportation. So all those things are coming into play here shortly that we're going to really look at that and streamline that a little bit. The state's going to help with that because they're going to cap a lot

034of your like your alition placement service costs, tuition costs, transportation costs. So they're going to put a cap on that. Right now it's it's a free willing on what what these organizations can charge. >> Is it possible for us to get somebody to look at water bar and see if they got some efficiencies that we can take advantage of that they that we may not be aware of? Yeah, I think there's I mean and that's kind of what we're doing is really looking at and I'm gonna I'm going to be reaching out to some of the urban school districts as well, superintendents, because we're going to we're we're sharing some of the same issues and I think it's important to have the that deeper discussion with them regarding, you know, what are you doing with

035this things that that I may not be aware of that they're doing like you said, the efficiency parts of that. And again, that's just uh I just joined the the urban superintendent leadership not I don't know the name of the organization but it's all the local you know urban size school districts in Connecticut so that we can be a part of that and understand some of them what they're doing locally as well so but you you make a great point I think it's important to look at and talk with other superintendents that may be going through the same same or similar things that we're going through let's start with the fact that doesn't have charters the targets have charged. >> They don't have to transport chart students. >> Okay. >> And then you notice they

036have less special ed students and stuff. So those two things are factors right away >> um for their transportation costs. >> That's what I was going to >> which I'm assuming is a rather significant factor. New Leven has about the same number of charter schools as Bridgeport. Right. So there we're about equivalent to New Haven. I don't know what the transfer cost is. Um and of course we're comparing a year ago where um we don't know what our costs are this year. We have yet to be elucidated as to what the heck we're spending this year [laughter] how we're paying for it. So we don't even know. >> Um so there's another problem. Um but with regard to an actual comparison, those two factors alone make water very different than us. So I assume those

037things are come into play. >> Yeah. >> Um I uh wanted to just ask about um the difference between Waterberry special ed and our you know it New Haven and Bridgeport are about the same. >> Yeah. Waterbury shockingly low number of special ed. >> Pardon me. >> Oh, tuition mean >> special. >> Yeah. Yeah. Tuition. >> You know, what do they do? >> Um to have that number down slow um would be of interest to me. Um and then um uh the other thing that you you said you're going to get to is that there should be a column here for regular ECS. You described alliances supplemental ECS. So there should be a column here for regular ECS. >> Regular ECS they haven't. >> So then we're comparing oranges and oranges and apple. I know

038regular ECS they have not changed in the last >> I don't know what it is so so I can't we went through it in total ACS for Bridgeport is 212 million [clears throat] >> right so here I should write 164 from Bridgeport but how much should I write for new >> how much should I write I had given those to >> no I just don't have them you gave me a chart here that tells me everything I need to see in one place except you just said >> I got all these documents We have it comparing these three cities. Um, and that's certainly a relevant figure. Uh, New H somehow got slipped an extra 3540 million in alliance money. >> Yeah. the supplement there. >> The other guy has said historically the last >> I

039just wanted as as Mr. Sakavic has underscore for years their local contribution is 30 million above arts. >> So um they're getting extra money from their from their community that Bridgeport doesn't get New Haven gets more from their community than Bridgeport gets. So, you know, when we start looking at the state of the the district, those are factors. Those two districts get much more money from their local communities than they um we're looking at how much do they get from the state. Um so, and they're all crime poverty. So, we're we're all crime, I should say, and we all justifiably so >> true. uh the state isn't taking care of any of their poor districts in in of so many ways and we have looked at the ECS formula being flawed. We have looked at

040the ECS uh formula needing to be tweaked with regard to poverty and multi-lineers. You've highlighted both of those. >> Yes. >> Um here and you've highlighted the special ed problem. So I you know if we can get the ECS numbers on New Haven and Waterberry to add here it would be useful. I don't I just don't have them off my >> I was I think I'm going down. >> Yeah. Right. You know because you got it so concise and honest data which is useful but comparing the legal water that way too. In one of the I'm going to share you >> I heard when he asked >> I thought about our BCS. >> No, it's just here that should be one more column said bring out ECS for fiscal year 2425 so that we can

041see how the three commands compare that way too. >> I never thought of it until you said it aligned to supplemental ECS. So it's >> Mr. Woodson. >> Oh, you said it. Why' you send it to guys here? Oh, just tell us >> Mr. Wson. >> Oh, okay. >> Thank you. >> Um Um I I like the, you know, information and you I like to know what other, you know, other other cities are getting to compare. But I don't, you know, I think I don't like to waste too much time, you know, figure it like trying to like uh, you know, just say like wondering how why they got so much and why the the different like we we know the form we we know the formula is is wrong. It's not it's not, you

042know, equal to every what everybody else gets and, you know, it should be flipped around. But I think that we should spend this time, you know, focusing on our own finances and how we can, you know, you know, fix what we can control because, you know, even if we even if we do find out how much Waterberry and New Haven gets, you know, by the even if we go up to Harford, by the time we, you know, ask for money and, you know, you know, talk to to representatives and stuff like that, you know, a whole year go by. So, you know, but during during that time, you know, we have to save what 40 million or $60 million for the for the for the next, you know, uh you know, budget. So, you know,

043we should I think we should spend our time, you know, trying to handle what what we could control rather than what we can't control. Thank you. >> Okay. The next page if you want the next big is a bigger page. Basically what I compared here is the IDEA grant. IDEA is 611. There are two IDA grants. One is 611, one is 619. The next page is 619. But this particular page we're looking at, you're going to see on top it says ID is 611. On top I did it. Again, I highlighted Bridgeport, what Bridgeport is receiving, and I put each individual town. There are nine major towns that I'm comparing here. Each individual town total number of students for fiscal year 2024. And the average per pupil the average per pupil received over the seven

044years period basically the average is basically divide the total that each town received over seven years divided by the total number of student that's how you get the average per ratio for the seven average so um Harford if you can look at the total horn received a total of 46 $6 million richport received by a total of 40. You can go down the line and see what each other town received. Then you can equally go over and see the total number of students for each town. Then you go further and see the average for students over the seven years. again highlighting Bridgeport uh Hartford, Waterberry, New Haven. All the all those three major cities received more in total and in average than Bridgeport. Yet Bridgeport has the highest number of the most number of students

045and EA grant is used for special education students. If anybody doesn't have a question, I put it in that go down. What I did is slapped on a historical distribution of alliance grant again amongst all these major towns in the over there. Over the last four years, these are what each town received. In fiscal year 2023, Bridgeport received 24.7 million. Fiscal year 24, they received 28. Fiscal year 25 they received 37. Fiscal year 26 which in the year we're in they received 48 million. However, if you look at what other towns received, Waterberry, look at what Waterberry has been receiving over the years. In fiscal year 2026, Waterberry is receiving 86 million. Yeah, look at the student number and yet look at their average receipt compared to Bridgeport average. Their average receipt or student average

046receipt is $4,673. Bridgeport is $2,449. It's >> bad. Jesus, it's real bad. >> So, what I did is the total number that every child all the nine cities or towns we will we receive in fiscal year 2026 is $367 million. Then the total number of students in those nine towns is 120 million students. What it means is the average the average that each town if you do the average here the average that each of those towns each student in those towns is receiving is 3,4 $3,45. Yet Bridgeport is receiving $2,449. So I kind of took a little further step and said if Bridgeport is average receipt over the seven years is $2,449 divided by the 9,000 average Bridgeport Bridgeport ratio is 80% of the the 9,000 average 80.43%. Then I went a little further. I

047said, "Okay, let's flip the coin and say, give Bridgeport the average that each of those has received, multiply the average of $3,45 by the total number of students in Bridgeport received $60 million in the island compared to the 48 million we received this year. By the law of averaging, we are short changed 11.7 million. If anybody has a question we please >> and this is a story we're we're getting ready to tell and it's a story that's going to be very painful for people but it's it's a story that needs to be told I mean in your face with the numbers data doesn't lie it's right here but no one's wanting to explain the the rationale behind the differences between a a $ 48 million payment this year directly $86 million payment to library. And

048so that is the the the the the explanation that is needing to be put on the table. So we better understand that, right? So that's kind of how why we're these these these sheets are going to be every time we meet, we're going to be able to kind of go through them and make sure people truly understand what they are and we work from there. >> Sharing the data. comparing districts so that we can show how much we are short. >> That's correct. >> Yeah. Talking about short change unless you put it in empirical data comparison that's the only way you can show that that's what has been demonstrated here. Then you have alliance 619 619. >> Okay. Sorry. >> ID 6 again IDEA grants IDEA 619. If you remember I have said there are

049two IDEs funding sources. The first one that we'll talk about is IDE41 61 619 again is for special education also. Again if you look at the data it's a smaller grant but again if you look at the data in average receive $1142 per student report receives 8.8 8 town is 9.16. Let me see. Um, New Britain is 9.16 and Meridan is 8.8 again is 8.76. Again, Bridgeport is below these small smaller cities with smaller population. Yet, we have more special education students and spend more on special education more than any of those district. Kind of a kind of a redundant routine. I slap the scene again here that I had on the first page. If somebody didn't see the first time, maybe they stay the second time. It's the same data, but again, kind of

050a reminder. >> Then the next page, if we flip over, >> what I did is extract all the cuts that the district did or the board did this year in order to balance the budget. The line items are there, the categories are there, the dollar amount, the dollar amounts associated to those line items are there. We had a question for sure. Just ask a question about the seven year pupil average. >> Um so the idea is mostly special education. >> Yeah. >> Can you can you give a quick um definition of the acronym first and then >> I don't know what ID what do you know what ID? >> Disabilities education. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. So, >> yes. >> So, would it like if we just average the number of students with disabilities

051rather than the whole population? >> I think that would be a little bit more do that. >> Well, well, it will be worse. It will be worse. It will be worse. The comparison will be worse. It will show that >> Yeah. It will show that Bridgewood is getting much less because we averaging the total with a higher population, >> right? >> Yeah, I would definitely like to look >> that's good for I think >> it's a good it's going to look pretty much more ugly. But again, I do >> Yeah, >> it is what it is. >> But I I Yeah, we want more uglin. We want the truth folks to see the difference. That way they compare apples to apples of of comparing apples to oranges, apples to limes and they think that it's

052the same thing. Also on the on that note, I would love to see that also when it comes to the transportation because I know we got regular transportation, we got special ed transportation to see that that difference when we talk about transportation if possible. I don't know how hard it is. I know >> that may be a little difficult. That means I have to go and find the other town special education population and I mean we could we could we can look at the EFS report the EFS report is the audit report individual. Yeah, we could try >> by by history. We'll we'll figure out there to bring that forward to you guys Mr. Woodson. Um, I don't I don't know who does the report, but one thing I think that's important that people forget

053that should be included in the report is the amount of money that Connecticut spends on prison inmates. You know, they pay they pay $249 a day for inmate. That's over $91,000 a year. But they have no they have a a problem giving, you know, uh uh students and prek and and and and stuff like that. It's what it deserves, but they have no problem paying 90 over $90,000 for inmate. I think that should be included and in your reports when you when people when you're talking to the state and you're bringing this up, I think that should be a topic that's brought up too. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next page. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> The next page like I started saying earlier those are the cuts that the board approved or

054adopted to balance this year budget. I highlighted item number item number seven which is the elimination of the kindergarten parents. The reason why I highlighted it is to show that it was it was cut initially but it has been reinstated by the board. That's why I highlighted in there. Um but if you look at the line items, you look at the actual board adopted the total to balance the budget this year. Sorry. Go ahead. Yeah, I just madam chair um following up on Mr. Woodson just said which is an excellent point. We're juxtaposing all of this Mr. And with what you just said, which is the alternative, which is an excellent point that you made, the alternative is what we're paying if kids go to prison and we spend a boatload a lot more money

055to lock them up in prison than we do to educate children so they have an alternative. >> Um, and that's the argument we want to always make. And what's going to lead to them going to prison is if we keep making these cuts. And these cuts are what we did last year and next year. If we don't get more money, contrary to what you said a short while ago, if we don't figure out a way to get more money, these are the cuts that we made this past year. We have to figure out a way to come up with that much and more next year. So, we have to figure out a way to get more money using your argument as well as the arguments that we're developing tonight. Um, about equity and what's there

056and right um and contrast it to what you just said so correctly about the alternative which is so wrong. Um, so all of these arguments are strong arguments that we need to be making on behalf of our children >> and and they're using the third grade reading data to decide how many beds they need for prisons to look at our graduates. So that's a good button. >> And if you if anybody also threw the chair and if everybody wants to look up the data, they're actually even thinking of increasing it. So they're thinking of even going up to 323 uh per day. So from from 249 they're claiming to increase it to 323. So they're even giving a justifiable increase but yet the ECS formula for our kids have not changed it over close over

05710 years giving our kids no extra but cost of living is going up left and right. Our expenses are going up contracts are going up. transportation, gas, everything's going up. But yet there's they're setting it up for the prison prisoners to take care of them, but they're not taking care of our kids now before they get, god forbid, to that point. So all in all, if you flip to the next page of the operational cut, in total, the board did cut $33 million um in order to balance this year budget in expenditure in expend or program reduction with combination of both I should say. Then we use 9.5 million of the internal service fund which is the insurance fund or surplus if you want to put it that way that we had we kind of

058used $42 million if you want to categorize it as cut this year in order to balance this year budget yet we did $11 million in allian additional $11 million in alliance grant but let's not forget in total you started on the board started with last year or this year that got adopted was $67 million. That's the total deficit that working to bring it down the valley. So I know people are going to say alliance when you start with $67 million or problem for financial need um $11 million $3 million from the city from the city of Brook then we receive C grant well not se 1.8 8 million additional in supplemental special education reimbursement yet it's not enough. So that's that unless anybody has a question on those items. But again relating to the transportation

059elimination that the board did uh the between the city and the state they brought it back or they reinstated it. turn up for return 1.7 million. Now that 1.7 million again is a one time funding one time taking onetime funding from the state and the city. So what I'm trying to say here to retain it next year the board or the district has to come up with money to explain >> you can buy [laughter] it's along the same it's along the same They say it's the 1.2 and we got to come up with it. But >> 1.7 >> 1 I'm sorry. Yes, correct. 1.7. But according to the newspaper reports which is the only information we as a board were subject to the contract know about the number was it I think 875 if I'm

060not mistaken or someone there same that's being kicked in by the state >> by the city >> right for the first >> 869 >> by the city >> so now those additional 869 minus 1.7 on the additional savings going throughout this contract for the next two years. The contract that we're going to be responsible for after the state leaves or we still don't know that. >> Well, I had a meeting with we transport today and we're looking at what we can do to, you know, reduce the cost in the upcoming years. uh that's either coming back and revamping the actual contract or looking at ways to be able to within the contract save in order to kind of you know give back some of that to the district whatever. So, we're in negotiations right now

061just to look at that and what we can do to kind of make sure moving forward we're good for the end of the year, but moving forward, what can we do to mitigate some of those the the costs and lower them before we get there and have something in writing to be able to do that. Again, we we had an hour long talk today trying to figure out exactly and the state's working with us. They're in they're in those negotiations with us. Uh so within the next week or so, they're going to come back and provide us with a little bit more direction and concrete steps that we're going to be able to take to do just just as you said, just to kind of make sure that we know moving forward what that cost

062is going to be. >> Yeah. And and and I I find it quite concerning and really quite counterintuitive to doing our job as a board. We talk about transparency. They talked about all the transparency. We've been asking about information about this for a while. I literally filed a freedom of information request with the state about two months ago which has not been fulfilled to see the contract we as a city are privy to and it still has not yet been fulfilled. I hope I don't have to file a failure to provide the records for the states that information free money we paying and the services we're getting. This is not a partnership. We need to know what we're liable to. Please, state of Connecticut, give us the information we need to do our jobs. I

063can tell you I think you know probably I'm hoping by the end of the week I'll have some little bit more direction from the state of Connecticut about the the amount that they're going to be committing to the district. Uh, I think Nester reached out to the city cuz we need that those dollars on the books. Uh, and so what I'm hoping to be able to do is for them to provide me with, you know, some type of contractual things of where this money is going to go when it comes to the district and how much that's going to be. And so I'm I'm hoping that that's going to come as soon as I do. Uh, I'll get it to our legal counsel and then we'll be able to bring it back to the board

064for consideration before I sign it. uh because it's, you know, it's it's not a cont. It's a contract because they're providing us the money, but I want to make sure that that I'm doing the right thing by signing, but also being transparent to the board about what we're going to get. So, we'll get that from the state. We'll get to the the additional dollars from the city, and that should take care of the cost for this year's transportation that was put out to the public that they were going to joint fund it. >> Thank you, M. I want to clarify something. You say a few time the board dead. >> Let me finish please. >> Board dead and board dead. The information when they go out trust me but because we are the board we

065out and we have to handle what a lot of people when you guys inside the office and you handle less stuff. We we had to handle a lot of community parents. When you say the board did they going to think the board make decision they they we made decision because we don't have no choice. And we all know that because we don't want to get layoff. They don't want us to tell people listen your job is done nothing like that. It's because the situation was going through what the budget and the state know what we going through. I don't know what else the state want because I know Dr. in the cabinet they give all the information and I know you guys did an amazing job but I want you can understand when you said

066the board they had to be guarding when you said the word because people when they take that word not only people who is watching the news they put up oh the board they no was something simple they make it big and you guys know that we have to handle that because we made this cut because we don't have no choice because we don't have the money we're supposed to have so I just want to clarify that >> true I'll take that point of correction. I think I'll try to say the district that's better in the district because that's >> I mean but you know I try to quantify by saying you we started with $67 million deficit. There was no miracles to be done other than to >> get it done >> outside things and

067having it was a tall high mountain climb but I have to be honest with the chair I think you make a good point but I want to make sure I emphasize something to the board is obligated not to run a deficit budget. So the board relied on administration to be able to give them the numbers that was going to help balance the budget. And so the board supported that the recommendation that we brought forward and and you made a very good choice of being able to balance. We did that, you know, but we got much more, you know, and that's kind of part of this transparency with this finance committee. >> The time is now to start the work. the work is getting ready to get, you know, keyed up and we need to get

068we need to mobilize you guys with the data sources to be able to have a decent a very important confer conversation about the need and the comparison is part of that and you know I think the the the pipeline to prison if we don't do this is this needs to be in front of us all of that and then you know and then when I look back on Friday's you know little you and I's message is that we need everybody to take hold of this and push the button for everybody to understand. So that is the beauty of transparency and I think that's we're ready employees for that and I'm I'm really really excited and the state's helping us. So I think we're going to be in a good spot after after all said and

069done. I think we're going to be in a really really neat position uh to for people to provide additional funding for us. Well, I accept the fact that the board did this. I understand that >> Mr. Benan doesn't, >> you know, it sounds harsh. Um, you know, the district did, >> but ultimately it's our job to make a decision. We have to accept responsibility and we did vote. >> Um, and even if I voted no, I'm still on the board that that is responsible for establishing a budget. I get that. Um, and I can take my vote and explain to people I voted though and until I'm blue on the face and people will still point a finger at me. Um, it might, you know, no matter how I vote. But, um, you just said,

070which I am concerned about, that on with regard to the bus contract that you might have a copy of the contract for this year. No, I don't have a I don't know by the end of the week. >> I'm hoping to get some more direction from them about because we we've asked for the monies and so we have to get the money and so we asked the city as well. Uh I'll have to follow up with the city as well as I I have to follow up with the state about where is that 800,000 plus dollars because we have to sum up our budget and we're we're we're okay needing those dollars. trying to like put that to bed. >> I'm trying to get it behind me. >> Can you sign anything without us voting

071on it? >> Absolutely. That's what I'm saying. >> Okay. >> So, if you have that all tied up and and you're able to see it. I mean, he's asked to see it. It still needs to be presented to us by I guess at Monday's meeting it would be I don't >> if he has. Yes. I get No, no, I understand. He's he's as much a victim as we are. I'm not >> I'm not suggesting anything different. I'm just being clear because I I thought you said that you might finally see something. >> Well, I'm hoping that both at the end of this week, sir, I get that. I I got that. I'm not trying to suggest anything different. Um but, you know, then it would still need to be brought back to us because at

072some point >> we're the ones for the reason that we can Albert Banker just we still need to approve it. Uh, and so you know, no matter who was generous to us and and and trying to help us with the problem at the beginning of the school year, we still need to see what we what we agreed to in the final. Um, and know what we agreed to that Joe hasn't been able to get a hold of a copy of in through the FY process. >> Um, so I just Okay. wanted to make sure there was a time about five years ago, I think four or five years ago, three years ago when the city kind of chipped in reinstate transportation. I understand what was the way it was handled. We transportation sent a bill

073to the city that particular invoice of I think a million dollars. I can't remember exactly the amount. They send that invoice for that million dollar that million dollars to the city. the city paid that >> no [laughter] there still needs to be a very transparent way of being able that meeting but there was also other factors involved back then and they were like >> what I'm what I'm asked we transportation the rest for we transportation I say you know as far as I know the board did not commit to this extension uh the city you people agree with the city and the did instead of getting ready to prepare separate bills for them. >> But I mean that's the ideal thing. I mean >> right >> we the board is not part of it >>

074and and and and Mr. Nico I couldn't agree with you more. That's the way I understood what happened is the city and the state stepped in and said we'll take care of this. >> And so we really don't have anything to vote on, right? >> Because they said we'll take care of it >> and we need to see that they've signed off on an agreement that says we're taking care of this bill. You know, it's it's like when we're sitting at the lunch table and they say, "Don't worry, I got it. I got it." Thank you. I got it. So the way I look at it, I mean brings out another question. surrounding the city's contribution and a little longer to MBR last time the city stepped up and gave money to save transportation before

075an election, >> right? >> It was added to one year only and then the next year that money disappeared and the only reason we did not have to cut busing that year is because CO struck. Now the chickens have come home to roost and now we got another >> set of money that's may or may not be in the ECS in uh MBR for next year >> through clarify. Let me make it clear that the city committed to will not and is not part of the MBR or minimum budget requirement. It's allocated under the city's operating absolutely nothing with the minimum budget requirement. >> Why not? It's an incind contribution. Madam Chair, >> yeah, that's the way they treat me. Inind contribute. >> We don't need to spend a lot of time. The fact is

076I don't think Mr. Nicole is right. I think at some point we're going to need to legally resolve that question, but the the cards have been dealt on that question and it will need to be looked at legally, but I think you're wrong on that one, Mr. Nuo. Um, and I think that Mr. Sigavic has raised a correct point. Um, and it doesn't matter whether it came out of the city's operating budget. So, I think that that's that's a matter for the lawyers to resolve, not us here tonight. >> No. Okay. All right. Hold on. The last flip on to the last page. This is where basically what I've done question is here popularity I went back to historical data as to how much revenue these are in millions. I'm sorry these are in millions

077because if I start putting out the zeros is not this. [laughter] So I kind of truncated it to million. So where you see 164 million in fiscal year 2019 that's 164 million that of the east okay this this is where the ECS is teared up into two um so you have the 164 in fiscal year 2019 164 in 2020 164 in 2021 22 23 24 25 26 Now, as far as I know, for the last 20 years, ECA, that particular ECS allocation has not changed for any district in Connecticut. >> Um, at least 13. I don't know about 20, but it's been a while. >> They have they don't change. That formula has not been changed. That's why when they want to give you money, they give extra money on alliance. That's why they created

078the alliance funding. They don't they won't change the field. >> Who will change the formula? >> There's been a lot of conversation around changing that formula. So I think there's a lot of political support around [snorts] that needs to happen sooner than later. And I think that's what we're going to hopefully try to kind of capture as we start presenting our story as well. So that's kind of my thought process a little around how do we mobilize that is a way that we're going to do it and my my conversation with uh the senator yesterday was around that gave great pointers of what we can do to kind of do that but having conversations with people at Harford that makes a difference and how we change that. So it was really really good conversation uh

079and I'm pleased to uh again I'm just trying to mobilize how we do this and then I will bring everybody in the play how we move forward with it. So good good conversation. >> The next line underneath is the alliance allocation to bridge fiscal year 191 18 million fiscal year 20.9 million 23 fiscal year 21 23.22 22 fiscal year 22 24.75 23 24 25 then 26 this year we receive we received $48.6 $6 million. I didn't got it soon. >> Yeah, I believe I I have to go back and check what the date was of the last major court challenge where basically the Connecticut court said, "Listen, you know, there was a there was the chef case." >> No, but then there was a follow-up case was about everywhere else in the state water. >>

080And no. >> Okay. >> No, it was not Waterberry. was actually my daughter was asked to be a plaintiff in the '9s and it worked its way through about 15 20 years ago 15 years ago there was a ruling and the ruling was yeah you're right this is wrong >> but the court wasn't >> the court was not going to tell them how to fix it >> I remember >> the court kicked it back to the politicians >> I remember that yes I remember >> and the politicians haven't fixed it I believe we if we went back and looked we'd find out that's when they started using this alliance fix, but that did not fix the ACS formula. Um, >> but we'd have to go back and double check to see if that's an accurate

081um description of what happened >> historically. Um, and so, you know, it is time for them to to to fix the ECS formula, which is supposed to be what's fixing um, and you saw this past session where they kept the ECS formula in 80 communities that don't qualify for the ECS formula. because they were whining about it, but they don't qualify. They're they're suburban communities that don't needed anything. >> Held held on top of it. >> Um yeah, that's the way they call it. Held, but you know, it means is we're going to continue to give you money. Um so I I I do think that we need to keep pushing on this issue because it is the state is in a position where it can you know 15 years ago 10 you know the

082state was stumbling out of the 2008 economic downturn and and you know everyone was talking about how slow it was to recover from the 2008 but now it's recovered and it's robust. Um and the governor is running for office so it's a good time to raise these issues. The line underneath is the city's share or city's contributions over the years. This last year employed all the way through this last year. The city gave the district additional $3 million beyond what they gave last year. That 3 million, let me clarify that 3 million increase will the city has to maintain it. That increase to infinity. there's anything like infinity everlasting to infinity they cannot fund the district less a penny less or there will be in violation of the minimum budget requirement and and if I

083now chair um and I just the other thing I meant to ask is that I believe is the jump in alliance in the last two two years you report here is that the result of us finally correcting our Um um we have under reportported our um we have been lax in reporting our lunch free reduced price >> our free and reduced price lunches for years. We had failed to report accurately the number of children that qualify for our free and reduced price lunches and we only fixed that in the last few years. um as I understand it. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> They made some adjustments in alliance because they realized there was so much inequity. They said we're going to fix the problem. That's what the word they used. We are going to fix

084the formula to bring some equity in alliance with the good ask you to take a look at what our three reduced price launching u because I believe talking to legislators myself over the last few years that I've been on the board that we only began to accurately report our free and reduced price lunch percentages in in say the last three years. the years that I've been on the board, uh the before that we were severely under reporting the number of children who qualified um due to a uh a a budgeting reporting. >> I'm texting right now. >> Yes. I PJ's well aware what I'm talking about. um from legislators, the Bridgeport had had um dropped the ball on that one and had finally caught up which substantially improved our our position. >> I hadn't heard

085it. So, I'm I'm curious as well to to kind of see if there's a because I can go back and look at what was funded at those times >> in my mind numbers change. >> Did that jump our alliance contribution too? It wasn't just the generosity of the state. It was it was us improving our position in that area. >> Well, I mean in that case we are still ahead of what a better way ahead of us and the >> there's other factors. I I would agree with you but I'm just looking at what our why our position improves so dramatically. It's important to know that. >> It's just a colleague. >> Yeah. And I can give a little another piece of history because I'm glad I was here and involved in recognizing it. What

086had happened is there's a certain cut off where you go to 100% district. I'm going to make up the number right now. It's not going to be accurate. Say once you hit 71% reported as >> that's >> as qualified. We stopped count. We stopped counting. However, when we stopped counting, we were getting that 75%. Again, that's not an accurate number. It's just a ballpark. But when we started counting everybody and making sure that we had an accurate number of those people, the children that were in poverty that were qualifying that that's what booster exactly. >> Okay. But all in all, let's go to case which the total increase in the district received when you combine the three residents for each year. In fiscal year 2022, we received 3.95 3.9 million 3.95 million increase. In fiscal

087year 2021, we received 4.5 increase beyond what we received last year. Fiscal year 22, 3.53. Fiscal year 23 22 2 million 3.01 million fiscal year 24 5.7 >> I'm looking at the total revenue the total annual revenues >> it's the the second >> total from the top >> when you combine the three revenue sources. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Yeah. Sorry. Um uh fiscal year 25 we received 11.4 million49 million increase. Fiscal year 26 we received 14.2 million and 3 million of that was from the city of Greenport. The other 11 million was for the alliance increase. So but when you look at it the whole thing in 7 years our total revenue increase is 46.5 million $46.52 million. When you divide it over the seven years it comes up to $6.6 million annual increase. However,

088when you go to the expenditure side, total increase in expenditure over the seven years is $123 million. You divide when you divide 123 by 7 years, your average expense increase is 17.63 million. Automatically, you're negative 10 almost $11 million every year for seven years. That's selling almost 80 and people wonder how did Brit get here because they've been underfunded. They were spending they were getting less in revenue more way less than what they were spending. However, they were able to sustain themselves by doing some serious operational cuts. If you look here in fiscal year 2020, they did 4.8 million operational cuts. Fiscal year 21 they did 4.7 in order to balance the budget in order to run a deficit. Fiscal year 22 they did 12 23 is actually combination of operational and use of as

089you know as a money to observe things. It became obvious in fiscal year 2024 as somebody was pretty much working out on everything, you know. Then >> yeah, let let me emphasize one thing. I think it's I think it's so so important here. When you look at the dollars and you look at what the supplemental grants are are supposed to be used for, guys, when because of the lack of funding in Bridgeport public schools, you know, Bridgeport over the over the last seven years has been using the supplemental dollars to impact the classroom, you know, to hire staff and pay for staff because of the operational defic efficiency that we have. The state has designed the alliance supplemental grants to push back into the classroom and to use those things for the kids in this

090district. And that's not happening. We're not using those dollars to help teachers and to help kids get the services and things that they need in order to maximize academic growth. That's the story right there. And so I want to make sure that's clear because I think that is just the most heartfelt piece that we're not getting across to people because supplemental grants are for academic growth. And that's why they're targeted to those 14 turnaround campuses, guys. It's targeted for them to to use to help improve academics. And the way they're used is to by people in order to supplement the academics and that's just wrong the way we do it. So we got to do it and change the narrative here a little bit. So I know that's a hard thing to say but it's

091true. >> Truth. >> Yeah. And I I've seen this done. This is depressingly I, you know, I'm I mean that's it's I I really This sounds sick. I like the way you've laid this out because you can see it so clearly. >> I've seen this done comparing it to the cost of living too. >> Which is equally tragic. >> We don't keep up with the cost of living either. um we fall further and further behind the cost of living. Um but here you see it. So just to put another cost of living on here. >> Is there okay the projections for this year include the cost of living and for next year it includes the cost of living. So >> missing it Dr. >> Right. Right below the annual revenue increases go down to itemize

092the annual expense increases. receive salaries 3.5% coa staffs health insurance. >> No, but I'm talking about the national cost of living just just the sort of standard used in society that you know affects police, firefighters, everybody else. We don't keep up with that. Um so it's just a standard that everybody in society can relate to. We're not keeping up with that. And that's just sort of a standard that everybody knows. But I agree with you. We don't keep up with our thoughts. I get that. But I've just seen it done in different ways. I've seen it done comparing departments in the city and um you know we don't do it in any way. So I just think this is just tragically well done. Um and so I and and you know what you just said

093is correct. You know for some to do what we can for some kids and not for others. And you know we really need the resources to be able to do it for all our children. >> Mrs. God. >> Okay, I'm going to push back a little bit on that statement of how um yeah all in this track again the money is meant to supplement and not supplants. However, we are put in a position where supplementing is supplanting and supplementing at the same time. For instance, let's take it let's take a dollar that's um provided to edge psychosocial services. We were forced to cut from our operating budget x amount of the number of psychologists and social. However, we still got the supplemental grants which is going to backfield to hire the person we dollars of

094fun. They could go they got to go anywhere just because the dollars weren't extra person when we lay somebody off that person that we bring in is an extra person with that supplemental grant. So the dollars are being used not improperly, not tragically different, but we're being forced to I mean I I mean I just wanted to change the nar not your not your thoughts on that. >> I think I stepped out the room when you said that. >> I said that part of you coming in but I think but no you're right but it's >> again it's just one of those things where >> it it's it's laid out there just like you said we're not we're not supplanting anything because Yes. >> What is put in those in in those supplemental grants are

095are eligible items that the district can use to do that. So there's also planting going on, but it help it forces us to choose to use the supplemental dollars in a different way. I guess you could say >> so. So I'll change my opinion and I would like to reinforce what I'm doing. Let me I want to let me share let me give you guys the um the lunch count perspective. In 2021 uh we had 67% of the free and reduced lunch applications completed. In 2122 it was 65.2% of those applications being completed. >> Repeat that number. >> In 2021 it was 67%. In 2122 it was 65.2%. 2%. In 22 23 it was 80.6%. In 2324 it was 86.2% and then 2425 it was 87.5%. And I know uh PJ's apartment you know with

096Don and her team there the goal is to get to that 90% hopefully for next year as well. But that is a that is just a a pretty, you know, steep goal, but I think we're we're close. So, we're going to keep pounding to try to get more there because I think there is some dollars tied to that in order to get more dollars into the district if we can show that we're going to add more kids to the needs list for lunches. It helps with everything else that we do across the board. So, I just wanted to kind of, you know, give that to you while I was hot on the press. >> And if I could, >> Miss T. It goes one over if you look at that table then. >> Okay. >>

097You're seeing the 80% goes to 28 million. The 86 goes to the 37. The 87 goes up to the I mean I think it starts to go you're seeing the I think there's some connection there which we can elaborate look at between the three of you with PJ. And I think the other part for that which is a huge part is is when we write grants because that number is higher you have better chances of receiving grants for that purpose. And that's why you see a lot of community partners wanting to partner because they know that we could actually qualify because of the need. And that's a huge thing that we're that the grants department is looking at now to as we move forward with things. And we're getting some really good responses on on

098some things that that we'll be bringing to the boards uh shortly. So I'm very excited about that. >> Thank you. >> Let me go back to where it says item annual expense. There's line item couple of line items I would like to point out. >> Yeah. >> Under the salaries and step increase >> the seven okay the $7.6 million is one year increase. Next year there will be another 7 about 7.7 or 7.8 8 million increase in addition. In addition, those are in addition. Whether whether the district likes it or not, they have to come up with additional 7.7 to 7.8 million next year in order to in order to honor the wage increase or wage agreement increase they have with the teachers and the employee. Herburg agreement I just wanted to make that clear.

099So people are going to say 7.7 million is inefficient. We have no choice. [clears throat] >> We do we could lay off we could lay off a commensurate amount of staff >> to 7.7 million. I mean not serious. >> No, then the health insurance it went it went up by 9 11% this year. 10 to 11% this year. What I'm hearing next year is minimum 20%. That's what I'm hearing. >> Yeah. >> So the 4 million that I put here is kind of could be low, but because we haven't gotten a rate, I can't 20, but it could be low. >> Can I ask about um I just want to get clear. So for retirees, we do pay for their health insurance. >> For retirees, if they're over 65, they have to join Medicare. So,

100do we know for sure that 65 like is there a process that we're that making sure that people are joining Medicare? >> Let me rephrase it. If you're 65 and you're still working, cannot join Medicare. You have to be six, you have to retired at 65, then you're put into bed. But is there processes show that like you know once somebody retires at 65 that they're applying for it and okay is that something that okay >> and we're looking at issue >> so that the whole issue somebody can be somebody >> yeah that exercise >> somebody can be 65 68 70 I know an employee who was 80 still working on the city on the board side. >> Okay. >> That's in the board. >> Oh yeah. >> So those people cannot join the medical

101can only join when they retire. So the district has been paying for them. I don't want to tell you how much it >> Oh. I don't I don't want to tell you how much the premium is with the city. They charge by Alex follow question Medicare. Um, do we still provide like metag gap coverage between Medicare and what they got today or is it just they got to go on Medicare? >> Uh, honestly, I'm not very I could find the answer. I don't want to answer you. I don't >> my retirement covers me until I'm 55 full benefits and then when I go on Medicare that becomes my primary insurance and then >> you don't get there. There isn't there is an a medical insurance but it's the employee >> is the employee to be

102>> so on 60 once they get to 65 they're worried about >> if you retire and you're not 65 you will still be paying your co-ay as if you're acting employee district >> until you get >> what are we on what insurance are we on now Anthem >> are we looking? >> Yes. Are we looking? >> Yeah, we're started talking. >> We started talking about that due to the fact that we the state plan now. >> The state planet is getting Let me be honest. When we migrated to the state plan, we saved between the city and the board, we saved almost $10 million the first year, but the savings has run out. Um so we're now exploring see again it's going to involve statistical and analytical data from seagull. Seagull is the actial company.

103So they're going to run the trend and see where which one is better. But honestly, if you're only going to save a million dollars or $2 million from the premium you're paying, it's not worth it because we go, you will be going out there running the risk of big claim. But here we're on premium bas. We just pay the premium. If the if the claim is a million, $2 million, that's their problem. We just pay them premium. When you go and sell insurance, there's one they call lost reserve or potential loss reserve the IB and I care about not reported. You have to make reserve for that for the running CL which could be3 4 million you have to get a sign even if after you get out of the clip. >> Yep. Go ahead.

104>> Um the uh I know there was a problem years ago. I I don't know if we are taking steps where we weren't very good at keeping our keeping people off our insurance roles that shouldn't be on and the example I give to is an ex spouse was living in California and still insured. >> Yep. >> Um >> yeah, >> it's kind [clears throat] of thinking too. Go ahead. And so I I don't know if in the course of our trying to improve our efficiencies that's been addressed or being addressed. I would just put that on the radar. >> It's it's one of the first one of the highest priorities. We just had a new payroll person. >> Very bright, very active very techsavvy. That's the first responsibility she's been getting. She's very good at

105it. um people don't get it. >> It's it's a it's a fixating that I know there's a lot of action right off the bat >> given the the tip of the iceberg that I was aware of >> that it could represent us can save us. >> Okay. >> Joint joint medically care if reduces our pay for that right >> reduce the copay that we provide >> employee that leaves that retires >> we don't have to pay that anymore right? No, for the retirees. >> No, it doesn't. >> Sure. >> It reduc reduces it a little bit because they shifted to Medicare plan. >> Yes. Um so I'm not going to go but the bottom line here when you look under 25 if you recall when we were doing the budget this year or this year's

106budget there was a run up of use of SS money July August September that was budgeted so that was 7 7.9 million that 7.9 million is nonreuring is what I'm trying to get to year is not recurring. So that we're going to have to find that 7.9 million next year which is this year we had to find it. That's why our deficit grew up to 67 million. We used $21 million 21.6 million. You remember the board adopted 26 million to be used from internal service fund and we did bail tightening by operational freeze and you know trying to contain the cost. I committed I said we could try to bring it down to 22. We actually use 21.64 instead of 22. So which is good. But for this year, we're looking at $23 million. Again,

107the reason why when we get to when on the last page, I'm going to show you how the the basically the deficit remaining deficit came about. $23 million is the gross gross. Let's get something clear here. The gross projected deficit. Then we're going to have to deduct the reimbursement of $1.7 million that the city and the state will absorb. Everybody understand that? To reduce the deficit for this year. For this year, it's only good for this year. You're saying >> he looked at me. I'm apologize. Um, so you're you're just simply reminding us that that cost we will will be ours next year. >> That it will not be absorb absorbed by the by the district this year. >> Yes. >> But it will roll over next year if you want to retain or maintain

108>> Yes. >> the distance. Then the board adopted $10.8 million of use of the service fund. Let me break it down how it came about. 9.5 was adopted on the floor when the board adopted the budget and the addendum of 1.3 million was adopted to offset the reinstatement of the kindergarten parents. So that's how we came up to 10.8. If you take those deductions out your outstanding balance for this year is 10.5 million and that's what's on the district website. So when they finish the audit, we'll see how much of remaining on this one we have to probably with management see if we can network the deficit this year. But regardless how you look at it, you're starting with 23 mill deficit of 23 million before the state kicks in their 1.7. Next year the

109state is not going to upset the state as you see is not going to offset that 1.7 and the internal service fund that's left will be gone. So that 23 million will roll over as your beginning deficit next year in 2027. Everybody pay attention because this is very very important. $23 million deficit this year. Yes, we're reducing. However, whatever, however, we're going to reduce it and balance the budget this year at all one time sl problem with resets of reserminate next year with 23 million. However, if you look at the total increase in revenue, we [clears throat] we're assuming that the city of Bridgeport will give us additional $3 million next year >> on top of the gave us this year next year. >> Everybody go to the assumption. >> Everybody go to FY2627. >>

110Last column, >> the last column. We're physically getting into next year's budget in this platform. stuff where it says 26 27 the head we know that the the state has a bad annual budget. We know we're getting exactly the same amount we're getting this year from the state. No penny more, no penny less that we know. They're going to be adopting it by open. So the city we assuming will give us an additional $3 million next year assumption not guaranteed. So we only gaining $3 million in increase in revenue benefit. However the expenses that we will incure whether pretty much like it or not next year is 17.5 billion. So next year between the revenue we're getting at and the expense normal cost of building increase we're going to roll $14.5 million deficit next year

111plus the $23 million we started with that we carried over from this year. We're starting the year next year budget with 37.63 6 million projected deficit with with no residual fund balance or internal service fund. I just want to make it clear. >> We're back where we started last year but less staff. >> You you're back to where you started last year. However, >> however, last year you had some fat some fat to trim or cut. >> We don't anymore. >> You don't anymore. You had some internal service fund to use. You don't anymore. You come to the end of the road. >> I saw Miss Estra's hand up earlier. Want to go backward? >> Yeah. >> No. Um I I fully understand everything that Mr. Nicole is chatting through here. And what I wanted

112to ask is at the beginning of um this meeting I think it's very clear what we have to do here and we have to go and advocate for additional money because based on the cuts that we've already done there's not much where we can cut staff in in main office we're half of other of other towns. Um, so what I was wondering was if um, Dr. for Avery, if you or your team would be like summarizing all these bullet points that you want us to to talk about with different like legislators and stuff. The other thing that I'm thinking of if we can like help mobilize all the different packs throughout the state, throughout the city that can help us reach out. I feel like, you know, our voices are powerful, but if we have

113the parents, we're even more powerful. So, I'm just thinking of ways, you know, where where we can advocate for additional money so that we won't have to make as much as much cuts as as what Mr. Nquo is presenting right now. >> Chair, great question. Uh yes, we will be providing some you know talking points and things you know documents like you said to make sure that you we we equip you guys with the necessary you know um conversation pieces to to go along with that advocacy. uh I am in the in the I've already started the process of going and looking at and talking to key people around the state in order to make sure that it's not what what what has to happen is is we got to start having frequent conversations with

114you know with with political leaders you know our delegation I mean these we can't just wait till the last minute to say okay we need to have a conversation about this need to be a fluid conversation, get a game plan together, and we're going to we're going to help work with all that, get those those things talked, you know, timed out, scheduled, you know, all of that. I think one of the things I know the board chair and I have been talking about is is how the board's going to get out there and do some things with the community and talk. I think you equipping you guys with this this type of data and having community meetings, that's a great way to to bring more people involved with it. So, I think we're gonna do

115all of those things and and any suggestions that the board has, you know, let's talk a little bit about that and figure out how we can maximize those and put those into play as well. So, great question. Uh we're we're still trying to strategize on some things, but time is of the essence and so we've got to start doing a little bit more faster uh and we're going to do that. So we're going to make sure we equip you guys with it and uh it all come together. So great question. >> Excellent. Thank you. >> Yeah, I I um I think this is very well laid out. um underscores uh the extreme nature of our circumstance. Um and you know I feel [clears throat] relieved. I mean on the one hand I feel wonder why

116that guy ran from board again. Um, and then I feel relieved on the other hand because we were in in the last legislative session, we had one arm tied behind our back by not having a budget. Um, now we know going into the fight well in advance. We're not waiting until, you know, January, February. We're going into it in the fall >> knowing exactly what we need and why. And I don't know the extent yet because I haven't had the discussion, but I know in this past f session just this past week, they the legislature not only bent the guardrails, they broke the guard rails >> and passed $500 million. >> And then because of the uh the vote down in Washington, they don't need that $500 million. So there's some of that money which

117I that's what I haven't had a chance to have that discussion with the people I need to have that discussion with. There's money available out of that 500 million for other purposes because it's not available for the purposes that was it's not needed for the I should say for the purposes it was passed because that money is not going to be coming from the fence. So we need to figure out how to redirect that money for the purposes that we see it needed which is our schools. U so you know that discussion as well as the understanding that in the next legislative session there is huge un need and and and understanding in the legislature that this issue needs to be addressed. Um, so the possibility of raising this issue in an off year, if

118you will, and a non-budget year, >> because it's an election year >> for them, for the governor, for the legislators, that that this issue is going to be a hot potato anyway. Um, so I think that there, you know, there are lots of of of good reasons to believe that that shaking the tree is going to help uh get bear some fruit. future. I think I I also want to emphasize that we're going to take it a step further and I I've requested uh of Nester today to extend what this deficit is going to look like over the next you know four to five years 2030 2031 because I think you have to see the picture right you know and and see the whole picture you know and it really is it's it's impactful when

119you start looking at something has to get done and we can scream on top of the mountain all we want but something has to get done and the timing is right I feel you know but but I do want to caution everyone there's there's a way to do it and I know for me as a school superintendent I will be I will be very you know you know direct and positive about how the message is about the fight for kids you know but again I'm just a portion of that And so I will keep that and I'll keep I'll try to keep everybody on a level a level playing field because as we do that we're going to advocate for our kids and when we do that I think people will listen if we do

120it in a way that's going to be meaningful for people right so but I'm not everybody so I can't speak for everybody and people have their own way of doing business uh but I will do my business the utmost the way I know how to do my business but I can do my business really well and I'll make my point and I'm going to make my point because this is important for us, for me and for the city of Bridgeport in the school district of Bridgeport. So, I just want to put that out there, madam chair. So, but as you know, um I I attended a um you know, charter board meeting Monday night um and you know, there I had again had the same discussion I had last spring um with charter school proponents.

121um they were in the same boat with regard to the money and we were looking at that, you know, when you were meeting with the five mayors last spring um for the five cities, we were looking at 57.2 million coming to Bridge and that CCN proposal. >> Um and that would have given us the 30 million plus another 27.2 million. >> We were dreaming about improvements in the schools. 27.2 $2 million worth of improvements. >> Absolutely. >> Um and when you look at that down the road, that fiveyear projection, you know, to be able to start thinking not just about next year, wow, if we had 27.2 million next year, what could we begin to do? But to do that for five years, well, I mean, to just start thinking about what our children could

122could start to see and do with that kind of money, you know, restoring the kindergarten pairs in every class, you know, restoring the social workers and and counselors, getting the additional tutors and support staff, you know, you know, doing other act. I mean, it just begins to you begin to paint a picture that everybody can can think about. uh you know seeing how our children can get what they deserve and the opportunity they deserve and the education they deserve. I mean then people Yeah, I think that's a great idea because that's what moves people is when they see what could be that they're not getting is really important. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Sam. >> Yeah. Um I'll be super quick. I did want to touch on something that Dr. Avery and Mr. Traber just touched

123on. So, I'm just thinking in terms of advocating and messages that resonate, we should go to the table not just asking for one year's worth of, you know, funding for a school year. If it's a go, if the governor is up for reelection and legislators, we need commitment from them for enough sufficient funding for the next five years because our kids deserve consistency. Like we we can't be having these conversations every year. Where are we going to cut? It's not fair for them. So, I just kind of wanted to say that like we should go to the table asking for multi-year funding source. uh multiple years worth of funding, not just one. Thank you, >> President Chair. I'm just gonna kind of extrapolate or move these numbers just to give everybody an idea right off

124my head to be honest. Assuming the city of Bridgeport gives us $3 million in fiscal year 2027. extra 3 million extra 3 million in 2028 extra additional 3 million in 2029 whatever 2029 that's $9 million cumulative increase assuming they do that your and the state budget still stays the way it is in again in 2027 you're going to have a deficit of 37.3 million 2028 That deficit is going to compound because your net increase on expenditure is $14.5 million. Assuming the city gives us an additional 3 million, add that 14.5 million increase to the $37 million up to $52 million in 2028. carry that for carry that $14 million increase again to the next year. That's under the assumption that the city again gave us additional 3 million. We are up to 63. You're up

125to 66.67 million in 2029. Push it one more year, you're up to 8182 million. able to still maintain your budget and and on the assumption that the city is giving us 3 million each additional minimum minimum I should say minimum additional 3 million each year >> Mr. to scare them. >> Yeah. >> Uh yeah. See, seeing that, you know, like like you said, we trimmed all the fat that if we could trim really, you know, we need to start, you know, looking at other things that we control. Like you said, we don't really control what the legislature would do. We don't control what the governor does with the 500 million. we don't even control what the 5 million that is supposed to be ours from you know from the state. So I think that there's

126you know avenues of ways that we could try to save money. I I remember Mr. Garcia saying that we, you know, we had done facility studies. You know, what what are these facilities studies saying? Are these buildings, you know, repairable? Are they not repairable? Should we close them? No. Is it is it time to start, you know, consolidating to save to, you know, to save money? A lot of these buildings are expensive to run. You know, they're costly with electricity. They costly with with heat. you know, it's time to start, you know, getting our our our our house in order by using what, you know, by using the the the the means that we have instead of asking the state and and and trying to shake the tree and seeing what we get and but

127that's not guaranteed. So, thank you, >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. I'm going to do a little bit of redirecting here. I've heard the term cut the fat quite a few times. We haven't cut fat since 2016. We've been cutting bone. Librarians are not fat. Parent professionals are not fat. Psychologists and social workers are not fat. Curriculum and instruction is not fat. These are necessities. We have not been cutting fat. We were cutting bone. We are getting ready to start cutting limbs. literally lives off our educational bottom due to the underfunding. And um to Mr. Travis's point about the 500 million, I'm almost positive that it rips into that legislation if it's not used to federal funds. It's going back into the pension to pay down the pension. I'm almost 100% sure that money's not going

128to be available to us. So, we're going to have to advocate to get money out of somewhere else in that rainy day fund to say the billion. How much? What's the billion again? Mr. over six billion >> over $6 billion is fun any day fund fund to get some of that aortion to us no matter how we get we got to fight for the state we we got we got to fight the state we got to fight the local to provide our children what they need these are our future that I mean these are the people that will be taking care of us when we're elderly these are the people um I mean good lord I mean it's this this is literally killing me like Rob said I don't know why I ran again and

129I do know I hear it again because we got to have these hard conversations. We got to do it. We can't just throw up our hands and say, "Oh, well, they're not giving us money. Let's not do anything about it. Let's just close what we can close." Because we can we can get this. I could I could sit down and work these numbers and decimate the system. But we don't have to violation system for our children anymore because the numbers can always be made to the numbers could always be made to balance. But it depends. You cut it off an arm, you cut off a leg or cut off your head. Let's look. Did we get Did we get to that 10 million page yet again? >> Um the very last page is pretty much

130what resulted to the remaining $10 million of this year. The last page pretty much when we when the budget was adopted the SP seed grant was used to pretty much uh the budget but it's earmarked for development grant and new special education programs improvement of special education know which one explanation of 25 >> I'm sorry the next >> different last page slide You said in front of somebody. Sorry. I'm sorry. I wasn't looking at somebody. >> We need to get to the sacrifice page. >> Um, it's the >> Yeah, it's explanation of the 25 26 remaining uh >> $10.5 million >> deficit your projection. >> Yeah, >> 10.5 you said. >> Yeah, I think he does. He has it. >> I see the very last page. The last minus >> this one. >> Yes, absolutely.

131Yes. >> So, I mean people are going to say, well, the budget was balanced. How come all of a sudden 10.7 million was finished? Well, there is a break. Here is a breakdown of that remaining 10.5 million. Spend cannot it cannot be used directly to it has to be used for additional program and improvement of program which basically means is for new programs. It can uh anybody you hire under this program postp on or after July 1. I mean >> after July one did >> let me explain this on the C grants the NA used the exemptions of using that $2.6 $6 million to kind of help with the budget situation. But remember, this crant is a brand new enhancement special educational program throughout the district. So, it cannot be used. It has to be

132used to enhance uh and so they're they got restrictions on that. And uh when they passed this legislation, the the criteria for the use of those dollars was not laid out until probably a month ago. So, he've had to kind of back this out of the budget a little bit. So again, that's why that line item is there. Uh and he'll take you through uh the next um the cost the especially the cost management um in attrition back seed grant as it's not it's not money that can be used to reduce the operating budget that much. And number two >> in the projection that this projection number two we budgeted to we said okay we're going to manage special program we're going to do this we're going to do that we we review everything the

133program we can save $2.5 million a much more effective management one thing we finally found out to my own surprise the principles once somebody a child is through IEP or PPT labels. They have no choice. Oh quite a few of children are being >> Let me let me explain. Let me explain that a little better. I mean, you know, the assumption was that we were going to be able to minimize, you know, what we're spending on special special education by additionally bringing kids back from out of district placements and all that. We've done a little bit of that, but I think the offset of that in the increased number of services needing to be provided for special ed special education children have increased. Uh, and so that pretty consume that piece that that line item

134there that was in the budget. Uh one of the things has that has happened is that we have seen an uptick in the number of children that has been identified and a number of services additional services having to be provided to the students that are in that population. Uh we are close to New York, New Jersey. So we have a lot of families transport transitioning over from there to Connecticut enter our district in the urban hub. And so we see an uptick in that cost. Uh, and so that's what that line item is. So he's trying to explain that a little bit. Um, but I wanted to make sure I clarify that a little bit more so that you understand that that line item. Uh, and then you can go down to number three. >>

135Number three, the we budgeted between operational savings, tightening our belt, shutting down, you know, out of state seminars and all those things and attrition because we have quite a few vacant positions when when it was done. But you know we we had to fill those positions. Uh we well we had to fill those positions pretty much almost all special education positions that teaching position were filled with satisfied teachers. We filled over 100 and something taking positions when when the school started. So what I'm trying to say here the lonesome attrition s that was practiced will not occur in it in its entirety because most of the positions that was built but that not to say as we go down the road that's not to say we wouldn't have a little bit of acryion but it's

136not going to lead to the magnitude of what we had budgeted because we feel just about we only have like 30 something or 40 something vacancy or less than 40 vacancies now of certified teachers that we need to fill. However, they're still being filled with long-term subs, but we are still hiring even till tomorrow. We are still hiring teachers till tomorrow, certified teachers. So, the goal is to staff most of the start all the classes as with certified teachers, but it does cost money. It will affect your attrition. The next one is well we know 20 teachers again during the budget process we said we're going to reduce reduce reduce reduce but 20 additional teachers but soon the state the state came in open staffing was required we had to do full staffing so those

137position teaching positions we filled them off just about pretty much I said cuz it's not there but we lost it since going to put it that way. Then at the bottom kindergarten parents we talked about $1.6 million reinstatement of kindergarten parents. Then at the end of the day, yes, we filled most of the position, but the lag between certified teachers and using long-term parents until we put those positions and operational fees, realistically I think we should save two $2.1 million in attrition and operational savings to by the end of the year realistically. So that's how the 10.5 billion remaining that was it came about. Go ahead. >> Um so go ahead Mr. Collet. >> Yeah. Before I start asking my questions and you can frame them around frame. Are you saying we now have a

13810.57 line billion dollar deficit and close before the year ends? >> I am really troubled. I don't >> and really disturbed and really not surprised because I've raised this up as these numbers was coming up at board meetings and raised up repeatedly asked since the C grants. I repeatedly asked is this a realistic number of the savings for special education has been asked everybody should remember this one the point4.6 million in attrition savings because we never had a number over $2 million in our budget. Particularly disturbed by the last line, realistic attrition operating accounts. Our budget should always be developed with realistic numbers. It seems like we are always trying to avoid the hard conversations, the difficult situations. We need to dispute while we're making those cuts right now because right now we're mid year

139now 10.57 million 10.579 billion dollars to find before June. Once again, this board is under the gun. Now we mentioned the state. The state was there. The state over our shoulder looking at it. We've got a technical support team. They should have pointed out this before. I do not expect them to jump on us now and say, "Hey, how you guys do that?" because they should have been aware of these numbers too because they are more familiar with education throughout the district and they should have flagged that beforehand not come after us now that we have a remaining deficit for the year and we do not come said um question one question of kindergarten powers at 1.3 why is that in the calculation that should be of wash ISF that we've used if we did

140not have the money. That should be a wash, should it not? Check that with that transportation. That's all. >> Yes, sure. the constant reduced to >> uh yeah 1.3 >> 9.3 >> and what is the remaining balance of the ISF date >> one definitity audible will Oh, fortunately we ended up $2 almost $3 million additional assets last year which was attributable to grants of insurance. >> So running balance after the 1.3 withdrawal for the kindergarten parents. Yeah, we will we I will touch base with the governor's office because I think we we have a lot more than what they finish the Yeah. >> Yeah. D the reason I'm getting at this is before we get into the answer. >> Nobody Nobody's for now. Nobody's asking you to cut anything. We just have to tighten our

141belt. I think we should be able to manage and try to balance the budget this year. Next year is where the problem. I would still like to get an answer to my question before June when we cover I don't want to have the answer in May. No, >> say we got to cut six million when we cut two million. I would like to know the magnitude of the cut before June 30th 202. >> Yeah. This is the first >> I would prefer to use the ISF cutting off another. >> Oh yeah, absolutely. Whatever it is, whatever it is just for clarity. Whatever ISF is left after the audit cumulatively has to be used to offset this. You basically got to be flat out granted. >> Okay. So what is the ISF balance now? >> Well,

142we we haven't they haven't finished the audit, so we can't I can't tell you precisely. I'll take it about >> seven $7 million. >> And that's after we took out the 1.3, >> right? That's correct. Yes. Once we finish the audit, we'll not even audit is due December. December 30 put about >> I got that >> audit final audit number >> and that I'm I'm just being um the uh so we had proposed to eliminate 20 >> teacher positions >> 1.7 million >> right and you're saying that didn't materialize right we just didn't do We had to fill our position. Well, not every most teaching could teach us. >> Yeah, that was a task. >> And I think it was more of just, you know, we we had a few additional children in the district.

143So we had to kind of divide and conquer that a little bit, but it was just trying to make sure that class sizes were at an an an adequate amount based on what we like 29 for high schools, 24 for elementary. So we had to try to make sure that worked out. So there was some additional staff that was needed to make sure that we had classrooms filled. And that's just one of those things each year you don't know. You have to kind of plan for that. And so that happened as well. And there was need for more special education class to be honest with you. Saw class, rice class, all classes were set up. >> Okay. And then um and then there was this attrition vote which was um >> 4.5 >> access to

144No, no, there was no 4.5 million. That's what you have here. So I'm going back to the original proposal that we worked off of. >> There's 4.5 million. No, no. There was no 4.58 million on that. So, I'm working off of what you gave us. And >> so, the treasure operating. >> Yeah. You know, I I know I It was 1.4 48.84.8. I'm sorry. 1 bill448,847 approximately 31 teachers who will be excessed and filled with Kelly long-term subs. Um in this year full you know based on maxing out sizes if I assume that's part of your full thought it was item >> item 17 no >> 16 16 >> 19 >> 16 >> and I hope he's not looking >> I have an older one the one today. >> Yeah, he was looking at it's

145in it's in the package from today as well, >> but he's comparing it. So, >> I was looking at the ones I was given and we passed the budget. >> June 18th. That's when the board >> a different line. It's the same number 18. Well, he's also looking at a different line on it on line. So, it's the same number. >> These are item eyes. >> On what you gave us today, check line. That's what he's >> That's the same number. >> Yeah, it's the same number. >> It's the same number. >> You see this here? >> Yeah. I just have to go back to my old suit and not your >> the number you see the friction city. No, no, that's >> No, no, it's right here. >> You have an old >> I

146know it's an old one. That's what I'm working off. >> And I when we passed the budget, >> so I'm I'm looking at what we wrote, but I can see it's item 19 on the sheet you gave us today. 30 tissues will be accessed and filled with killing. So, we didn't do that. >> We did. We did. But on top of that, they said we're going to allow additional features. 1.7 1.7 on the last night >> 500 something overund. So, we didn't do we didn't do 27, but we did do we did do 19. >> What is 19 on your sheet? >> 19 is eliminating uh 31 teachers. >> Yes, we did that. >> Now, on p on the next page number 29. >> Oh, 29. Number 29. >> Yeah, that's the best. That's what

147we're talking about. While we're talking, we didn't >> No, we did the library media specialist. You didn't do the 29. >> Correct. >> Yes. >> We did not do 29. >> Okay. So, that's 1.7 of the of the 4.5 3.5 2.8. So, I got another 2.8 million to come up with. Um, where else did we not succeed in this longer? >> It's clear on the last page. >> No. So, he's saying >> where the 4.5 is a big number. What are the subsections of this detail? Yep. >> I'm trying to figure out where the add up to 4.5. >> Figure out that total cost. >> It's a long number. It says citywide attrition and >> operational confer operational operational brief. >> So that included you said that earlier included like um conferences >> conferences and

148yeah >> the conferences didn't add up to 2.8 million. No, no, no. It was com which one? It was combination of citywide operational freeze and citywide attrition. It was originally $4.5 million. The last day we the deficit was was remaining like $50,000 and do said I said okay instead of staying here all night let's just increase the attrition to 4 4.58. That's why it's an odd number because we had what $30,000 deficit still hanging from but not balanced. >> Yeah. Yeah, I understand this better, but I'm not going to do it. >> No, if you look at the >> Okay, we're fine. >> If you look at the spreadsheet that I sent, it says board adopted budget as of June 18, 2020. That's the That's the file number. I don't >> No, I I have

149the file here. I can pull out the whole file and try to find it. >> Look for the one that's been >> June 185. >> I know. I'm just that >> I look at the ones who adopted the budget, but that was the working document. You never actually got the after we did amendments and stuff that we changed. He you have to look the one that says at the bottom of the name >> June 18, 2025 that's the plan the board adopted the budget >> and that's it. That's what I'll say. >> I try I do the same thing find out. I try to put the number at the top now so I can kind of >> We went through like the board members remember we went through like eight different and just when I

150suddenly get told and then you know that's why I'm trying to understand it because you're lumping a bigger number that's not doesn't appear in the itemized right >> it is it is itemized you know >> no but 4.589 isn't itemized and so if If you had itemized it here, then I would have a better understanding. That's that's all I'm saying. >> Break that down. >> He gave me the itemized item. He gave us a list of itemized number with those description. But he want to know what that is. What makes up that 4.5 million line item now to come up with. >> No, no. The way we do it in aggregate, you've taken a vacant position assuming that they will not be filled. Some will not be appealed for one month. Some will not be

151appealed for two months. That's how you get the savings. >> Which which of these on on the previous two pages, master solutions and actions for fiscal year 25 board approved adopted deficit reduction measures? Which of these items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all the way to 29 add up to that 4.5? Okay, >> so that's all I'm saying. Not the one. What? >> Oh, number one. >> Yeah, >> number one. You see number one there? >> Yeah. Right. So, it as amended and adopted in the board on June 18th, board increase savings from 4.5 to 4.589. That's it. That's all we have. That so none of these things below fall into that. false that planted is independent of their own assumption. >> No, none of them fall into that. >> No, absolutely not.

152>> It is. >> No, attrition is a separate assumption that will you save money through vacancy not through the eliminating position but vacant position not being filled for a short period of time. >> Yeah. No, I I have never seen I'm going to just be honest with you. >> In all the years I've negotiated, I've never seen the management allow us to do that. >> But you do. >> Yeah. >> This is not you. >> I get it. I get it, too. But in your presentation to the board, I get what you're doing. I understand what you're doing, Ben. I I now understand what you're saying. I did not understand it. >> We argue that there's zero cost to a race, but we're not allowed to make that argument under law in no arbiter ever

153will ever allow the union to make that argument in arbitration that there's no cost to a race because of attrition. [laughter] >> But but I see what you're doing here. >> No, no, no. I get it. I get it. I'm I'm now completely clear. >> Um, but you would make an argument that there's no cost to a race because of nutrition, >> Mr. College. >> Yeah. Um, now I understand what you did. Thank you. Now, now that I got some basically rough numbers, I know they left just yet. Um, >> 9.3 million remaining deficit after accounting for that. a potential $7 million in ISF. Yep. >> Which brings our deficit down to $2.3 million. >> With $5 million hanging around out there in the commissioner's pocket, which we as a board should decide the first

154$2.3 million goes to covering this deficit and perhaps maybe for later discussion, shoring up the ISF for next year to prevent additional cuts. Well, B. So we have a starting point of 2.7 on that rest of that and that seems like a logical place for us to begin the conversation actually need you make a very good point. I think I I can chew on that. I think that's important to be able to do and as we have a deeper conversation moving forward. I think it's a it's a great plan of action. We've got to get that $5 billion. >> Yeah. So just for us to read that. Okay. >> For you to read, I'm sorry. >> Um, so I guess I want to now ask two. I had another question about the C grant. Um,

155special cost management. On the C grant, what I understand you to be saying is we were not informed of the rules until a short while ago. Um, is there any chance that we're going to be able to still achieve some savings now that we know what the rules are? >> Not necessarily because they're wanting you to use that money to enhance. Now, we're we're we're going to be coming back uh to the board for considerations of of how we're going to spend that money and how we're going to enhance the work that we need to do within special education. That is a major major major focal point for me. uh as a superintendent because we're we're it it's special ed is just pulling all the money away from everything else to focus there. So, we

156have to divide and conquer a little bit on how we're going to do it. Uh and so we we've been visiting with the state a little bit about how can we do a better job of servicing kids. We're dealing with compliance issues uh and trying to figure out and work around that side of it. So, again, a plan is going to come. we're going to be bringing it to I think Marge has reached out to you about the academic um committee really understanding what we're going to do from that side of it. So she's looking to join with you to kind of tap into that that C grant proposal uh and see where we go from there. So absolutely but no >> is a chance that we >> not necessarily savings with it but using

157it to enhance >> that's what it's for but you would also originally in your proposal hoped that we would be able to achieve some >> not with the not with the regulations out with seat money u and we we're going to we'll provide you those uh those guidelines as well and how it was calculated how each district got the money we have all of that, you know, we've been through that exercise with them and uh but there's not going to be really any savings that we're going to recoup from that. uh and because there was no there was no uh legal language written for it at the time it was proposed and on the spend savings the language in our budget said I'll go to the item given to us tonight is the same language

158that the board of doctor I'm going to the language that's correct >> make sure I'm not my own language. >> It goes downwards. >> Um review sped non-medical students IEPs determine bringing some in-house and regular resource students use regular buss that latter reference. Do we achieve any savings on that? >> No, that's why that's why it's there because we did not we said we because doing that. Well, kind of sort of not really, but yes, you know, we're we're we're reviewing all those IEPs because one of the things that we have to do before we build this new special ed center is looking at all the diagnosis that are out on these district placement opportunities for children. No, I understand I was not asking about that because I I understand. >> Okay. I understood that

159from your original comment about why out of district placements the IEPs have been had and there may be some being reviewed as we go through the year but that's I get I get how that works but the latter comment in this line item regular resource students use regular buses bringing some in you know I get that the term bringing some in-house regular resource students use regular buses is that happening If if I if I if a student is uh special and you vindicated one kind of have a bossing for private transportation for them, you're going to have to review your IEP in order to take it away. >> So that's not happening either. >> So unless you unfortunately >> that that's really happening a little bit as well. Unfortunately, sometimes they say possession is n

160of the law. >> No, no. I I get that. Parents parents once they taste that flavor, they want to keep >> So that was unrealistic, >> Mr. Wood. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. Wood. >> Um quick quick question. Um the the $5 million I I thought I I thought I heard someone say that that the that the bus money might have came out of there. Is that true? >> Yeah. >> I don't think that's accurate. I think the the bus money is coming from the state is coming from this the commissioner's budget. Uh and then the money coming from the city. I'm not sure where that's coming from as well, but that has nothing to do my understanding that the commissioner has no jurisdiction over that $5 million. I've I've told I've told a

161number of different, you know, stories behind that and still no no real clarity on where that $5 million is, when we're going to be receiving it. But just like Mr. Mr. Kick said if we were to get that 5 million and be able to utilize it to offset the deficit, it's going to be really really meaningful for us to have a balanced budget at the end of this school year. So that's uh a a task that I'm going to be uh I'm charged with over the next couple of weeks to figure out figure that out and uh I'm hoping to be successful in landing where that is. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Uh Deputy uh Mr. Woodson, Deputy Commissioner Hughes, when I asked him directly said the commissioner had no control over the $5 million

162at two weeks ago, two meetings uh two two board meetings ago >> when he was in attendance. I asked him directly >> and that was his answer to me. >> The questions. >> Okay. Thank you as a favor. >> Thanks everyone. >> Say no further questions. Um I just want to add in uh this a thing miss um let's say rem uh said earlier um about the advocacy piece and Dr. Ay touched on it like um you know I I'll definitely be reaching out to um members of the delegation to try to see how we can as a board meet with them um prior to the session beginning um and I know I'm going to work with Dr. A on that. >> Can I can I emphasize something with the delegates? I think we have

163to have meetings with them more than just before the the I think we need to have a permanent >> monthly meeting with them to to walk them through our processes and the new process that we're going to develop so they understand clearly why we're doing what we're doing systematically within the district. so they can have some confidence that we're working with the state to to transform processes and procedures in the district using the audit to provide those things those checks and balances for us to do the job better. Uh and I think that just constant conversation with them would would sum up. We started doing that with my cabinet and the city starting this this month. So once a month we're meeting with my cabinet, meeting with his cabinet and we're having conversations and we're

164going to continue to have those conversations, but I also would like for you to reach out to the delegates and have that same conversation. I'll be glad to meet with them. I'm not not sure if if the board could do a meeting with them and without calling a formal meeting. I don't know how that really works and that's where I'll lean on you guys to to help with that, but I think it's needed. Uh, I'm gonna I'm going to be reaching out to some state officials, um, you know, appropriations committee chairs, you know, Dr. Austin, she says she'll be willing to to meet frequently with me as well. Some of the other, she gave me some other names to also reach out to to have conversations with. So, I'm going to do those things, you

165know, but I think collectively we got to let people know we're serious. you know, we're going to do it the way we need to do it and we need people to sit and listen to us and uh because the time is now. I love that the fact that it's election season and somebody's going to have to talk with us. Be it whatever side they play on, we need to make sure that people have a conversation around that and let's see what we can do for sure. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to say this for the record because this is what's going on and what's happening. I like to listen and search, you know, and listen to you all. All of you in this churching is because before it was not, let's put

166it this way. I can't say it was no team that care and step in and said we're going to do it and whatever the state say, they make the decision, everybody quiet, everybody keep searching and fighting for the kids. Now though, we have a strong team including board members, new board member, your team and cabinet, they know we're not playing. They see, oh wow, now the board then I say, "Well, we're going to show you. We try another way nicely this way this way and they see they will play but when see you step in and the board step in our way everything change they know we're not going to play we're not going to give up for the kids they have to understand this is not for us this is for the kids sometime

167they think it's because we us because the position of the title no we not here for the title some they have for the title but I'm very glad that now we not we don't have people here for the title we here we got people here now They want the best for our kids for staff and especially if you support our staff and principal because not easy what they going through. Of course you know everybody know how I with my parents but I told my parent if you don't step in and you not come in you know don't say why this happened this is not happening this is why our kids don't have this so we have to take care especially our staff because the staff work very hard and I take it out my hand

168for all my staff and the cabinet and everybody because it's not easy because the time is we here discussing the situation when we have to be relaxing I know we have staff we got parent they watching us because they want to know what's going on for public school. But I'm very glad that the state city council people and the board member, they understand we here for one reason. Especially the state, they thought we was laughing. They thought we're not taking the job serious. They thought we not care. And guess what? Yes. They trying to fight something negative, but guess what? They're not They're not trying. They're not going to Sorry. They're not going to find nothing because I know you Dr. F in your cabinet. They put everything in the table very clear what we

169have what we need and what our student need. So that's very clear that if state don't want to step in and help us is not us it's not the bication you know it's not the point to attack the city if the state have to understand what we want for our bishop board school. Thank you Dr. Avery and your staff and everyone especially my all my colleague all my board members they everything they do it's not easy but as already I said together we can make them different. Thank you madam chair. >> Thank you Miss Medina. >> U motion to adjourn. >> Second [laughter] all favor say. >> I 82. Thank you all for coming. >> That's you guys. I know that was a lot, guys, but I think it's important that we're we're having a

170conversation. Let's get it done. >> That's good stuff.