001It is now 5:30 and I would like to call the board of education special budget workshop to order. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. So tonight we are going to have our second uh board workshop where we are discussing how to balance this budget after receiving our final appropriation with additional cuts from the city. Um, and to start the conversation tonight, I just really, if Jeeoff, if you could put up the slides, I wanted to go over this process because I think it's important to make everyone, including our board, but also the public, aware of what we're being asked to do here tonight. Um, so what happens if we don't approve a reduced budget, right? What if approved funding is insufficient to meet legal obligations? Well, state and federal law require that we meet
002all educational mandates. However, we've been reduced to a place where that's exceedingly challenging considering all of the increases to contractual obligations, insurance, transportation, special ed is a rising fast, right? So, how are we to do this here tonight? So when we took an oath to be on this board of ed, we did so by saying that we would adhere to the laws and the laws that we are all bound under are to provide a free and equitable appropriate public education for all of our students. This includes full compliance with special education mandates under IDA and state law. If we aren't in compliance with those things, we're at risk as a district. And there are provisions individually of legal action, financial penalties, and loss of federal and state funding. SL Connecticut state law requires municipal municipal
003support. What that means is when we pass this budget tonight, we will have line items that we're going through. This is what the commissioners wanted was to make sure that every single line item that we pass when it's entered in to there's a system called Munice and the state receives all of those line items as our approved budget and then we are legally required to make sure that it's spent in the way that the board passes the budget tonight and not going over in any of these line items. So when special ed goes over that's the only line item that can go over where m municipalities are then legally required to cover those overages. So when these costs exceed the board of education's budget there is no penalty to the board or anyone because we
004have to meet the needs of every individual students and their educational needs. That's protected by Connecticut General Statute 10-76D, 10-76G require districts to provide all necessary special education services regardless of cost. Municipalities must allocate funds to ensure compliance. Failure to fund special education risks legal action, state intervention, and loss of federal funding. So, we were able to do this for a little while as the costs rose using CO relief like playing this, you know, let's shift money here to put money here to make sure that everybody has what they need because we had an influx of money coming in. Um, but when the money dried out, which were providing these really important stop gaps for our kids getting what they needed, well, then the deficit just continued to rise. So, the money just kept coming.
005The price would go up by 20%. But our budget wasn't going up by 20%. Right? So, the money isn't here anymore. And now we have this issue where the special ed costs are still higher than what our budget is paying for. We know this not only because we see the impact, but because we were fortunate enough to have the city sanction and pay for an audit for us that told us this exactly. It said special ed costs are going up by 20%. the district budget only went up by 5%. And the city funding, so this is the part where it gets complicated. In the beginning of the year, they give us an appropriation like they're giving us this year. And that initial amount, that initial appropriation is where the where the district starts. A supplemental
006appropriation at the end of the year to cover the special ed costs. That's a separate appropriation. When we report to the state department of ed, there's a form that we use that says how much it costs to run the district. And there's a minimum budget requirement. It's a state law and it says municipalities can never give less in the pre in the next year than they did the previous bill. In Bristol, we weren't we were not recording the supplemental appropriations. So what it cost was it actually the appropriation at the end of the year. And a benefit of hiring someone who used to work for the state department of education or having people on your board who have that background is that then you could say wait no that's not how it's supposed to be
007right and so what happened was for the first time ever the form was filled out in a way or the first time that I'm aware of maybe it happened years ago I don't know but in the recent past it was filled out in a way that included the supplemental appropriation for special education which is so important because that's how much it costs to run the district the year before. You have to have that number in there. Otherwise, you're not starting at the same number in the pre in the next year. So, you're already in a deficit, right? So when we looked at how much we got in the beginning of the year versus how much we got because of the supplemental appropriations, the distribution shows us that we really only got a 1.18% increase over
008the 3 years outside of special ed overages, which means all of your contractual obligations, all of your transportation increases, anything that rose over three years, which everything rose over three years, especially in CO, it rose like double rose, right? So, there wasn't inappropriate spending. It was money that wasn't catching up because we weren't one including the supplemental appropriation and two being funded appropriately with any kind of increase to match the increase that we were receiving because of inflation and because of co so in 2023 2024 our budget was 126,900 89,000. Right. So, but in actuality, we overspent and we were at 130 million.4 and change. The special education budget was over by over $6 million that year. And it was alarming because previously when we had COVID funding, it didn't seem as vague, but now
009we saw it like, okay, here's $6 million, but we had frozen budgets and shifted money around. And at the beginning of the year, like tonight when we approve this budget, it's going to go on the website and it's going to show you. And then at the end after the year, it will show you, did we go under in any line items? Did we go over in any line items? We're only allowed legally to go over in one in one line item. We can transfer. So if in the general ed budget we were under in one and over another, you could make a transfer to stay balanced, right? And then we wouldn't be in any kind of trouble. But if you're if you're over by millions in one area and now you're able to make up
010that deficit by taking away from the budgeted and approved amounts in those other areas, you're taking away from one to give to the other, right? and you're creating a pattern where no one really knows how much we need and we're not putting that to the city to say, "Hey, we're 6.26 million over." So outside of reimbursements from Access Plus, which is the special education grant that helps give us back some money on our most expensive um services, we would then know, okay, so then our budget would be increased by that much. So then in the following year, we'd have that much from the city and we wouldn't be carrying that deficit over and more, right? So, general ed black that in 23 24 absorbed 2.79 million of the special ed budget. And for some reason,
011there's like this way of thinking that says, well, you should you should try to reduce the special ed budget if you can, right? Like we should we should try to see where we could find money in the budget and be so fiscally irresponsible that we move the monies over and not buy books for kids who haven't gotten new books in 20 years or not do these things because that's the the way not to be a burden on someone. But in reality, if you don't if we don't act as stewards to protect general ed, we're actually harming general ed at the expense of funding special ed when both are equally as important because every single student in this district matters. So, we can't do that anymore. So that's why we're in this situation right now because
012we haven't been saying no, we're not transferring money out of regular ed to cover special ed. We need to let the deficit be what the deficit is. We need to let the class share, hey, whatever it is that this the state reimbures. And it is what it is. It's not that any one of us did anything wrong in this room or in this district. You're all working so hard to make sure that every kid's needs are met. So you can't be demonized for that. Like that's not doing something wrong. We need to protect the funding for both sides. So in the end, we had this deficit of 3.47 million. And the supplemental appropriation from the city of that 3.47 47 million was counted on the form that goes to the state which then made it
013so that the appropriation that we had received in 2425 was under the previous years which bumped us up by approximately 1.4 million. So then we had to get another additional appropriation of 1.4 and change to make sure but then we stayed level. There was nothing above that. So between last year and this year, we didn't even get a 1%. We got a 0% increase because we were in a deficit. And the minimum budget requirement law required that we got that extra money. But that extra money was just going to cover the special ed deficit minus the 2.79 and minus whatever those costs went up this year. So we're still going to be behind. So, the city's non-compliance with the minimum budget requirement is a law in Connecticut. It's been around since 1974. It's not a
014new law. It's nothing that was created to try to help out Bristol. It's just a law. And so it was not something that the city had been in violation with until this year. We when we look at the fact that I don't know how far back the system has gone but the ED12 measures how much money we need to run our district every year. And now that we are in compliance with how that that is filled out, we received the additional 1.372811 this year. We know we're in a deficit. We already know we're in a deficit, right? Because we could have predicted the deficit. The CL uh the the auditing report predicted the deficit. So if in this fiscal year the deficit then surpasses this new appropriation, we will get an appropriation to cover the
015deficit for this year. And if it's higher, then we'll get an additional appropriation to catch us up. So the law does help catch us up. So we can get back. We just have to stay to once the budget passes tonight. You don't allow these transfers to the chair. Can I ask one question? >> Sure. Clarifying question. Make sure I understand. Absolutely. Um so if the so the MBR city always has so it stays lower but it doesn't the city only has to >> they never have to give us $1 more than the year by law. So you can never give us $1 less. So if the only way they have to give us the only legal issue here is that there were special ed overages. So that is what is bringing the MVR up. So
016if our points know our true but yes so if this year just like last year so last year we had an appropriation and it was 1.375 less and now because of the MBR it went up by that month. That would happen again this year if the city is giving us approximately 6 million in change in an increase. But our deficit right now is at close to 9 million. If the deficit stayed at 9 million, then our overage would create a minimum budget requirement violation again, which would require the city to pay the difference between what they gave us in this budget that we're trying to approve tonight and what they gave us last year, including the supplemental appropriation. So if it's off by 2 million then we would get an appropriation of 2 million. That's
017how it works. So in every scenario if you had a surplus in any area you would use your general ed surplus to offset special. There's no scenario where you would want to create a deficit for our city. We wouldn't want to do that. You just want to actually have the city fund the need. So if there's a certain amount of money that it costs to educate 8,000 kids in Bristol, that is the cost and we don't want to pretend that that's not the cost because when we take away from one to give to the other, we create deficits in other areas and then we can't pay for our budget. Like we're in the situation we're in right now as I answer your question. >> Thank you. So, what's allowed and what's risky? Kind of what
018I just said, right? Internal reallocation to meet special ed need mandates with surplus funding from general budget is permitted. Like if if you didn't have you had a line item where you you had a surplus and then you had a deficit in in special ed, you can absolutely use your surplus to pay your deficit. That's not a problem. It's not illegal. It's not supplanting. It's legal. But what the risk is if you continue to shift and it harms general education, it prevents essential increases to the budget to support special education essent uh expenses. It violates equity laws and educational standards and it may lead to state intervention or loss of funding. So it can't continue. So we we're at a we're at a a place now where we have to say whatever we adopt, we
019have to protect tonight. So wherever we land, we're not going to be here again next year. We're not going to say, "Oh, we're in a deficit again because we shifted funding again and now we have to pay for special ed and we can't and so who do we have to lay off?" We're not doing that again next year. So, I resent being in the situation I'm in right now and I do not want to be in the situation again next year and I know every board member up here doesn't want to be in this situation next year. So, whatever we pass, we're we are going to monitor monthly. Eric won't be here anymore, which is so hard for me. But whoever is the finance and operations chair every month if transfers are made we have
020to vote on them in that committee. And so in the past it was just standard like if the district said they had to transfer money they transferred money and we just agreed because we didn't know better. No, none of us were educated on you can't because then you're creating a gap in this other area and then you're going to end up in the situation you're in. We had to painfully live through this to to understand it fully. Like when CBER comes to to onboard us, they don't teach us this. This is what they should be teaching us is make sure that you look at your budget, you approve and when transfers are made, if they're causing a deficit in another area, don't approve them. Right? And so it's going to be a different year next
021year because once we pass this budget, we cannot allow the shifting to happen. Next slide. So, shifting millions of funds from the general education budget to cover special education costs is no longer sustainable and at risks violating state and federal laws and ability to invest in all students and ongoing budget instability by having the city not provide appropriate funding to support all students. And so we're at a place now where moving forward, that is something that happened in the past, but moving forward, we are protecting the rights of every single student and every single dollar in this district so that we never have to make these types of cuts again. The last thing I wanted to talk about was our insurance increase. So, it's very difficult for me to understand the whole insurance system in
022Bristol because we're self-insured, which means the city and the school district are combined to create its own insurance company, but we have to have secondary insurance in case of large claims. Um and if you look at our budget increases over the past three years in 2022 23 we actually received a decrease of 1.6 million in change and then in the following year uh we saw a you know $920,000 increase and then last year we saw a $299,000 and change increase and our numbers are going down in employees. So we're about we were at like 152 or I'm sorry 1,52 employees in 2022 23 and we're down to a,09 in 2425. So and we're still moving in the other direction hence our deficit and budget cuts and whatnot. So for us to go up by 3.259469
023in one year. As somebody who works in in this field and looks at increases in funding for education and insurance and things, I look at, you know, double of that would be 600, triple of that would be n, you know, so 11 times the the amount. That's more than that 3.259. And then to make things more complicated, the insurance reserve offsets us sometimes for our premium. And so last year they gave us 750,000 in the reserve to offset the cost which got us to the 299. If we didn't have the 750, it would have been on top of, you know, it would have been added to the 299. But this year, because the city is giving us 500,000 to offset to get us to the 3259 or 69, that creates an automatic $250,000 gap in
024our budget, which when you're looking at a $24 million policy for the whole district, they think 2, you know, people just assume 250,000, you know, but that's three teachers doing benefits or four teachers spent. So it's it's a lot of money, right? So we can't continue to have unexpected increases of our premium going up times 11 plus losing part of that. Like that's like a three that's more than 3.5 million out of the 6 million we're getting as an increase when we're already know we're over 6 million in the deficit for special ed alone. So this won't touch general funds. So where does that money come from? Right? So it's another one of those things where if we were being appropriately funded in special education, maybe we could use part of the six million in
025our increase to cover something like this that we didn't expect. But we're not in that situation. So it leads us to have to make these really horrible decisions tonight. So, I just wanted to show you that because I think it's important to understand that that's just one small piece of things. Um, we're going to have more conversations with the city. They have a secondary insurance company called Lockton is who they use. And we've met with uh the city and asked, can we meet with Lockton? when we find out how these numbers and and how these um premiums are, you know, kind of given to us since we're self-insured. So, I think there's a lot to learn there. I don't I don't know enough about this, but I do see this as a big issue in
026our budget this year is that is that growing um number that we didn't have previously that eats up half of our increase for next year. So, I just wanted to go over all of that so we all kind of understand on the board and those view who this impacts the most where we are in the decisions that we need to make tonight. Um the superintendent is going to we've already had different um spreadsheets sent out to with the full award. So everyone had the information explaining the different ways that the budget has already been addressed and how the options we have in front of us to get to the number that we need to get to tonight to pass the budget. Um, I did call the attorneys and ask what happens if the board doesn't
027pass budget and the answer is just it can't it does if there you have to or you're out of you're in violation um with the state department of education and there's all kinds of things that will be bad for our district if we don't pass the budget. So there is no end time to this meeting tonight. So my colleagues on the board, we we can stay here as late as we need to stay here and go through line item by line item until everyone is satisfied with where we need to get because we cannot leave here tonight without passing over. So with that being said, I'm going to turn it over to Superintendent White so she can go over some of the information to help us make these clinical decisions. >> Thank you, Chair Ponds.
028Good evening everyone. Thank you all for being here. So over the weekend um there were two documents that um were sent to the board of ed commissioners. One um were a number a large Excel spreadsheet um that tried to give a historical accounting of the cuts that have been put before the board previously. Um and then other um proposed cuts or proposed conversations including current vacancies u that we have and whether or not um you can go line by line on those vacancies, which one of those um the board would be interested in moving forward with. Um there was also a listing of previous cuts that have been made um by Miss Gordier the previous director of finance and operations. So the board has those and um there were also on the first page the
029first app which has the summary um there were it reductions that um Mr. Telpi and the IT department were very um gracious in um putting forward as a proposal for the board and I will give Mr. Tel an opportunity to talk in detail about those and there were also positions that were originally proposed to the board um when we were asked to come up with a five or $6 million uh cut scenario before we presented to the board of finance. Those are also listed on that first tab um in case the board wanted to revisit those. I think Mr. Tel, if you're ready, it might be helpful if you wanted to talk about the ITV definition. >> Absolutely. Um good evening, commissioners. Um sorry I don't have all of you here in person. I only
030have printed copies at the moment, but I could certainly get the rest of you who are online um copy of this as well. Um, I'd like to pass around my rationale for some uh substantial IT deductions um so that we can all go over them together. Um, so the first page of the rationale is just really uh a summarized explanation of of where the cuts that we were able to find are kind of coming from. Uh, and I want to really uh indicate that there's a there's a very important section labeled important uh that notes that these projected savings that we'll be able to utilize are really only viable for one school year. Um as the substantial amount of these these savings are uh actually uh through creative switching of our um equipment renewals um
031through our leasing structure and uh purchasing some equipment rather than continuing leases for for another year or so. Um I just want to preface this with the fact that uh in order to sustain the technology department in the future um a good portion of these funds would have to come back in future time to continue supporting our equipment segments. Um so going to the the second page itself. It's uh an itemized list of of each cut where we've come up um to total this uh 516,685 cost reduction dollar cost reduction scenario for from the IT department. Now please know it is very substantial. Uh this is roughly onethird of our entire non staff technical 140. So this is something that I'm bringing forth because we are in the situation we are in with our budget.
032uh just want to make sure that we understand the the scale of magnitude of what this cut brings forth for our department for this year and the five. Um on the top of this I've add I've added a comment the far right as to whether or not I would consider it temporary. Uh the first pieces uh are not considered temporary in my mind. They are uh reduction in our Adobe Creative Cloud licensing. uh we were able to find a new vendor that was able to bring our license count down to support what our students are actually utilizing in our schools rather than a a bare minimum previous vendor would have required us to go up. So that was a $7,200 uh cost savings. Um the next savings I have here is uh the implementation of
033our securely um student internet filter and uh securely classroom uh classroom monitor solution. Um this savings of $11,246 a year uh is realized by um the replacement of some of our existing softwares that have not been really working too well for our district this past year and are actually more expensive at this branch. So the next year we are moving forward with this new software which is vital for ensuring the safety and security of our students both at home and in schools with our test. Uh third item I have on here is our other professional services uh power school scheduling training. Uh we had a great person uh Bart who would come in year after year and help all of our administrators at each school um to actually work on their school schedules for the
034next year, help them ask questions, give them guidance on different approaches on how to accomplish certain things with the schedule. Uh unfortunately Bart has retired uh and uh in his absence I have taken up the charge of uh being able to provide that training for the power school scheduling these for our investigators. I have over 12 years of experience with power school being personally so have no fear I have all the experience and expertise to uh to accommodate that. Um so we realized uh savings of uh roughly 15,760 which is what was budgeted for. Uh the next item was uh the parent square secure box. This is a software platform that was meant to allow uh the district to send out digital documents to families in a secure way. It was meant to be a
035cost savings uh upfront. Um but it was never implemented when I came on board here. I had used it in my last school district and I know the ins and outs of how how great of a tool it is. Uh but compared to the existing tools that we have, it does not meet all the requirements for uh what we are doing this system as far as the delivering documents um through a myriad of different ways using AD. So it was budgeted for but I'm asking for a reduction there for $8,000. Um I'm going to jump down to uh the big one and then I'll go over the others because they kind of can fall in my lap. Um big reduction that we really see here is with um a lot of our leases we've been
036purchasing our technology leases that have been expired some of them since 2022 my time here that have just been kind of lapsed and renewed on a monthly month by month basis. Some of this equipment is six to seven years old. Um, and we are working on a plan to replace that equipment, but much of it is still about five or six years old and is still viable given the serious situation that we're in. So, I'm going to be working with the technology department and public schools uh to get creative and ensuring that these equipment will be able to support us for the next school year uh as we come upon our looming uh Windows 11 requirement this quarter. Um that's requirement that Microsoft has set for with their owners and Windows 10. So, we have
037to make make a shift. Um this these savings here um what we had budgeted for actually for these expired leases was roughly 500 plus 52,337 um of which a buy option that we got from our our lease vendor was $17,6. So I'd like to propose that we move forward with that with that purchase and realize some some real savings up front for this school year. Um the new cost that I'm proposing, even though I said 107650, uh new cost I'm proposing is $27,650. Um that would be the buyout for the equipment and a $100,000 um lease continuation so I can get new equipment to backfill our oldest equipment that is failing that we have no in place right now to replace. Um, so that in total would bring us to a savings for this year
038and this year alone really of $294,687 just for that. With the purchase of these leases, typically when we have leases and we replace them, we have a tight window or else we get charged extra money from vendors to another month of their contract. um with the purchase of the this equipment, all of that kind of throws out the window and it frees up our team to actually have some time to go through and replace the equipment in a more time management with them so they're not running around and randomly trying to get the in order in time. Uh what this allows us to do is um actually look at some of our other line items that we had previously budgeted uh around our managed professional services. uh we had some services for deployment of computers
039because of the tight time frames historically we can actually do away with um the those services. So deployment services I have on there was $31,000 for next year we can actually do away with that because our team can do that in house. Um along with that there's also another line item for imaging services. typically would have a professional company come out because of the tight time frames to install our version of Windows, our secured version of Windows with all of our specialized software on it. Um that was $10,584 that we typically budgeted for. Um we can reduce that by zero because we have the talent, we have the expertise, we have equipment in house to be able to do. Um the other piece I noticed was overlapping um payments for our leases. we did have
040a contingency in there to pay for another month with our with our leases since we're purchasing. We really wouldn't need that contingency for this year. Um that was a $42,000 $42,000 um line item that we were able to bring forth and reduce. Um along with that going back up just below the parent secure dogs portion uh is the buyout for monitors and leases that was actually put in uh prior to me the initial budget recommendation going forward because we're purchasing all the equipment baked into that $17,000 cost is all of the monitors. So we would realize another um $23,880 savings that we can uh look towards budget for that student. Um the next item I have on here going back to the other piece is the power school data administrator. Um we have posted the
041P position because it is vital position for this district. Um we had had over 50 applicants apply for the position and uh if you're not familiar with color school student database uh requires a very particular skill skill set and data management ability of typically what school districts are looking for. Even much smaller school districts are looking for well for or somebody who already has power school experience that out of the over 50 applicants not a single person had noted power school actual power school experience on the administrative side near the extent of what was advised um was a little concerning for me because it is a vital position. Um so the reason that is on here and I'm I'm noting that we can take a reduction here in this position because again I have um
042well over a decade of experience with powers school and while I am the director of technology and that brings a whole slew of of workload and and everything to my plate as it is um this isn't anything that's new to me. I have done basically this role in my last job. Uh I had managed the IT department for the weather public schools and I have administered the college schools database for the sign. I feel for the next year I can support the district in those needs to consult with set uh the budget and that goal. I'd love for us to continue looking at that for the future. if somebody really comes in who is qualified for the position of the process that we love to continue to support uh in future years. But I am
043willing to take that on everybody willing to help out. Um next item I have is a smaller savings um but it is something that I have to be kept in mind. Uh $3,85 uh with Power School SIS itself. This was anticipating a 7% incre increase in the bud in the uh the cost as we got quoted from powers. I was able to talk them down to a 4% year-over-year increase for for their software platform. So that is powers school sis and powers school don't have enrollment on here because that is paid through our office of student learning. I didn't have a chance to get the updated cost on there but I assume it might be a little uh little bit of savings there as well. Um so as I as I said those are really
044the line by line explanation of all the items. Um that does bring us to a total of 516,685 of which um the temporary the the non-temporary items the ones that can just be essentially permanently removed may be around 90 to 40. Um uh with that the very bottom of this I have in red um that we would need to be refunded uh some way shape or form over the next year the next two years um roughly 390 $394,000. Sure, we could get creative with with um some new equipment based options, but we we need to fund back some extent to some extent year over year side in order to accommodate savings in this year. Does anybody have any questions? I understand that there were certain things that you went into some agreements that save us
045money in this year that won't save us money in next year and not rehiring staff will give us a break for this year, but moving forward we still need to look into that. I I do just want to say I really appreciate that you spent the time to really find the areas that we could save money and then talk to us about how it's not a forever on all of these things and we need to be very cognizant of that when making the cuts. But I do appreciate all of the work that went into this. So I do really thank you. Do any of our commissioners have any questions? I know some of these are already in Mary's um proposal. So, are there any that are here that are not in Merit's proposal? >> Uh,
046no. I I made sure that uh this lined up with with what Mary had uh had proposed. Um, there was one additional line item out here that we had found that was already duplicated on there. So, we did take it off. Uh but all of this is new findings uh in the past month. Us me being able to have conversations with different vendors, negotiate better pricing, just again getting creative with our situation and um trying to make the most of what we had because in actuality, if we were to just keep doing this, we could have gotten all new equipment and re renewed our leases. That really from my standpoint as a as you know, a resident of Bristol doesn't sit right there. So, I thought it was best to at least bring this forth
047to us to identify this because I would much rather have, you know, teachers in in the classroom than um have a computer that's brand new and shiny when the one that we are purchasing can hold us over for another year, maybe two. So, I'm being realistic. >> I'm being realistic from the from the IT realm. I love technology. It's it's my world, but this is the act the reality of it. So, there any other questions? >> M. Oh, I did have a quick question. Um, >> we were with these leases, were we actually getting all new computers every year? >> Not every year. So, these leases were spanning uh between three and four years. Um, I don't know how long. I haven't gone back to the full history of technology leases and purchases. Uh, but
048since I've been here, we've had um this is one, two, three, four, five, six, seven leases that are actually expired. So, they've been expired since 2022 and we've just just been going with the same equipment. So, the equipment usually is meant for like four years and then we do a flowover. I'm going to be working with the district administration on building out a five to six year technology refresh plan to make it much more palatable for us. uh because six years is smoothly the acceptable lifespan um of of computers in you know the workplace. Um, yeah. So, it's not year it's not refreshing computers every year. It's three or four years. This in this case of what we're doing now, we're getting six to seven years out of some book by by purchasing holding on
049to realize. >> Well, these are some great savings and it looks like you personally are taking on about 70,000 of them. So, we really what an asset you are to BPS. I really appreciate that. Oh, Dante cannot unmute wants to talk but can't really quick. I can help with >> I think he wants to ask you something. Yeah. >> While you're doing that, I just want to say thank you. I really appreciate this approach and your creativeness. Uh I have found this presentation very helpful. through the chair. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Sorry, we were restricted online from unmuting. So, um, >> cost savings. We don't have that opportunity anymore. >> Exactly. Um, Jeff, can you repeat the number of funds you will need next year, i.e. the total that needs to be refunded to
050your department. >> Sure. And this is again this is just uh basically an estimate based on the actual reduction scenario and us getting fully funded back to uh what was initially requested but that number is $394,54861. >> Thank you. That's all I had. >> Any other questions? >> Jill, are you done? I just have a couple and the answers on tonight. I'm happy with that new um the Adobe vendor that you're not going for the PDF management. What is the new vendor? >> So the new vendor uh it used to be um CDWG. Uh the new vendor is Genesis Technologies. CDWG has a minimum license count of 2500. Genesis Technologies has a minimum count of 500. We need more than 500 but drastically less than 2,500. Um I just have a few. >> Yeah. >>
051So uh the parent square secure docs that were um are we still able to send certain documents and caregiving u potentially abuse and things like that. um that would not just say completely protected email because a lot of mail goes well other ways. Are we still able to secure those kind of documents for those that West sent uh in all honesty um secure docs I don't believe would even be able to do exactly what you had just proposed. Spearox is kind of a mass transmission tool that allows you to send out multiples of the same document where each one is individualized. It doesn't really support uh or it's not really built rather for uh single documents sending to um that is also true for the current solution that we are utilizing uh power school uh
052digital document delivery and the e-lect forms. Um that is not really designed for oneoff sendings as well. I've been here since March and I haven't really had a chance to dive into everything. Uh, but I have noticed any set software that we have that allows us to encrypt emails, encrypt attachments rather, similar to what other state departments for instance do or some private special education facilities that have the funding to to purchase those. Uh it's something I'm certainly willing to look into to secure you know our our email transmissions uh more readily but I do not believe that is something that we actively have. >> Okay. So I can help. >> Oh absolutely. um uh the quest of going to Microsoft to Microsoft I decided to software it's my um it's my experience and my
053but that transition usually isn't too much too much of a do you have the amount of cost for the window because that is in >> I don't have the cost but what I can tell you is uh my experience. Uh when we were paying for the Windows 10 software, it is a like comparison as the Windows 11 software. The cost structure would be the same. It just increases year after year with uh inflationary. Um you would expect it to be the same if we were on Windows 10 or Windows 11. Um but that was something that we've we have licensing. It's called volume licensing. uh it allows us to utilize either at this in Los if that helps it. But because Windows 10 is no longer being supported after October of this year, we have
054to make the transition and my technology team is amazing. They are already on top of it. They're they're jumping to every computer they possibly can within the times given. Um but it is something that is going to continue to take something. U with regards to you're um now going to own the heap um the power school training uh at is there training that you think you could um help provide some of your staff to give you some support while you're taking on the power school administration. Um yeah so believe it or not so coming here in March um there has been some um changeover in administration on the technology department side over the past couple of years uh the staff themselves on the team have actually taken up the charge and kind of began owning
055some of these uh larger tier pieces. So the staff by and large do have expertise um to be able to to help this to help with this this offloading of duties. Uh but it's not something I'm actively looking at at this time. Uh they have enough going on in their buildings. I feel like I'm throwing enough at their on their plate to be completely honest with you. Uh we have some pretty substantial changeovers especially especially this summer going into the school year with the migration of the security products getting training materials ready and supporting everybody that we can process. They have they're responsible for all the moves of technology in line. start of the year especially is it's a very chaotic with with the technology but so it is something I'm going to be looking
056into. I do have some some people that have the expertise and I know of it. So, I will tap on the shoulder when the time comes if if things are gonna get a little too overloaded for me to really share this. Just want to make sure you never as you're offer any type of improvement from provide secure platforms the world. So as part of my negotiations with them as they brought up a 7% increase I did bring that up um and I think that was probably one of the primary drivers that got that down to where it did. I say it was a 4% increase. It's more like a 38 five% increase I believe year-over-year. Um, but that was I believe the main driving factor. There was no cash like full refund or anything like
057that that we would expect. Software uh they technically followed uh the rules and terms of our agreement or contract with them. They notified us within the appropriate timelines, shared information of balance, authority, um offered credit monitoring protection for families as well. So to my knowledge, we were able to to identify some savings, but it wasn't a straightforward reason for anything. >> Thank you. I'm skipp Thank you. Any other comments, questions? Okay. >> Thank you so much, Chef. We really appreciate you. >> Thank you, everyone. >> The second document that was sent on to board that commissioners Jack is going to reject in just a minute. Um, it was the board of education budget options worksheet. And they can't unmute again just so we know. I think that right else want to see? >> No. Dante,
058can you unmute? >> I'm unmuted. >> Okay. >> I don't got >> Did you want to say something? >> No, I just want to make sure I can unmute. >> Okay. >> All right. Okay. >> Okay. So, uh, turn it back over to >> Thank you. Um, the second document was the board education budget options worksheet. And I know Jeff was Yep. There it is right there. Um I'll have Deputy Superintendent Hawk explain it in just a minute, but this was really an opportunity we she pulled from the other spreadsheet with um some of the proposed cuts um the vacancies. We thought this might be a more organized way for commissioners to give feedback to sort of facilitate the discussion on particular um options in particular positions. for those. >> So, the board requested um
059more detail in how the what the budget would look like. Um using this worksheet, we wanted to get an understanding of your thoughts on different ideas that have come forward from all of our stakeholders. There's some ideas in here that are from BAPS. There's some ideas in here that are from um the teachers. Um, so we can start at the top and work our way down if that's easiest or Yeah. >> Okay. Um, so this idea um is looking at what the state requires um for the high school and the state requires two um credits for uh physical education. We currently ask all of our graduates to have four credits. If we align with the state and go down to two credits, then we would be able to have a reduction in our workforce um
060with physical education teachers. Uh we currently have one vacant position. Um so that is helping us as well and we're holding that in a freeze for discussion. We have one or two vacant positions in one position, I guess. >> Well, the positions would start at the high school. Um, but with the bumping border, the positions could end up anywhere. >> So, the retired or the resigned person was at a high school. >> Yeah. No. >> No. West Bristol. >> Okay. >> The reduction would be in the high school because the high school had that credit issue. Um I just I suppose have a question. How many of our students typically take four credits in? >> Oh, our Yeah, we removed some requirement. We heard data there were students that didn't and so removing the two
061credits or aligning the state will allow us to let students have choice. My question is if a student wanted to take to get all four credits, could it be elected? Will it still allow a student to take for them? Yes. with the requirement actually this decision I know previously and I don't know if it's still place there is an option for some students to fulfill their requirement a basic c would be needed >> Sarah or a hail do you want to come up with. >> Good evening. Um I was listening to the question and I was writing them down. So if I missed a step just let me know. Um your question was in regards to Early Bird. Um it it is running. It is at one of our high schools definitely. I would have
062to check on the second high school. Uh we do have so that's in terms of the early bird are teachers. Do you come in for that program? Um and what was on the other part of that? >> So I said does it I knew it exist. So you mentioned that at least for sure uh they cost associated with that city teacher there. their stipen that were paid that teacher board >> that counts as one of their sections, one of their classes for the day. >> And my third part was um before that the award credit requirement starter for some students to get it in during the day, those students that are, you know, maximizing their schedule to try to obtain college credit for studies, things like that. I don't I don't know the entire profile
063of who likes the early bird thing but uh if they have more room they're scheduated I don't think a few thousand and that saves something else that's why >> correct and I would like to the chance to look into that a little bit um we haven't really taken a look at that specifically um but I think that it's worth looking answer for sure. >> I I just have a follow-up question to your question. Is the early bird also for students who it's written in their 504 that they can't take gym with every other week? Like that is that part of that? >> I don't believe so. But again, I would like to look into that. >> That's something different if you have to take gym. it there's an independent study part of PE as well
064in the high school and um that is where that comes from and then just as like I was thinking the if you could take it so your question about if you choose to take more PE um that would still mean sections for teachers so like that if there were a lot of students that decided to take PE more act an extra PE section that would mean more kids more students in the classes and more sections for teachers >> kind of be like art or any of the courses where once they were full they so you'd put the kids who needed the credit in first if there was extra space >> the chair >> yes >> I guess my question um for Miss Hail would be what would be the impact of eliminating the two physical
065education teacher positions Well, the impact would be that there was less teachers available for less sections. So, I would think that it would increase the amount of students per class in those PE sections that exist now. >> Even if we had eliminated credits, >> I would think so. And what is our s our classes our sophomore class we I know a little bit about the sophomore numbers because that's what we use for our kinetic fitness assessment um and those numbers that's what we use for participation rate so I would kind of look into that more specifically and a follow-up question um how might that create some access issues for students not just an increase in classroom size, but might that create some access to physical education um credit issues for students? If you're going from
066two credits to four credits, it would you would have to get it into your schedule a little more tightly. So, I would think that that would have an impact on that. I just have to say, you know, since we're in the spirit of discussion, it's hard to think about larger class sizes in a gym, especially because, you know, that's where kids can actually, you know, get hit in the eye with the ball or just the classes are already large and concussions are real. And I I just I it's an area that I'm nervous about, but I'm just putting that out there. I'm one of So, >> at one point, was there ever a discussion about um athletes being able to use their practice time or other time to uh count toward credit? Well, the reason
067why I ask that is because if they're worried about the class size, and there are some athletes that choose to submit that credit, that could help, especially high schools, I would think, help reduce um those that are bus. I just So that has never come into conversation. Um this was mentioned briefly at one point and then kind of not brought up so we haven't done too too much research. I know that it has been um a growing thing in other districts that other districts are counting being an athlete as but it's different right? So there's a curriculum for high school physical education and so it is a different aspect with that also. So as part of do we know if it's allowed is yeah a is it allowed and bing that allows for that at
068least part of that and if there's a requirement of the state that's more instructional basis is there a creative way set up the instructional they satisfy I don't I'm oversimplified oversimplified but I'm sure some that is wouldn't be that if other districts are doing it, they must have found the because the state applies the requirements to all the streets the same way. So I guess um while we're seeking out these solutions and there might be concern about classiz that may be helpful. Thank you. Any other comments or questions? I would almost just in the spirit of brainstorming wish in a perfect world that we could say let's remove the two credits and give it a year and see what the numbers look like which students don't enroll and which do and what the class size
069kind of happens. Um, and then if we implemented the credits for athletes, I don't know if they have to be two two score, three score, you know, and then if that really drastically reduced, you know, the amount of students that we had in gym classes, I could see that as something I'd be more comfortable with. But like not knowing how it's going to impact things makes me nervous. >> I suppose that that makes me think of one um additional question. So, um, if we were to reduce the requirement down to two credits rather than four, when would that go into effect? Like, would freshmen already have met their requirements? It's ours. So, we could take it away like immediately when the state doesn't like so because it was never a state rule, >> we could
070just have it be for every grade immediately. We wouldn't have to like grandfather ourselves out of it. I'm sorry, somebody said I can't hear this better. I I'll just share that after my questions and I do think there's potential to get great answers on this. I had raised the questions about allowing for um more flexibility in the student schedules without having to require the four credits. So, I've been in favor of this move. Any further discussion before we go to the next item? >> Um, so are we are are people scoring these right now? Do they have like hard copies or are they just jotting down notes or you're doing both? >> Yeah. >> Through the chair. >> Yes. Um, as I was just sort of digesting this idea of going from four credits to
071two and losing potentially two physical education positions, um, I I I guess the part that I'm makes me feel a little bit uneasy is really not knowing how this is going to be realized and scheduling. You know, it's not just physical education and wellness that accounts for one credit, but also the health and safety education. I'm just, you know, there's so many scheduling challenges that might, you know, that that are realized when anytime you move um classes or scheduling. I I I just I wish that I could see how this might look in in scheduling, although I I I know that that's not going to be part of our work. um maybe even conversationally if there were challenges um at the high school level with um scheduling and the impacts that this will have on
072access for students. I I know that we're not having that conversation, but that's where I'm I'm kind of my brain is moving towards that. If anybody has any uh comment on that, >> I saw it as being able to help for schedule. um you don't always have adaptive PE either. So trying to come up with adaptive for students that need adaptive PE at the high school level this many credits is also a challenge. So, I find it to be challenging for some to get the kind of class that they um may be the most successful at is when you're talking about access to be able to do that for extra amount of credits in their schedules that also need other types of classes in room. I I from that standpoint I guess to me seem
073more challenged and access by having the four to >> Oh, I can absolutely appreciate that. you know, having the reduction in the credits from a required four to two for sure, and then having there be opportunities for um elective credits, if you will, and and that creating more access for students where it's not a requirement. Um, no, I could definitely appreciate that. I think it was that the reduction in credits sort of augmented with losing two fizzed teachers that was hard for me to um to see because now even though you're reducing the credit requirement you may there may be a reduction in sort of that access when we're losing to um to educators. I'm glad I had a chance to clarify that. Thank you. >> Thank you. The other question I just have is
074if we were to go down the road of athletes getting credits for gym, would the coaches all have to be certified coaches for those credits? That's one of the barriers that was in front of us in the past. So, I don't know our percentage of does every athletic team have a certified coach as like a teacher? I don't know. get asked that question moving forward, but because then we'd have an equity issue of certain kids that were on certain teams and certain coaches could get credits and then others couldn't. So, we wouldn't want to create another issue. Just wondering, put it out there as a question. Maybe we could get an answer to that. >> Chair, uh, just a quick question. Do we know like the average class size of a gym class right now?
075How many students? >> Do we know an average class size of a >> girls? Okay. 25 is the average. Thanks. Certified teachers, right? I'm not sure if they have to do right. >> I think >> Oh, sorry. When do we have to vote on this? Can I make the motion >> to move to physical education requirements? >> Are we going to be a lot item by item or are we going to do everything at once? lower than my question because as we product >> what would the total so how much money is is in this spreadsheet and do we need all of them or are there >> um we have extra money built in I believe there's three maybe maybe in the spreadsheet and I think we needed What? >> And there's 3.8. >> So
076there's money. There's things we can say no to. >> Yeah. >> Yep. And then the third one is really just to get ideas. Um so it's not an actual cost savings. It was just to kind of frame um what different things mean and to open discussion. Do you think that people spirit involve and then if there's any that people are likely start there? >> Can I circle back to the gym real quick at high school? Um, and I think we talked about it before, but trying to realize that the class size, how many gym teachers do we have at each high school? So just to repeat the answer for those online that might not have heard that that's okay unless you wantless she yeah before can I just ask so and then do we have
077four wait so you said 8 to four. You probably should come up. Yeah, I heard the first answer, but you should probably repeat it. Just Okay, >> we have four PE full-time teachers at VC that just teach PE specifically. >> And how many do health? The same. >> There are four as well for health. Okay. >> Um, one travels a little bit, but there are four full-time for health. Bristol Eastern there are the same amount of teacher full-time teachers but they some it's arranged a little differently that they teach both PE and health sections. >> So because the same amount of eight and eight it's just some teach two and some some teach both and some only teach. >> Yeah, we have a a special um certification process that we hire dual certified teachers for
078our department. So next next on the list. >> So So does that mean that all of these physical education teachers also are certified in health? >> Yes. At the high school level, Maria. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. Just so that I'm clear, do you want me to stop after each one for discussion or do you want me to just kind of give a synopsis of everything? >> I think discussion between each one helps and then we'll be >> all right. So the next idea that was brought forward was when we looked at co-curricular stipens. So those are um like a team leader or a um department head. We looked at the current budget is $493,000 to fulfill all of the stipens. These are really important positions that we don't want to go away because they
079help with things even as simple as putting hours and hours into the yearbook um some afterchool programming. But we were hoping that the union would allow us to cut it in half just for one year um with a savings of $244 46,762 which equates to approximately five teacher positions at the 55,000. Again, this would be something we would have to enter anou with the union, but we just wanted to know what the board's thought of this was for the chair. >> Yes. >> Um, so is is Thank you for the information earlier. I do I do appreciate it. Um, and perhaps I should have asked an additional question. So is this like taking the stipen amount in not the number of stipens? It's cutting the stipen dollar amount. Is there any room for cutting some
080stipened positions? I believe that when we when we decide if this is a route that we want to go, I think that the union would be open to it. Um, I do know that at one point I had called um a tech person. No, yep. A tech person who gets a stipen saying that we were going to cut off the science stipens and he was like just don't cut off my job. So, I think that they will be very flexible and I think that we can be really strategic. We want to these are important positions. um they do serve um the the entire district in a lot of different ways. Um but we thought that this was one more way to save um some teaching and administrative jobs. So, just to clarify this, everybody who
081is in a stipen position, the proposal is they could still get a stipen. It'll just be half of what they were getting for one year. Not eliminating statement from the certain ones, but keeping it for certain. >> Correct. That's what this proposal means. Everybody was treated the same way that got the site. The next item um was just to kind of frame um as we talk about reduction in force the approximate savings um because sometimes I think we think oh if we reduce this position that the teacher's currently making 100,000 then we're saving 100,000 but because of the way that bumping takes place I just wanted to be crystal clear to everybody and open up for any questions that you might have in regards to salary and savings. On this one, I just had a
082question about the this we're in the reduction of course, right? Okay. I had a question about the the one first year teacher. Was that reduction that's on this grid part of the five that we already voted on? So this isn't a six. This was one of the five. >> No, none of these are positions. This was more to frame conversations. So if um you were wondering, you know, why when we cut two PE teachers, are we only makingund 11,000 if they're veteran teachers? This is just kind of a framework page. Um, and if you had any comments on positions that you felt as though um should be eliminated, you could share that in the comments with us. Uh, so again, the one that's proposed on here, the one first year teacher, this isn't in addition
083to the five we've already approved. No, it is not. And then the only other question I had on this one was they the first year pair professional. I thought we have pair of professional positions that have been open that we're um currently using uh yeah like subs for. So why why would we cut one? >> None of these are positions. This is just to frame the budgetary impact. So if if one of you had come with an idea of oh >> reducing secretaries we could have that conversation using this as a reference but these are not actual people. >> Oh I understand >> these are just for Yeah. >> So these are like when we're talking pair professional world these are this is about the money they're talking about when we're talking about repodians. This
084is about >> correct >> the dollar. Correct. >> The next uh item that came forward was the high school's um more recently added a ontrack um guidance counselor. And if we reduced one from each um high school, we would save $111,428. through the sheriff. Yes. What does the on track coordinator do differently above and beyond that council >> Mel? Do you want to speak to that evening? Um so the ontrack coordinators uh the guide school counselors really work with our most vulnerable students. So students that are off track um as ninth graders or the eighth grade um school counselors say or you know kind of say these kids may need more support in adjusting to high school to keep them on track you know that we worry about our grade nine on track rate. He
085also we have a bristle friend um also um spends a lot of time with students that transfer in. So you guys probably know we do have a lot of students that come in mid year, come in sometimes in April and they need a lot of support getting um used to the school and used to the um the policies and processes that we have. So they actually really are very important. They have a smaller case load but still a significant case load and it really is students that need weekly check-ins. Some um are check-in checkout. So it's just students who need a lot of extra. >> This line item says that this is a relatively new division. and somebody can find how many other ways. >> So ours is whether it's about two years. So it
086was initially a two-year position um I believe after our funds and um the position proved to be so beneficial again also used a lot in SRBI. So they were so beneficial that they were put into the the regular fund like they were put into the regular fund because they really were beneficial. I think I shouldn't say I don't know what fund. Are there any other questions or discussions about that? The next item was already explained by um Mr. Telki. Thank goodness because I tried to explain it this afternoon and was talking in circles because it's a lot. So, thank you, Mr. Telki. So, this not replacing non-essential employee positions. Um, and I don't ever want to kind of refer to somebody as non-essential, but what we're saying is if we have a retirement, let's say
087in I'll say art and um currently we have low class sizes in art. Um, for this year, uh, we would like to propose that we do not um that we do not fill that position. there any questions or discussion to the chair? Um, so I I guess just as a piggyback um have we looked at some of our classes that are at beans or you know our electives that historically have low student sign up um to where we can maybe cut some of those out. They only have few students every year, every semester. I don't know if we looked at those. So, we have been looking at those and that's been an area that we've been looking at where we could potentially reduce make reductions in terms of very low enrollment >> through the chair.
088>> Yes. >> What does low enrollment look like? I I I think it's helpful if we're quantifying that a little bit. >> Seeing some of those five, let's say under 10. >> So, student enrollment of five. I is that I'm sorry. I just I didn't hear so well. Apologize. >> We've seen some classes um historically with low counts. For example, we were reviewing some passes this past Friday that had five students. So 10 are below what we were thinking. >> Okay. Oh, so I think I understand. You said 10 below. So ideally there would be 15 in the class and what you're seeing are class sizes of five in some of the classes where you would want to see 15. >> Right. >> Okay. Thank you so much. >> You're the chair. >> Yes. And
089that those classes we had a a proposal on our last workshop it was four high school teachers. Is that would that still be what we would put on the table? >> Yes. I believe when we had discussed it previously that was part of our rationale very low enrollment. >> Okay. Great. Thanks. Do we happen to have an idea of just an idea to it? Like how many classes um do have what would be considered an idea of flow moment? Uh, so I did print out I have upstairs and I can read to you the book with all the teachers schedules and then highlighted under 15 class under 15 students per class. I believe that the cut off right now is 10 but if we moved up to 15 so it's it's a very easy I'd
090appreciate that >> through the chair. Um, and the low enrollment that you're seeing in some of the classes, is that just this year or is it just per half year? Has it been something that you looked at over time, whether maybe the last three to four class sessions have been five or below, or are you looking solely at like one isolated semester or trimester? You you know what I mean? So I have two different documents. One of them is a fiveyear looking at the same class and looking at the enrollment and then the second uh document is teachers uh case loads uh for this year only. and and and and then in making this determination um for these reductions, were the classes five students or so over time or was there was there a measure?
091Okay, if we see that this a certain class had only five students low enrollment or 10 and below for one year, two year like how how what is being determined overall as low class enrollment, you know, over time. >> There did seem to be a pretty specific pattern. I can share that document with you if you'd like. >> Yes, that would be helpful. in that pattern based on what you were seeing would be that it's not going to trend up again where it's just a dip in the last enrollment count or but that there's it's been trending downward over time and it doesn't look like it's something that would recover with higher enrollment. >> If we base it on the last five years, I'm pretty confident that next year we'd have a good assessment of
092the enrollment. >> Okay. So, so much of the recommended reductions in this area would be something that you're seeing sort of longitudinally over the past five years that there had been this reduction in enrollment. >> Correct. >> Okay, that was helpful. Thank you so much. Um, so can I close the discussion on that item or do we have >> I just have one more question just to piggy back off of Commissioner Triel's comment. So these currently are positions that are vacant because of the low enrollment because we haven't offered it. No, these are currently vacant positions um be by retirement by the um the different plans that we've asked and what we're proposing with this is that we don't fill them. The ones that we will fill are the special education ones um because they
093don't fall under the same purview. But um this is a lot of different teacher that are retired that the coaches didn't take their position. So not filling them though meant not filling four high school teachers. That's was commissioner. It equated to four. So four high school teachers gives us a savings if we don't fill them of 67,600. I believe that there are about six in this particular number. The original proposal was four but that was to um uh reduce without looking at retirement. >> Good evening, commissioners. Uh, as of March 16th, we have 18 teacher openings in our district. Two of them are special education. So, if you factor that out, um, three of those resignations and or retirements were coaches and one interventionist. Um, three of those 18 were backfilled by um, coaches that
094were displaced. So technically, if you're looking at these numbers, you really have 13 open positions to work with. >> That comes the 607629 or no >> no more. >> Hypothetically, if you went through and Yeah. And just because I feel like I have to ask the question, none of the low enrollment classes are classes that would allow students to obtain postcar. >> Uh no. Uh the ones that we were looking at show you there. It's an array of different um subjects. >> That's a big car. family and I know we're thinking the same thing but I just feel like I have to put it out there that we get a call and see none of them we did previous that was on our mind >> in some of the vacant positions it might be like
095seventh grade at um Chippens, we know that that we have the students to fill that, you know, we need to hire that person. Um okay, so the next thing on our list is a furlow day. This was a thought brought forward that we wanted to get a little bit more detail with. This again would be something that we would have to put through the unions. The number that you're seeing here is what we would save out of the general budget. Um if we did a a furlow day for all um members of the so all the different units. Um my only question would be is this net savings or is it going to cost us to submit it to the vision? General say I don't know. >> Do you have an idea for the union
096stewards whether this would be something that they feel is negotiable for their membership? >> Truly true. >> Yes. >> I would expect it to be a savings because we're talking about eliminating the arguing eliminating hours anything like that. This could happen to be this would be in that s I can't see that being argued out 105 hour had an additional question that that this line item reminded me of and I know that this would impact teacher contract as a uh the way that they're they're But we had a topic earlier in the year about um holidays and um the feedback from some of the surveys about the amount of time off in all the things in the fall. Some years when some of the holidays fall uh are rotate on each day. So we don't
097have the same amount of holidays in November every year depend on the calendar and holidays that we approve. Was there any look at um some of the holidays that we did not have data to support them in the student tune with me? And I can say that because I was there and I know one of them I don't want to name the name of things. It's just is there additional potential for cost savings because the board controlled the calendar and if we eliminated a holiday and that's a big EV that I know we still have to um we won't be able to promise this tonight but I suspect that things could still be pretty volatile for the next few months. Would it be something that we could consider for uh non-essential employees um who do
098get paid from the holiday be removed to holiday because the or has withdrawal so we wouldn't have to social that's definitely something you can consider without discuss the next item is the more recent added uh position of supervisor of Bristol Preparatory Academy. It would be a savings of 169,291. Just a few questions. I know I've covered this position a little bit. Um I'm just wondering who's going to step in. I I feel like there's been improvement in the school. Um, and there's a goal and there's been a goal and and um we've moved closer to the goal and so I don't want to lose that steam that's picked up over the last um couple of years. So, how do we how do we fill this in without students? So un unfortunately with all of these
099cuts, it's going to uh shift responsibilities onto other um staff. We have begun discussions on this. I I think it would be premature for me to um offer those right now uh but I can share them uh with the board as we solidify them. Uh we also have written into the BAPS contract that they receive 30 days notice prior to any added um workload. Um, we've also looked at maybe um having some of the support from uh the high school security team as a as a possibility as well just because the um security team over there, the climate team are are very good. So there are a lot of things up in the air with this. Um but and when we were talking about cost um we wanted to make sure that all unions are
100affected and that we'll look at uh what what we believe we can cover. >> Uh this is Chris Abraham. Is it possible to just clarify one thing on that Excel sheet? >> Oh, I'm sorry. Um we have a commissioner talking right now. Um, what? Okay. Commissioner Blue said she'll she'll wait. What What was your question? >> Um, I'm sorry. This is Chris Abraham. I was just wondering if we could clarify the title of that position. >> Okay. >> It's supervisor of alternative assess uh alternative education and assessment. >> Okay. >> And maybe just get the spelling um corrected if you're keeping the title that you have. Thank you. Sure. So, um the preparatory academy is an academy to help um students who maybe the um mainstream education of the big high school um just isn't
101a good fit for them. Um, and so what it allows them to have is a smaller classroom. Um, they have hex hex. Um, so they have a shorter amount of time for them to recover their uh, credits just to figure out like specifically what this phys that positioned on. >> Yeah, that was what it was. There was there was a different position that had a stipen to be the supervisor and then the position was turned then a principal was given the position at the same salary and they used anou to have it be a supervisor but it still was kind of the same position principle but we didn't approve a position in our budget so it created did that amount of money on top of where we were. So, because of the number of students
102adding a full-time administrator to a school with small staff and and not a large population in a budget crisis, it was one of the things that was suggested as of cost savings. So the original So this position was never originally the boarding never actually that just made me think of a question. I um how many kids are at this still? I think there's more full-time staff. I think I've asked this before. I think maybe 40. So, it is built to um uh have approximately 80. Currently, I believe the enrollment is in the 50s. I can double check and get back to you though. Think a couple questions. It's um if you eliminate this position, this is a position that currently has a contract. It has anou. >> Is that not binding? Oh, if we eliminate
103the position then the for financial reasons the position is eliminated the person it's it's not a you know so that's separate issue depending on their years could bump into another position so they wouldn't lose their job we would just be eliminating a position and I just pulled up the enrollment it's 52 too. >> Trying to think how to ask my question. So um because and I'm you know I apologize not to try to bring up those things but when a position was eliminated in the past that was only related to one person you know uh there were some issues out with them. So I don't want to be in the same situation. That's what I'm asking. That's why I specifically asked this this position holds a contract that was promised to be in a bed
104past whatever decision making. >> Yeah. And uh in the past it was always a slight imposition by this program. Nobody is arguing that we don't need the program. the program. He'd still be there and he would go back to the prior way of program without this title supervisor of alternative ed assessment as it so the new title there isn't going to be a title position. >> So who supervises the program? It was a stipened position based on the person who was doing other roles. So that would be a stipened position again. So I'm assuming you might have something to add. >> Yes, Dante. Can you unmute? >> Yep. Sorry. So, for clarity's sake, um we're saying we're eliminating this position entirely, but adding a stipen for another individual to cover this in addition to their
105duties. >> That's how it was previously and based on the financial status of us right now, that's the plan moving forward is what I'm understanding. >> So, this savings is net whatever the stipen will be. Yes, I believe the stipen was 7,000 previously. >> The stipen is still in the budget. Um, so this is the net. >> Okay, great. I think that's pretty clear then. >> So knowing that we can't have a successful program unless we have a successful person who wants to administer the program under these conditions. Do we have that? because I I'm not comfortable making a cut like this unless we know there's somebody that is there that is going to take this or a $7,000 sip. >> The gentleman who used to uh have that stipen is still there. What I
106want to ensure is that this program is still adequately supervised and successful. And just cutting it doesn't tell me that we physically have somebody who's willing to do the same job that we were willing to pay $179,000 for whether we did. So I don't want to rehash over how they got what we did. And that's a significant reduction. And maybe it's maybe it's appropriate because we did do a recycle report and it is I I have to say that when I look at admin position across all high schools and it's a competitive salary to a high school that has a lot more students that doesn't make this program less important but there is less students here so I do understand the reason for bringing it up. Um, I don't know if the magic solution though
107is $7,000 if we don't have somebody who can successfully pick up where this position left off and not with those students have the program that >> yes I believe this program was successfully managed before when it was a was a type and position see any problem with it continuing in the future under the same same opaces is certainly, you know, work gets shuffled around a little bit, but I'm sure it will be handled adequately. With that discussion being closed, the next item this notice requirement applied to usition and you know the risk requirements. We were asked when we do the budget to be sure that we try to um affect all and so then unfortunately I um am losing my administrative assistant who has been awesome during this transition. Um but uh that will save
108us $57,792. Men chair. >> Um I I did ask I think it was a couple months ago regarding this position. Um who will take on the role and responsibilities of the position or is it being completely eliminated? It's being completely eliminated and the um superintendent's administrative assistant is taking on the roles. assuming there's agreement from the superintendent specific that's already been negotiated. >> So there have been some initial conversations with Miss Eber but um Michelle is transitioning in the U principal office. Sorry I should make um usually don't say names but sorry about that was a s but she has been good about um hearing some of the roles that she had with the death superintendent some of the sunshine some of the fun celebratory things that brings the central office team together some of
109those responsibility he has agreed Any other comments or questions? I guess my only other we I mean I see Michelle a lot. Sorry. [Laughter] It was already out. So um obviously there's some meetings um this position um handles um do we know who will be taking over in that capacity for meetings? and don't want to comment without talking to the person confirming the difference. So, >> it it's a fair question though. It's a lot of extra hours. You know, you know, this year especially, we've had some meetings well above and beyond schedule that we had previous year actually above and beyond every other year that I've ever been in this. So, it is a lot to ask the staff to come in. So, I just want to make sure things are covered. You'll probably figure
110it out, I'm sure. But um the clarification that it will not be built definitely sets to press that this district I think years. So doesn't mean you couldn't bring it back I guess in the future if you had money for it. But um we would you're saying complete elimination. There's no expectation of the ability to So, the next item on the agenda, >> um, the dean of Southside School, it would be a savings of $136,000. This is one of those ones that I'm having a hard time with, uh, with a school that size and a new principal coming in. Um, that's going to be a hard cut because it's a direct service administrator right in the building. Um, it's a big ticket item. I get it. But, um, I I just think the school needs
111an administrator to support the principal. Uh, and so that one's going to be tough for us to really let go of, but any comments or questions through the chair? Yeah, >> I concur. And it was a question I asked um, Mrs. clock. There currently is no dean there, right? Uh well, there was a dean position and there isn't someone employed in the position right now. >> And how long has that four months? >> March. March. >> And is there no teen or I should not vice principal over at our other large elementary school staff? Yeah. Originally, um, this position came in, I want to say around 2000. Um, none of us have deans. Um, at the time in making the decision for Southside and Stafford to share a dean, so it was every other day
112that they would have some support. Um, Southside had what we now refer to as the breakthrough program, which is a self-contained program for fourth and fifth grade children. That program has since been moved to Ivy Drive. So IB drive currently has K through five self-contained breakthrough program which um can uh take a lot of time from that administrator. Um Stafford has three self-contained programs. Mountain View has two and Hubble has three. So while um Southside is a larger school, the um the student population as far as any self-contained program, it has absolutely zero. So I think that's where the decision was was made. Question. So when we have self-contained programs for specialty populations um there are certain much like requirements for administrators to participate in meetings. Um so I understand reflecting upon the fact that
113it had been moved out of Southside school but we still have programming but we've increased the amount of self-contained programs at Ivy. Uh Stafford has three and has three. any of those schools Ivy Stafford or Harbo have a shared dean? >> No, no one. >> And say again, >> they don't have the dean at all. Not our right. And that's what I suspected. But um if how are they managing being able to participate in all the additional meetings for those specialized populations that uh are required to have the admins have every one of those meetings while being school ready. The meetings are shared with the special education supervisors. Um, again, I don't believe, and Erica may be able to answer this better, so Erica and I used to share a special ed um, supervisor, and
114we pretty much split the person. Um, Erica had three uh, she had she had Tuesday and Thursday, I had um, Monday and Wednesday, and then the supervisor did all their out placements on Friday. So that's how some of the meetings are covered. Um beyond the meetings though and um when you have uh students the level of need the reason why they're in a self-contained program is because they just have a higher level of need and it can be anything. Um so uh no I'm familiar with what self programs are. My my question is coming from the uh special populations are that have IEPs is rising. Our programs are rising. That means there's more meetings. Statutoily they're required to have admins in them. And if you're not going to have a building admin in them, those
115need to be um approved by the parent in the release. So, we've been getting those releases for every one of those meetings that have a shared supervisor. I guess I share a concern similarly to it's it's not sitting well with me because I I'm having a hard time trying to figure out I'm grateful existing staff has managed this. This is no implication saying anybody has. I just don't know if it's >> and I think it's important to understand that. No, like I think everyone in the room wishes that we could not be in this situation. So I don't think these proposals are put in front of us because uh you know anybody's saying that we don't want this. I think it's they aren't filled with people right in this minute. So I think that's why
116they're just on the proposal for us to discuss, but no one is telling us we have to do this, but we do have to get to a number. Um, I mean, personally, I think every school should have a dean. I don't think there should be any school that doesn't have two people, two administrators in the building with our students. Um, but we're also in a deficit right now. So, I I don't know how we get there. Um, but I think in my opinion, it's really important to have that support in the building where the students are because I know the professionals who are working one-on-one with our most vulnerable students aren't able to do what they would be able to do had if there were two administrators in the building. It impacts that. And >>
117you're the chair. >> Yes. I sorry I had I I had my hand up so I was waiting but I didn't unmute until just right now so apologize. Um I think the so I I obviously have a concern with not having a dean at Southside and also at our other really high need schools. a really important one of some of the important responsibilities um to Commissioner G Antonio's point is to attend 504 meetings, PPT meetings where you do need to have that supervisor present. And I I would really love to see if the district, if we're picking and choosing between what schools we consider are are the highest need, that there be some type of formula because you have you have some schools that have self-contained programs, you have some schools that have more staff,
118you have some schools that might have more student population. Um, but you know, if we're looking at how we're separating administrators because they have to participate in 504 or PPT meetings, then you know, you would have to factor that into the formula as well because if an administrator is attending a 504 meeting or a PPT, then obviously that administrator is then not available to address other issues throughout the building. Um, so it's it's hard to compare apples to apples when we don't necessarily have a formula, but I do also have a deep concern with um not having these supports at our schools. And because Southside School does have this budgeted um position, I I share the reservations about removing that. Obviously, I share reservations about all of the um impacts that are going to be
119realized immediately, but then over the long term with all of these uh budget reductions, it's it's um it's it's really unfortunate and um it's actually to me it's quite sickening. So, I just wanted to put that out there. I I don't know how we say we can take these positions away. That's all. Thank you. This this this is awful. This sucks. I wish that we never had to be I don't think we ever should have to be in this position for students and staff. There is nothing that state. So for me I think yes we know that there's a need right now it's not ideal but that's the position but could we but could we bump like so if you kept this position would would and you eliminated something else. Would someone be moved into
120that position? I'm just thinking about people in the schools being prioritized and people working directly with kids. I don't know. I don't have the answers. I'm just struggling with that school has over 500 kids. the one administrator just does not seem appropriate. >> Maybe um in due time as things start to everything starts to make sense um I don't know how realistic it would be to have like a districtwide K5 dean or even a shared dean maybe between the two schools of the Yeah. So, I ideally we're, you know, we're making really hard cuts and we're praying that they're just for a year or so to get back on our feet. Um, we're trying not to cut the teachers have already taken quite a big hit, you know, trying to uh help. Um, of course,
121you know, Southside, you know, if they need any help from either Steve for security or myself, um, I'm a short drive away and we're going to support them as much as we possibly can. The next item is the supervisor for custodians for BE and BC. And Joe, did you have clarification on this cut? >> I don't think I wrote the clips out. Not sure. >> So, we have a current position that's open. Um, it's a shared role. Currently, it's about $90,000 a year based on that. >> So, that would actually be a larger savings. So when it says BE excuse me and BC 46, it's actually one position. >> Mhm. >> It's currently open in >> No, no, it would it would open a position in both schools. So right now you have um as
122TIFA so describes you the foods on custodians that are there and they're doing a lot of the um the actual areas and then you have a supervisor of the two schools. So um Mr. Fusco said that he would take on the supervisory position of those two schools and we would eliminate the current supervisor. Um, we were trying again to make cuts in all different areas and currently a lot of the custodians are already overwhelmed with the amount of uh real estate that are trying to supervisor in the custodians union and another Um, so that was Yeah. >> Um, the next item we put forward two uh OTL supervisor positions. Um again, we were trying to give you more money than um the exact pinpoint amount so that if we do need to change anything, we
123do have some wiggle room. We do currently have one position open. It uh affords us $164,689. If we choose to eliminate a second one, we would have a savings of 329,378. The discussion, >> you're the chair. >> Yes. >> Um, this would be the elementary humanity supervisor and the climate and culture that was previously listed. No, the climate and culture is already out. We currently have one opening at OTL for a um humanities and this proposal would be a second person from there. >> Okay. Thank you. Can you clarify what you meant by the climate and culture is already out the elimination of the position for theou of climate and culture. That was the second position that was anou that wasn't approved by the board. Does the person have a problem? >> The person has
124in front of you and his and already conversations have all gone through all the legal everything and the position can be eliminated for financial purposes and will be in another position. Um the second if you went with the position that's already assumed there's not another person impacted by what was the other one you would part >> I would allow that to be a decision with um for if that's something that we want to move forward with >> through the chair. Yes. >> Does that Thank you so much. Does that mean that one of these two positions would actually displace um a currently employed Bristol public school staff member >> through their contract the supervisors bump a teacher. We do currently have some um teacher vacancies available. So, we would have to see. >> Uh, do
125those certifications match up. She did. She said that they didn't. Carly, um, Miss Foron would be the person kind of deciding if there was another supervisor position eliminated. I don't know that I don't know that that's been decided or talked about. I don't have a but I don't think it would be a discussion for tonight. I think it's right. So, I don't know that we can match anything up tonight out loud. >> Right. Well, I think for for for me I my question is if this line item is approved, then does that mean that a Bristol public school staff member will lose his or her job? That's my question. And I I mean there are not that many OTL supervisors. So the question really is looking at their their certifications to determine whether or not
126there's an open position and then but that means if even if there is an open position where the certifications match up then that would be bumping a Bristol public schools teacher. This is my question. Does this mean that somebody loses their job? >> I don't we don't know that answer but also you are aware that in this list right here there are a lot of other people who will lose jobs. >> Absolutely. and I'm keeping track >> which which is why I'm asking a very pointed question. >> We I don't think that the answer could be given right this minute. It's not something that can be given. >> I have a question but chair um and I know that um there has been lots of discussion uh regarding um the cos and things like that.
127um by eliminating the purchase of Virginia and still having statutory requirement to produce curriculum that meets the state's framework that meets the needs of our students that propels our district forward. How would uh or I should say not filling the p the position that's already vacant and potentially eliminating second how does this align with the goals in the vision of our district and the vision of the benefit because I don't have any other plan except the vision of the graduate and we had some metrics that had not been met at the K5 level for simply uh the grade three level and if we're talking about elementary candy ities. I'm assuming that also means third grade literacy not filling it. So I'm I'm concerned that eliminating the coaches and then having additional eliminations in OTL where
128we have to produce the curriculum is not going to bode well for those uh vision of the graduate and for the district goals that we're punching down. I I have a hard time supporting this much cut in that one place until we see even back to uh you know the mission of all um thank you and I would have to say I agree a thousand% that every single one of these cuts up here is going to impact the vision of the I mean there is absolutely nothing that's happening none of this is fat none of this is unnecessary none of this is uh wasteful spending ing. None of this is un is is what uh we are being made to um pretend in this forum based on the amount of money we've been provided by
129the city to do. So I a thousand% agree with you. It's impacting the vision of the graduate and it's disgusting. So any other comments just that I agree I think all of this impact and it's so with no further discussion the H back um not replacing for the year currently savings would be about 83,000 94. >> I did have a question on that, too. Um, so I was wondering which Hback system we were talking about because I know Green Hills was just redone and then I saw it said citywide. >> What was one of the the vacancies? >> It's a position. It's not Oh, okay. >> Wondering that. Okay. Thank you. Is that position open right now? Yeah. >> The next position um you may not be too familiar with. Uh we did purchase a
130van to try to offset some of our transportation costs. We have been trying to find somebody who would be willing to take the position which is kind of a as needed position. Um and we haven't found anybody for this year. We thought that if we hold off on that idea for this coming year and just stick to our regular transportation um allowances, we could save $20,000. Without further discussion, we have currently a position. It's an ISTY position at Green Hills. It is vacant. Um although I, you know, as with all the positions that we're talking about tonight, um very important position. Um but going forward we thought with the redistricting happening next year with the heist with the middle schools it may be possible for us not to fill this position this year whereas because
131it may get eliminated next year. So offer discussion. I'm really sorry, but with all of the acronyms, I can't for the life of me determine what I >> sorry. Um, that is the literacy intervention people. So they are the uh people who when we're not certain if um somebody needs uh little extra or does somebody need specialized instruction the usually work with them for six weeks keep um data on what they've done and what their growths are um during that time. This is currently empty. >> It's currently empty. That's why we put it up. It's with no more discussion. We were tasked to of course look at all positions. Um the secretarial position uh we currently have one empty at the high school and we're looking to reduce another two. uh through the chair. >>
132I'm sorry for the delay by the time I have to like kind of raise my hand and be unmuted. Um >> we can't see you. Raise your hand. Up on the screen is just the sheep. The >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, I understand. Um >> just talk when you want to talk. >> Is doing a great job >> um unmuting me. But I I I appreciate that the ISTY position is currently vacant. I just wanted to share that these are such vital positions. They are positions that are direct contact positions with students and as deputy superintendent >> is vacant. It is vacant or it's not. >> Yes. Oh, no. Right. It is >> it will be vacant when when they retire. Right this minute it's not vacant. >> Okay. Gotcha. So, >> but it will
133be >> but it won't result in a staff person losing his or her job. >> No, it won't result in somebody losing their job if they don't refill the position. uh but the person will will be here through the end of the year. >> Okay. Um I I just wanted to share that that you know it is a an extremely vital position as deputy superintendent Hawk mentioned that the the interventionists are really responsible for supporting students that might need um smaller group instruction or they're going into the classroom and providing um instructional support there or bringing students out supporting students in tier one instruction or tier 2 instruction. They're just really super valuable. Um, and I just wanted to mention that, but it's helpful to know that while it's occupied currently that this a person
134will not be losing his or her job. Although, if somebody needed to bump into this position, would that would this position be available for for that purpose? >> Not if we eliminated it. >> Okay. Because then that could result in somebody bumping somebody else and that person potentially losing his or her job. >> No, the person who's not going to be in that position res resigned retired or they're not here anymore. Marius, the position will be open unless we eliminate it and then it will be gone so no one can bump into it. >> Right. I understand that. If we vote to eliminate it, then it's not available for somebody to bump into. My question is, have we resolved all of the um for the positions that may be eliminated? They they have not yet
135all been resolved. So, is there a potential that somebody could have bumped into this position at Green Hills >> before if we did not eliminate it? Does does somebody understand what I'm saying? >> I I think I am um understanding what you're saying. So currently the people who can bump have uh all chosen positions that they feel as though are suited for them. Um the positions that we're still struggling with are the five um that we had to do a reduction of force and we haven't brought those people back on yet. Um, that being said, they they don't have the ability to bump because they were the least senior teachers. Does that answer your question? >> Yes. Yes. I'm I'm sorry, I'm processing. So I So that means that of all the people who might
136need to bump, there is nobody that could bump into this position. >> Not at the moment is what they're saying. >> Okay. So not at the moment. Okay. Then that answers my question. Thank you. >> Right now it's currently filled by somebody who's going to be there till the end of the school year. I'm assuming such their wish, right? And so if we make this decision tonight back to fill it, there wouldn't be bumpings. The bumping wouldn't have taken place until after that person, which would be later this month. >> Correct. Okay. >> And because we're looking at redistricting in a year, um people are not as interested in this position. Um they're interested in room uh positions that were more stable. through the chair. >> Yes. >> Of I think the genesis of the
137question asked really is us trying to get an understanding of if we vote on all of these proposed cuts, how many folks actually lose a job? Do we have that? In other words, let's say I rate everything a five on this list. >> Well, five we already voted on which were included on this list. So, he said if he rated everything up. >> I get that. I'm asking. >> I I believe we're at four because the ontrack coordinators and the PE teachers are current. Nope. Because there's only one PE teacher. So three at this time I believe there are three >> on the list of if we voted for all of this that would be three. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Well we talked about the secretaries have >> you said one was empty.
138You're looking to cut two more. >> Yes. So, there's one at the high school that is currently empty. Out of equity, we wanted to uh cut one from the other high school. This says three secretaries. One's empty at one high school. just said proposed a second at the second high school for acquidated. Where's the third? >> So, we need to look at the um K8s. They will be um changing a lot next year. They'll So, they'll already be an issue there. So, we're going to look at those and talk to the Kate administrators as well as look at um some of the programs that have very few students and um full secretarial staff. So, you guys brought it back. We have two caves or two high schools. So, would you are you wouldn't it be
139fuller? you're looking one isn't filled the other one at the high school and then one at each kid. I'm not trying to increase the number people that are I'm just trying to understand the the the reasoning that you're telling us. So, we were looking at um the preparatory academy and the adult ed have two secretaries. if we need to move forward with those two. We also wanted to look at what will possibly as we get information about the redistricting, what will be the needs of um the K8s of Northeast and we're actually starting the kickoff to the redistricting next week. Well, only one out of these three proposed is currently unfilled. Correct. And the other one was going to uh potentially come from the other high school and then you're you're looking to a secretary
140duties between the academy and helmet. >> That's what we are going to look into. >> And then you're not thinking about the K rearrangement until after the rearrange. That's another cool option that's later. Yeah, there's something to close the bag. Okay. And the last item on this section is the one that um Mr. Telie has already explained. Did somebody just put their hand up? >> I did. through the chair. >> Yeah. >> Um, so this is a listed cut. I think there was a number above of not replacing non-essential employee position of 607, but I thought the student database administrator was already in that because that would be one of the vacant positions, right? >> Right. It's for the services. This is for the position and also one of the positions that >> Sorry, it
141was really hard to hear you. >> Oh, sorry. Um, it's one of the open bacon positions and it's also a position that Mr. Tilki mentioned during his description of it reductions. So, it's a duplicate. Gotcha. So that's part of his 516,000 and then it's also part of the and then >> I just want to make sure because >> we already discussed it. So if it's I mean it's not an additional option, right? >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. So the next uh couple of options were things that came from BAT leadership. Um we don't have the cost because we're going into negotiations with the bus company. But one thing that was brought forward is just the idea of the late bus going from 3 days down to 2 days. Once we have the contract, we
142would have a better number on that. it was just something that they felt as though they could support. Um, and I wish we had more information, but we don't. Uh, the other idea coming from the middle school was that with the redistricting a year away, um, middle school sports will soon look like Northeast versus Chippens Hill. So, and right now Northeast doesn't really have a field. um so they have to go somewhere else um to practice. So an idea was brought forward of um combining the teams for next year uh and that would eliminate some of the coaching stipens um and they felt as though the savings was approximately 27,160. What about the transportation? How would that work? >> They would be using I think the late bus lessons for that. Um there is going
143to be uh so and I Colin can probably explain this a lot better than I can but basically we book a bus right now through the contract for the day. So the bus um might not have a prek run but may have an afterchool run. So, you're paying for the bus for the day anyways. He explained it, but I don't know what's going to happen with the new contract, but I thought it was an interesting wheel to just bring forward. I I do have a comment on the uh the middle school sports. Um it's really not that much of a savings, it doesn't look like. I mean, they already have the uniforms. uh you would be transporting the kids right from beach school back and forth which they do for games but they practice four
144days a week so it's just an additional I know um are they not doing practices at at North they don't have their games there >> they have every game's an away an away game for outdoor sports So they don't practice, they practice at a at a park. And then uh when asked the Babs members from the high school, sorry, one second. Can you check and see if the people online can hear us? I'm getting a text saying we can't hear anything anymore. >> Oh, you can hear us now. Okay. So, do you want to come up to the Sorry about that. Um I believe the question was about Northeast currently. Um, beginning this year in the fall while I was out, um, we began practicing, um, on off-campuses. Um, it was, Colin can definitely speak
145to this as well. Um, and my Northeast, um, uh, athletic coordinator. It was quite a struggle with the bus company to get the kids to and from the fields on time. Um, I worked with the bus company as well as our parks department to ensure a baseball and a softball field for practices and for games. So those kids were still given the opportunity to play a home game, but it wasn't obviously at Northeast. It was at Mix Street um and another field for peace ball. Um so those that was the answer to the question about practices and games. >> Yes, thank you. Yeah, they didn't I knew that they didn't have any they had to travel for every game, but I think with practice it it sounds like it was difficult to adjust with one
146school rather than juggling three. I will be interested to know after um redistricting how middle school sports looks because right now we have a rotation of couple middle schools. So is every season just going to be Northeast versus Chiffens for every game for every sport? Um so uh that'll be interesting but guess that's my only comments on this subject now. So the next um group of recommendations came from the BAPS high school just to consider um the freshman team leader savings if we eliminated that alto together instead of just cutting the stipen would be $24,424. the moving of adult ed support staff into the PEP grant the savings 27,27 um and then there was discussion around updating the rental uh fee structure um for wear and tear custodial supplies um shifting the time of a
147vocational programming to reduce transportation again that is not going to be covered anytime soon because we're going into a contract and then um and Mr. Telky is already looking at this now that we are one to one can we remove some of our computer labs and retain uh extra money by really carefully going through all of our resources and um making uh reductions as as we see fit. the reduction of the computer labs, >> the lab like the room that has computers that have been there that are redundant because we're one to one device for students. Is that the theory? >> Uh yes. So over the uh past several years, especially with the introduction of one to one Chromebooks, um computer labs and schools absolutely one that's not just here, that's essentially a woman. um
148as students have affordability to do things actively in classes. So while they still do serve a a very good purpose um the the amount of them simply um isn't as required so higher necessary. So we're we're working with the administration of I think schools to to assess viability and medic. I just want to share that that that would only really be kind of a long-term savings. um some of this equipment again because of scenario I I brought forth it would uh it really wouldn't be realized at least until the following day when we need to get that >> with this um I I do believe and correct me if I'm wrong we had um we have Apple devices to support some of the design programming there too and I thought those were in a computer
149lab we didn't issue those devices on a wonderful basis to the students to that. Correct. >> Correct. Yeah. And and there are some labs that uh simply cannot go away because they do have a different operating system in them. They are purpose-built for um computerated design for instance, uh music production, digital art, photography. Uh so those those computers will be um staying to support uh the curriculum that they need to. >> I had a question on the move adult support. What? Which support staff? What does that mean? Is that a secretary? Is that student support staff? Who what kind of position? We're going to have to talk to the high school BAPS members and get you that answer. >> Question on the rental. This in all schools or this just the theater at everybody? >>
150This uh pertains more to the theater at BS. Um, looking at uh the amount of theaters in the area, um, we think that we would probably, um, it would behoove us to relook at what we're charging compared to other people um, to get more um, more of a revenue there. you reach this list. I don't know where the agenda meets going from here, but I had a couple other questions from the last meeting that address your thing. Um there were there was a grid given to us at the last meeting identifying the fe I program for the VSIP program and in the uh June meeting I believe was 9 months the the board approved the VSIP and I had asked what is this our uh is it new because we didn't approve two different programs
151So, what is the difference? And how can we accomplish something that the board didn't vote on? >> Well, we did we voted on a retirement plan and through the attorneys and the way that the plan is negotiated, one was for people who were retiring and one was for resignations and they're not the same. So there had to be two different ways to get to those options. >> I wouldn't argue what the the legal advice was. I'm sure. >> Well, we asked if we had to bring the second option back because what was presented to us by the previous oh whoever created the last needed to have another plan and so I asked if we needed to bring it back and the answer was no we don't need to be bring it back because we already
152voted. These are just technicalities of how we went about allowing people to take advantage of the offer legally. So I can kind of clarify um the plan that you saw where we offered the 30,000 um it could either be three years of 10,000 or two years of 15,000. Under that they were resigning. So they were not um they were not allowed to have their severance pay which is article 28 I believe and it is 25% of their sick days. The second ones that the attorneys drew up it was they are retiring they um do get their severance pay but the payout from the district is 5,000 for two years. I remember we discussed like a number of um staff would be able to um use this the SIP plan was that is are we now
153the same number but with two plans combined or has that changed? So the the breakdown between two different plans, the first is the bisque plan, VSIP, which is the plan that you're all very familiar with. We had six individuals who took that plan. So those are considered resignations and verup the ve which is the second program that deputy superintendent just referenced had four individuals. So it's combined for a total of 10. I don't remember the number we had talked about of um people who would be able to utilize it. Do you remember 30? And so it will set first. I wanted to bring up um something that had been shared in one of the um earlier meetings and then also there was some subsequent email from the shared in regards to the KTAs. I was
154briefly touched upon um in last week's meeting at the finance meeting I believe um as far as where they're being so they're being part of the alliance they learn alliance they should be alliance um in the original proposal um I'm just going to read an earlier document that came with the the $6 million decision initially that they were previously funded they I I remember when these were introduced with the SR brands and then move to Alliance. And it says they that it was originally included them in the proposed cuts list because we were previously advised to remove any previously SR funding positions. When those positions were proposed that we knew to be brought in with the SR funds, I remember not every word of the conversation, but my takeaway was, you know, we had um
155the pandemic and you had kids entering kindergarten that potentially didn't have any preschool experience because we were closed at that time. We also were letting we didn't have the role from the state about no more four-year-olds. Uh we also added a section I believe to accommodate the um sections of people that had written for uh consideration. They didn't meet their students by their age limit based on the legislation. the and in the last budget committee when this was originally brought up, there was discussion about the different roles between the kindergarten teacher, the KTA, and the pair of professionals. Um, and that the pair of professionals, we still had openings in and that the the vision potentially this was being considered, but that the KTAs could have the option if they chose to fill up their
156professional uh position. uh we that there's training involved with that. I understand it's a different level. Um but it also it also pays there was a potential that no KTA people would lose their job because they had potential openings already had it at a very rate. I I'm only asking why this isn't being considered again. I understand people feel strongly about the support in the classroom. I do too. But this meant that this was a chunk of people that was we didn't have historically. We had it to help us bridge a problem with co kids being out. We're three years past CO. We don't have any more prek kids that didn't have a prek experience because schools were shut down and we also don't have we have very few four-year-olds coming into kindergarten because the
157state section. So, I'm just trying to bring this back on the table because to me when I listen to all that plus I knew why it was introduced, when it was introduced, it was introduced relatively recently. So, it is a relatively new set of positions and I'm trying to understand why that's no longer. Can I speak? Is there a kindergarten or elementary person in this room who works with the students who get entered in kindergarten because I've happened to have some experience speaking to them um even going to kindergarten orientation with my youngest when we started full day kindergarten. Uh the eras were per classroom the class sizes were large and I'm just wondering if anyone has any data on the number of students we still don't have preschool coming into our kindergarten classrooms because
158um preschool for a certain number of kids in our district is at no cost. others do pay and then there's not enough space and we also would price some families completely out. So the enrollment though I thought we looked at that and it hadn't substantially grown. So that's why I was asking and there's also parent you know there's parent choice here too. Some parents choose not to go to a public preschool pres Oh right. Yeah. But what I'm saying is if you were to look at the size of our kindergarten classrooms and think about is there a parah in every classroom and if there's not which we know there's not if you have the kindergarten assistant it's it's a lower paying position and they were all filled. So we couldn't fill all of the positions
159being had. So that's why when we had the conversation, it was a really low dollar amount to have another body in every single one of those classrooms through the chair. Yes. I also just want to make sure that we're all on the same page that the TA position can also substitute teach, which is something that you don't get from the PAR position. So, um, you're paying somebody less and when that teacher is out, all of the kindergarten kiddos have somebody that they know and knows their routine and we don't have to worry as much about sub coverage. Um, they can also, some of them feel comfortable going up to first grade to help out with sub coverage, which is a a big concern. Um, so you really get a lot of bang for your buck
160with the kindergarten TAs. You really do. But there are certain job responsibilities in a KTA that they cannot cover as par. It's different. But I so we would still have classrooms that were using subpar. We still haven't filled all those positions but we have to fill them. Somebody has to be. Are you suggesting that you want us to put back on removing 12 positions that are the lowest paid that we're told are high need and we have them in a grant? Is that what you're asking? Because I just want to move on to the next thing just because of time we've been we have a lot of cuts to make. So if you're adding to that if you're adding something to the list just be clear. Are you adding that? Are you asking us to
161consider cutting the 12 kindergarten assistants right now? Uh, Dante races San Antonio. >> Yes, Dante. >> Oh, no. I'll let the question be asked and then I'll follow up if I have a question. It >> was my understanding that we wouldn't boost these people because they would fill prior position. >> No, we were told that wasn't true because they didn't have the qualifications. So, that was already answered. So, would are you asking us to put this on the table? Uh how many uh current para positions in the classroom tonight or being focused? I don't have any questions work. So um para positions we might be able to pull for you. Um because uh uh really the amount of kindergarten paras would be based on how many students with disabilities come into the district. Um, so
162it's really changing year to year. I'm most concerned about empty pair positions in the kindergart. >> We didn't caught any special ed parent positions on this list. Clarifying why I'm bringing it up right now. There were a lot of empty pair of positions though, so I thought there was like a chance to give the KTAs an opportunity to >> they could all apply for those positions if they're empty at any time. They they they wanted to be in the positions that they're in those. >> We had many discussions about anything that was brought on SR ARB that we that we funded as staff, right? That now that should be eliminated. It's something that was brought on. I understand the need, but there's a lot of things that were brought on under SRP that then we
163we ended up with this funding bull. We we hired all these people under SSR ARP and then the SRP money's gone and now you're looking to fill the gaps in. So, Dante, were you going to say something? >> Yes. Yeah. Um, so I guess the real we had this discussion last time and we were told that this was already existing in the alliance grant. So I guess my question would be is if we are to remove this are we taking anything out of the general fund to actually create a savings if we are proposing this. I mean >> yeah so if we took it out of all because it's in alliance now and let's just say hypothetically it was considered tonight and that those were if they were eliminated it would be removed from alliance.
164So what could you save from the general fund cuts that would qualify for alliance funding? It's a hypothetical, but it's a good question to understand the pros and cons, additional pros and cons of the move. Are we saving other positions potentially because they could move in the alliance? >> Yeah, assuming it's one for one. I don't know. There's 12 positions that were listed here and >> there 12 of the lowest paid positions. So, the this total sum of the 12 positions was under 300,000. Was it >> 347,000? >> What was it? 347 >> 347. >> Regardless, I I I guess if we're putting it on the table, we need to know whether that's actually going to produce a savings or are we just eliminating a a role that's it's not clear to me and I
165think I've had asked this question a couple times now. So, um and I'm I know there's other things on the list here and it's not clear where everyone stands. I also would ask the question of is anyone showing how we're getting to $137 million? Because I hear a lot of people thinking that they have a lot of choices here, but when I look at the math, I don't actually see any choices. I see that all these cuts really need to be made. And so I'm trying to triangulate a lot of this because I don't feel that I I think the discussion is great, but I mean the time to advocate for funding was during the budget season when we had those opportunities, but now it just again I'm not seeing the room here. And so
166I think in order for us to even have to to have these discussions about are we going to eliminate this? Is it really a choice? we we should show up on the screen or somewhere so people know, okay, this is where the proposal is. These are the actual cuts that are being proposed and this is how you get to 137 million because that that's not clear to me. >> You're good point. Uh it isn't clear, but before we had KT positions that were funded by SRF and then moved into alliance, what did we move out of alliance to make room for those before? Because we were alliance, we had an increase in alliance an increase in >> Okay. And so we chose to invest that increase in alliance by >> we have 12 Yeah, we
167had 12 classrooms with people hired in those positions. And so yes, that was that was something that the district decided to keep the 12 people to help the kindergarten classrooms. You don't have to keep 12 of these exact same positions in Alliance. If you're going to remove if you're going to eliminate positions and you have $347,000 now freed up in Alliance with other things in there, you could produce a savings on the general bed side. If somebody at here at the board could tell me what could be moved into alliance and you're saying nothing can that we don't have anything eligible at all in the current gen ed budget that isn't up here for cuts that could move into alliance if we eliminate it there and then freed up the general ed funding that's cutting
168some of these other things. I think a couple things. One, I think maybe if we wanted to have those answers, right, I sent an email out asking for all of those questions up front so we weren't putting people on the spot to get us data during the meeting. Um, at this point, because we have as many cuts in front of us as we do, if are you formally asking for us to consider this because I'll put it to a vote if we'll even consider this. Yes, I am now because I did ask these questions in the last meeting. I >> No, I didn't say in the last meeting. I said when I sent the email out on Saturday, I said any questions that anyone has that they want specific information from to please send me
169the email so that we could get that data for you and I did not get a response. So, I'm just simply saying >> respect chair Barnes a Saturday email with a Sunday limitation is not always sustainable for everyone. I come prepared. I've asked these questions before. The time to actually get the information to us should have been brought to us the very first time that >> with all due respect, people can't bring people things when they ask on the spot. And I and you've had weeks, months to put this in writing to me and I haven't gotten any of these questions or even a response. So, we're going to move on and we're going to go through the budget that we have in front of us. And if we don't get to where we need
170to go, we can add something and and see if the board is interested in acknowledging another cut at that point. But it would be helpful. >> I wanted to put it and I I'm saying yes. And I heard you and I thank you for your suggestion and I said once we go through all of these if we still need to get through more we'll put it on the table. My point of putting it on the table is that it might save some of these. I don't need to wait until every other decision is made. It should be in. >> So you want to you want to save people who aren't working d you want to save positions that are not necessarily working directly with students and you want to eliminate positions that are hired with
171people who are actually working with students. Right now >> all I said was to put it on the table for a vote. If the only way the discussion can end because we can sit here and argue about the details all we want. I think I've stated my position about why. I I framed it. I I understood. I understood and I just put it to a vote. >> We will put it to a vote after we do the list that we have in front of us. >> Really true. >> Yes. >> My thought is the whole package. I think positions can be added in later. I think to sit here and and nitpick on one item or another item, this the coach that thing, the teacher here, whatever. I'm sorry. This is a a list of
17237 separate items. Uh not all entirely clear savings for the future. Uh we've got the the tech savings which are right here and then it all goes back in because you have to do this stuff. So the real question is is will the city will the will the council will the board of finance give us the damn money to do the job? In the meantime, we have to cut down to the budget that we have. They gave us a budget. We're stuck with it. Vote on it. >> I I threw up another question just on some of the things offered. Um, the governor decided not to fund FRC's at any moment. I mean, I do love our F FRC's, but are those funded by the general fund now alliance or >> I know at one
173point was a bunch of different. So, is the state still funding the F FRC's or is that now coming out of our general fund? They it was it was a I don't know how the end how it happened in the end, but a couple months ago he said that he was no longer going to be funding them. They talked about how many there were through the state and all of those details. So I'm just wondering if you know when we're talking about things that affect students, there's a lot of services there that are wrapped around that other you know entities pick up whether it's in BPS or partnerships. So if it's something that's being funded through our general fund is something we should look at or if it's grant funded the gen our general fund
174or grant >> state doesn't give us our general fund the city gives. >> So is it grant funded though or is it is it being paid in our bud in our budget that the city gave us? No, that's great. No, no, we don't whatever grant we are. We currently getting an F FRC grant in Bristol. >> I think that's >> we can find that out, but that's not part of this right now. >> Yeah. >> We didn't lose the state didn't stop funding. We never funded out of the general budget FRC's. >> Okay. >> And we're not they're not in our budget right now. >> Okay. So, that's what I wanted to know and be clear about. And I guess the only other comment before we move on to voting is, you know, we we
175mentioned many of times bodies over buildings. Um with with the condition with Edgewood, we have two brand new K8s with the beautiful beams. We have a new NEMS being built. And so >> we're not saving any money right now by talking about that. Like we really have to stay to our agenda. I understand that >> you don't want to have it on the on the table. And I think >> there's no money to be saved right now from that. Zero. There's nothing to be saved by that right now. >> Not by repairs, not by >> No, nothing. We're not It's not on the table. So, we have the we have no we have the funding to fix the building and we are spending the same operational costs on the temporary space while it gets fixed
176and that's just not on the agenda. That is absolutely nothing to do with what we're talking about tonight. >> Taking a building offline doesn't save any money when we have we're going to be we're going to be opening space in two beautiful K8s. >> Yes. and we have um a study going to see about our enrollment and those decisions will absolutely involve the board in the future but tonight we have to get through this miserable activity so I don't think we need to add the >> are we are we doing study >> yeah right this minute they're Duke that we're already under >> contract and everything's happening yes >> the redistricting is looking at enrollment for >> all of it. Okay. Yes, Dante. >> You were the chair. I I just wanted to There was
177a lot said I didn't know if uh Commissioner Carlson actually made a motion or not. It was hard to hear. >> Commissioner Carlson said that his opinion is that we should just move forward and vote through everything in one vote rather than go item by item and argue over I guess the each individual. Um, Dante, did you go through and do all of the math? Does every single thing have to be cut on this sheet? >> They already said it. >> No, he then said it did. So, >> well, how could it? Because there's not even dollar amounts on some of the stuff on the bottom. >> Well, we mean the ones with the dollar amounts. >> Correct. >> That's what he's talking about, >> right? So we have >> so everything from middle school
178up on the grid. >> I don't know. Dante, do you want to explain it >> attached to that? Yes. >> A question. >> What did you say, Dante? >> Oh, I'm sorry. Can you hear me? >> I couldn't. >> Oh, sorry. Um, anything with a dollar value would have been included. Anything without a dollar value, obviously, I have no way of knowing what that would be. So, um, but we we have a couple of different documents, right? So, this is what makes it a little hard. Um, and I don't know if Jody could help us at all, but just so I'm clear, right? We received a document with $4 million worth of cuts. I don't recall that being a controversial document. Um, I recall the $2 million document being the controversial document because it included
179the KTAs and a few other positions that people weren't sure about. Um, and then we also received um an additional cuts list um from Iris before our last meeting that again she reprovided and pointed to exact areas in which she would cut. That totals $1.7 million. And then we have today's sheet of reductions which is $3.4 million assuming everything on this sheet. I don't know if it's grossed up for the benefit amounts or not um or if it's just raw salaries but um and I also took out in that the student database person because it was included more than once. There's no motion on currently, but I do think there is. I disagree. I think there's a lot that we do have consensus with. Um, and we should go with those that we have the
180most consensus with first and then continue the debate on some that might not have a full majority, but eventually, yes, voting on all of them. But I'm not I don't I don't support voting every single one of these right now. We passed through them once and we may be materializing more savings. At the beginning of this meeting and I wrote the note right here that this sheet this grid that we just walked through every line item and and discussed said there are more cuts here than are needed. >> Dante when you did the math and you >> again I could only go by with what I know. I disagree with that comment. I do not think there are more cuts than what is needed. And like I said, I would prefer a staff member proved
181this out, but I looked into the sheet that had overlap and I eliminated about $2 million from that sheet, reintroduced this sheet to get rid of all the overlap and got to $137 million. So, I don't believe there's additional. >> Was anything added since that though, Dante? because I think revisions were made >> revisions with respect to what added and where >> were there any things that were added to the the sheet that we're looking at right now since you did all of that >> I did this while we were on the meeting >> okay >> there's also um money coming from the state for special education reimbursement those will be coming through throughout the summer >> but I I don't know that that's going to that's going to impact our special ed deficit. So,
182that's not going to help us. Um, we also are possibly getting the $400,000 um drip grant, which is the facilities grant. That would then free up $400,000 in our budget. So there could be I mean the problem is that when you eliminate positions if there are people in them that you have to announce it within a certain amount of days which is before is it June 30th making that up Joe June 30th. So, we don't have a lot of time. I don't know that we're going to get will we know about that grant before June 30th that the $400,000 grant. So, thank you the drip. So um the organization is currently working with the governor's office. He didn't but when we were at Southside on Fridays like build >> I think the easiest thing at
183this moment I'd like to propose a motion to accept the entirety of the cuts that Mr. Di presented this evening. I do believe we have pretty good consensus on that. I could be wrong. Um, but I I think that's the easiest way to cut through the first 500,000. Second. The motion's been made and seconded. I'm going to do a roll call only because we have people online. So, Commissioner Ozowski, >> yes. >> Commissioner Gonio, yes. Commissioner, yes. Commissioner Fitz Simons villa. Commissioner Carlson. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Arrow Simmons. >> Yes. >> And Commissioner Tag. >> No. >> I know why Dante said no. He's afraid that if we take this much money away from you, you're never going to get it back. Um, so yes, I'm going to vote yes just because we're saving positions
184and you put it forward. So we'll fight hard to get it back. So motion passes. >> Commissioner Carl or Anderson? >> Oh, Commissioner Anderson, are you online? >> Was not anyone? He is online. I'm not sure if he knows he has to raise his hand to unmute. >> Oh, there he is. >> There we go. Can you hear me now? Sorry, I was trying to unmute. >> Yeah, we can hear you. >> Okay. Um, I vote yes. >> Okay. >> Motion passes. 81. Okay, I have a another motion if I may. >> Okay. I move to um accept the $4 million worth of cuts as originally proposed at our uh May May meeting. >> Second. >> Motion's been made and seconded. Commissioner Ozakowski, >> uh can we have some discussion? Does that include the other
185items that were not part of Mr. Ti's presentation on this grid that we just walked through every line item on or is it more than this? >> It's $4 million. >> So, the cuts were unrelated to um >> positions, >> information technology, right? I mean, it had a list of equipment, office supplies, uh membership, vandalism. Um there was a supervisor salary that was moved into alliance. I mean this is something we had since way back. Um >> but it was also sent the other day on Saturday night and it's in one of the spreadsheet tabs on the bottom. >> It's highlighted in yellow. >> I just have a question from that that sheet if I may. Were the coaches part of that $4 million cut spreadsheet? >> There were one second. >> Summer. >> No,
186I think they're on this top. >> Summer summer coaching stipens were on that sheet. >> Stipens. >> Summer coaching stipens. Now, talking about the um the coaches who were noticed shortly after that meeting, I didn't think >> Nope, that was on that was not on that list. Those were on the list that Iris sent before our last meeting. Is the is that 4 million spreadsheet inclusive? Uh two cuts to supervisor positions in OTL. >> There are two cuts of supervisor salaries, but they're not coded. I don't know if they're coded to OTL or not. >> I think Jody would know that more than me. It were the It was the twous is what I'm hearing here. >> Any further discussion? Comment. I know that we have to put I I just have to reiterate I
187don't think that we ever should be put our kids and our staff deserve to be prioritized and I do not believe we are faced and essentially back We also were presented with a budget with a $16.5 million wish list that obviously wasn't going to be approved and no matter who was the mayor. So, we didn't ask for $16.5 million in the end. >> That was the That was the original. >> But no, we didn't ask for that. >> No, I asked. >> No, but we didn't ask the mayor for that. We didn't >> No, we didn't. But that's what we were presented with. And then now it looks like we're making all these we are making some cuts of course, right? But it's it's we're still the the city's still giving us more money. The
188city's not cutting our money. Yes, we would like more, but we'd also like more from the state. The state we're going to move on. This isn't a time for excited about for the city making us million dollars worth of >> all of this back and forth while we're just trying to get the job done. >> Okay. >> Yes. All I'll say is it's extremely offensive to call this list a wish list, especially because we're cutting another $3 million off the top, which includes the original >> which included secretaries, IT folks, deans, custodians, OTL supervisors. Those are actually being cut right now from the Yes. from the they were included in the original budget. So, no, it's not a wish list. We're here tonight to discuss real cuts. It's very unhelpful to call our staff a
189wish list and I don't even think it's appropriate. >> Okay, let's keep >> I just need to repeat on what the motion is right now. I'm confused. >> The $4 million spreadsheet um as is and it was seconded and we went to discussion and now I'm going to call close discussion and call for a vote. Uh, could we not post discussion just because I I do have the four million spreadsheet up. I'm not saying I have a ton of questions. I don't. I just could we just take a hot second if we just oriented oursel to it just to make sure we're all the reduction in full and MS office line. We already approved that the software licenses in the 427 427,000 that was also part of um was that part of Mr. Southeast. >>
190Uh, no that wasn't. Uh, one of those items was brought up initially. Um on this first of all I thought did take out supplement everything on the supplemental list but not thank you. Does this does the four million savings also include the uh removal of the supervisor of Bristol P Academy and uh assessment of the 1691. >> Sorry, was that question answered? I can't hear. >> Yes, Iris said no. Essentially, I'm I'm just asking for the things that I bristled. I bristle at it all. But when I'm looking at the grid that I had that we went through tonight, I did mark it as we were going through it. So, I'm trying to understand and the vast majority of even the grid I agreed. So, I'm just trying to understand what's in the 4 million
191anything in this 4 million spreadsheet is not on this. Okay. Thank you. an addition. >> Well, I just started with the low hanging fruit, which was the tech. Um the uh and it and I don't like to giggle in this meeting at all. I don't. It's been a long meeting and we're human and we don't always have to agree with every single word everybody says. There's a lot of personal opinion and things that are said and I I'm not here to argue all that tonight. We do have a lot to do and I appreciate it. Um I I I mean the four million's on the table. So, we have to look at this and um I would like to know in all honesty if any commissioner that uh was looking at this $4 million budget
192had big reservations about an item that might be in here in the last several meetings that were having I don't see it because it's bringing up the lines in the in the budget. So, I'm not seeing anything, but I don't want to pretend that I've memorized this. It was given to us on Saturday. Not everybody looked at it on Saturday, even though it was coming in on Saturday. We're all doing our best. >> We received this in May, FYI. >> Oh, okay. This This one wasn't updated since the May. No, it was, but the one we're looking at right now is what he's saying. Like, so this that you got on Saturday, this tab number 4 million. This was that original 4 million, >> right? >> Okay. So, that help me. That clarif is that
193the There's two at the bottom. four million summarized and then one >> it's the same one has coding and one has words because I asked based on the last meeting when people didn't want to look in their budget workbook to codes and keys so we had them add all of the words so in this 4 million it's the same as the nurse book they're both the same exact but as far as positions So, is it fair to say are people talking? Sorry, I can't hear anything. >> They're trying to figure out if there's any actual positions other than the twous in this because we see stipens, uh, reductions in salaries, but they're wanting someone to say whether or not there's actually any full-time positions with people who are employed that are going to be losing
194employment because of this. I don't see any. >> I think it's only two. So, >> I don't see >> I have no further question and I don't need any further time. I'm speak for myself because I asked for the time. But other people need question. Well, >> Jody Bon wants to speak. >> Okay. Hi, Jody. >> Hi. Can you hear me? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um, no. I just wanted to answer um that question that no, other than those two high school administrators that were cut, there are no other positions. >> You know, they're not included in this format. >> We appreciate the clarification, Jody. Thanks. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Okay. So, I'm going to do a roll call vote. Uh Commissioner Joseki, >> yes. >> Commissioner Dantonio, >> yes. >> Commissioner Van Gorder, >>
195yes. >> Commissioner Fitzpa. Mr. Carlson. >> Yes. >> Commissioner uh Anderson. >> Uh thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Yes. >> Commissioner Pero Simmons. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Tyrella. >> Yes. >> And yes. It passes unanimously. Okay. So, looking for another motion on the floor in the in the May meeting, just clarify because we had um not the May uh the March meeting when we had the proposed we either are going to pass $4 million in cuts or $6 million in cuts, but not the plan. So did we already approve 6 million? This was the addition of fill or is this for part of the six but we also agree to the plan. Did I say that right? >> I think this is >> original >> part of the original six but we're confirming that we
196also agree in the plan. Got it. I make a motion we move all respect to presentation. >> What was the motion? I couldn't hear it. >> Commissioner Carlson made a motion to approve the cuts that are outlined in the presentation we received tonight. >> Specifically, the the worksheet or the other? There are both sheets. Sorry, >> the worksheet that Mary went through. >> Oh, I will second that. >> Um, the motion's been made and seconded. I'm hoping this up for session. Uh, I would like to know if this um if some consideration could be made in the two supervisors * 2 on here. Um, one as we discussed earlier tonight is already vacant and not currently being built. Um, would this would our board because I don't would our board consider just voting on the
197one and not the other one? >> I don't know how everybody else feels. It would be a difference uh >> we're putting right well we're putting before we change any motions I think everyone should say how they feel about >> anything on this grid because honestly if I were to say if we're going to get a grant that brings back in $400,000 and we find out and we get to keep any positions as is um the the two positions in the high school that Mel spoke of that work directly with our most vulnerable kids. I that's just unimaginable to me. And the dean at Southside, having an administrator in that school as we bring in a new principal, I mean, I those would be the two that I would say if we get the $400,000
198that I would want to put back on the table. I don't you know obviously those decisions are going to be made after the fact but the ones that are working in school buildings directly the kids I mean I respect everybody's position and I don't want to cut anybody's position um but I really feel strongly about those those positions and those would be two of those people are are hired right now. The third would be if we didn't replace the one gym teacher, but we kept the one gym teacher that we were talking about eliminating if we had the resources because I don't know what it's going to look like when we when we eliminate the the two credits in year one and if the class sizes are going to go up or or I mean
199go down immediately or not if kids are already enrolled. Like just having that play out a year would be good. But those are just my thoughts. >> You're the chair. >> Yeah. >> Yes. And >> Yep. So, I will say that I'm of the mindset that if we're negotiating or willing to take things off the table that I will only vote in favor of any motion that comes to the table with an equivalent savings and has a line item associated with that savings. Otherwise, I'm not going to vote in favor of anything that doesn't give our staff the ability to upload a balanced budget because we're running they're running against a deadline. We're running against a deadline, but I don't I'm not going to vote for something with stipulations like that won't pan out. Um,
200and I would also say that, you know, if we are getting additional grant monies or we're in the running for those, um, I personally would leave those decisions up to the superintendent and her staff to decide how that money gets spent only because, um, you know, that's I feel it's more operational than than what we have before us. And I don't think we're being called to make those decisions at this very moment. Though appreciated. One quick clarification on the grid row three that says reduction of course the the samples the one year teacher one year secretary that is not included in this motion those weren't position I just want to be clear okay the rest of the items from district options all the way down to middle school options besides that one tech dollar that
201means what uh for sure tech open and others um the middle school options um you wouldn't I'm asking this to Commissioner Tigriel because there isn't money associated with it. Um, and I understand the reason why you're asking that, but the late bus reducing it from 3 days to two days didn't have a dollar amount on it, but it wasn't a highly debated item. Do would you not include that in the in your yes vote tonight or no? Yeah, because that wouldn't be included either, but it wasn't under was on what you said because there's no dollar savings there on the grid. I don't know which one >> I believe down to middle school the um it's about twothirds of the way down the grid the worksheet sorry looks like grid middle school options there was
202two and these were recommendations from middle school from what was given in the presentation the late bus is going to go from three to two but there's no dollar amount there I I >> oh if if we're going to amend without a dollar amount yeah I'm fine if people want to take that off the list I would vote for that would. Okay. Just trying to get that clarification of what I said. Yes. Or >> but it was amendable. >> The one above it. >> Yeah. In the high school options. This is the last question. That isn't uh >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Thank you very much. So, we are including that even though it doesn't have a dollar amount on it. So, I'm clarifying that. And then um the other the first two in
203the high school have dollar amounts to it. They update the rental fee structure. I don't think we can uh I would love to see it updated because if we need more money for wear and tear, we should get it. I don't think we can include that to make sure we don't have the dollar amount. We also don't have agreement from the committee that decides that policy. So, we're excluding that one. Um and then the shifting timing of the vocational programming and the reduced numbers of computers in lab and desktop will be a long-term goal, Mr. Chalkis, but also not. Okay. So besides what I said, that's the motion on the table right now. So I point of clarification to the chair. um item furlow day with the approximate amount that's going to require approval from
204so we can agree that we like the plan but it doesn't necessarily mean it's a realized savings without agreement I think is there another item like Oh, the stipens was um reducing the stipen amount. Those two would need agreement. >> Right. >> Sorry, somebody talking. So we were just discussing >> they're saying that there may possibly be need to be uh an agreement between BAPS for the reduction to the stipen and also the furlow debt. >> Sorry. So some of the items on this grid while we see a number and we may agree to accept them it doesn't mean that it's a realized savings if we don't come to an agreement with William. Well, yes. If we also don't come to an agreement, that would result in further reductions to the budget. So, we can't
205not reduce it. >> I think my only other um everything on here I'm pretty agreeable too. I My only other thing is the middle school sports. I'm not really sure will see a savings um by bringing it to the two schools when you're talking commuting the the students back and forth. But other than the questions I've been answering, >> Dante, it's 20 something,000. Do you want How are you feeling about that being taken off the table as well? >> My answer remains the same. If you're taking 27,000 off of here, are you going to have to add 27,000 somewhere else? >> Okay. So, balanced budget. No, >> I just have one concern. Um, on the worksheet, the administrative assistant and the secretaries um they do a lot of work and I just don't know how
206this is all going to get absorbed by one person now taking on that load of, you know, I know. Win them all. I know. It's just >> through the chair. >> Yes. Has it been considered to increase the furlow day from one furlow day to two furlow days if it meant that we could save more jobs? Had that been considered? No, it hadn't been considered. I think because of the number of days of school and and meeting that like the reason why they proposed the day on election day was it didn't interrupt learning and it didn't change the calendar and it was I believe recommended by it wasn't our idea. came as something from the district that like the leader, not this leadership group, right? But like when you spoke to your admins and so
207I think it was a way to acknowledge cost savings and not interrupt learning and not um impact days, you know, on the calendar. So we meet the days that we have to for >> right well if the furlow day was on um you know a day where the district wasn't necessarily meeting I'm just trying to think if a furlow day is realizing approximately 367789 um two fur days >> that also includes hourly people it's not just teachers so now you're asking people to go two days without pay that get paid, >> right? No, it's a huge ask. Oh, no. It's I mean, it's an absolute huge ask and it's a major sacrifice for people that have that job security. Of course, I'm just thinking if >> there were two furlow days. I mean, that's >>
208I don't think it's on the table tonight. I think that we have to move forward with what we have on the table. It's already as bad as it gets. I I just can't imagine asking people to give up another day of pay right now. Yeah, it just mean we think of like for example state jobs. >> I I'm sorry I can't hear whoever is speaking. >> I'm very close to my mic. >> Oh, that's much better. Whatever you just did. >> Okay. It makes me think of for example the state jobs. Is there just tossing it later where the state state employees are essentially asked to volunteer? You don't you're not forced or you're not told to take a furlow day, but you can choose. It's like an opt in to take a furlow day.
209>> Oh, I remember having to take furlow days. >> Yeah, I never had an opt. >> Oh, see I had an opt in. So the reason why we put the furlow day on um this worksheet is because this has been a technique in the past. >> Um >> and we also we're trying to do everything to save jobs. Um but it will be a discussion with BAPS and with BFT and all the unions. So, um once we have those discussions, we can bring some more information back to you and we can offer multiple days or a single day um just so that you have that information. Thank you. That's helpful. Since this question was asked of the four million, I'm just going to say out loud, not up for debate because I think we all
210agree on the worksheet. Um, voting on it in its entirety except for the lines that we've already discussed weren't included in the vote. We're looking at the uh one PE teacher because the other the second is vacant. The two on track coordinators are themselves and then three and then two additional secretaries. So there's five total positions with bodies in them that this vote eliminates. The rest have all been not impacting current people sitting in a position going to I just want to make sure it's a total of five six one two on track one two secretaries I think that goes without saying that we um stick to our plan of um trying not to well lose their jobs of sitting in there that when money comes in it would be my uh it because this
211is seven positions that I'm hoping our district leadership will make sure that people impacted will be considered as we get versus replenishing ing programs or filling an a job that we had already said was vacant and we agreed to. My position as commissioner would be people who lose their job because this decision get considered get priority consideration whyever possible. >> Absolutely. >> You're the chair. >> I just have one question. After this after this vote, did we vote through all of the cuts or is there still another spreadsheet? >> Nope. There is still one more spreadsheet. >> There is still one more spreadsheet. >> Correct. >> That's what I thought. >> The two million. >> Yeah. >> Say that again. >> The two million. >> Yeah. Well, it's about one 17. >> Okay. So, did
212someone else have say something online? >> Yes, I'm sorry. I did. Um, Commissioner Dantonio's um comment I think got cut off a little bit. What I think the heart of the question was >> if she said if if we get money if we realize money through >> Yeah, I heard that part. I I think it was the beginning part where we were talking about how many how many people if we're voting yes to this specific spreadsheet. How many people's positions are being impacted and I that's where it got a little cut off. >> It's six >> six. So >> it's not seven because one of the is empty additional it's the two pees that were on here but one of them's already emptied. So, it's really only one person's vote in there. The dean's already
213empty. >> Okay. You just cut off again. I'm so sorry. So, you said one PE and then did you say the dean is empty? >> The dean is already empty. The position isn't. We're talking about people sitting in seats. >> Y. >> So, one PE because one is empty >> already. the two on track coordinators, one additional OTL because the other one's already empty, and two additional secretaries because one out of three is already empty. So, it's a total of six six with bodies in them right now. >> Where where was the There is a data person a data position. >> It's vacant, Maria. >> Vacant. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. >> Okay, we still have one more sheet. So, at this point, does is anyone else have any last comment?
214And I'll close discussion and I'll start with a roll call vote. Commissioner Ozenowski, I'm going to say no. Commissioner Ganton, yes. Commissioner Van Gordon. Yes. Commissioner Carlson. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Fitz Simons. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Pero Simmons. >> Well, with a very heavy heart. Yes. >> And uh Commissioner Tagriello. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Anderson. Commissioner Anderson. >> Yes. Can you hear me? >> Yeah. >> Did you vote yes? >> Yes. Affirmative. >> Okay. And um I vote yes. So it is 81. >> We still have one more motion we need. >> Yep. So I'll through the chair. >> Yep. >> I will make to I will make a motion um to approve the superintendent's uh recommended cuts labeled additional cuts. The total is 1.6. 61 1,697,239. >> Second. >> Motion's been made and second
215with any discussion. >> All right. Do these impact any jobs? >> Speaking specifically to it, there are one, two, three, four, six coaches listed as reduction in force. I think either Mary or um Iris can talk to the specifics of this. >> The coaches um have taken uh vacant positions or um a couple have left the district. >> Thank you. Is anyone speaking? I can't hear. >> Uh, we're still just looking. Thank you. >> I know it's hard to know when we're just being silent, but just can't hear. I believe this was the sheet where we were just trying to understand where it said production and force position if there were people um outside of coaches that are still sitting in those seats. And it sounds like the answer is no and the rest were
216moved to alliance. Those that may have been sitting in those seats have either left the district or taken a new position. Correct. How many coaches were there originally? One say 26. So there's there were 26. There's 10 on here, but we know we noticed all of them, right? So, we're bump if they bump into positions and we're still paying for positions. The the savings isn't realized on this. There's just some discussion for those online just some whispering not intentionally whispering just trying to muddle. It's really what we're seeing about uh actual realiz >> we weren't we weren't Yeah. We're not voting on the removal positions. We did that a long time ago. This is just on a budget. So, we're voting on getting to the budget so that they can be entered. So, we So,
217there's 10 here, 16 bumped for the same salary or they were full-time teaching salaries as coaches. So, when they bumped into their teaching position, it's the same salary. It's no difference. Does anyone have any further questions? I'm going to close discussion. Commissioner Rosenowski. Yes. Commissioner G Antonio. Yes. Commissioner Vanguarder. Yes. Commissioner Carlson. >> Yes. Commissioner Fitz Simons Pila Commissioner Simmons per Sim Simmons Per say it right now. >> That's fine. It's Yes. >> One way or the other. >> Yeah. You Yes. >> Commissioner Anderson. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Tagella. >> Yes. >> And I unfortunately vote yes too. So it is unanimous that we have passed this. Um and again it was we are legally required to pass a budget that can balance but we also are legally required to monitor that budget every month
218and to not let money transfer out into other line items and to fall back into this situation again. And I can promise you that I will not be voting to transfer money out and away from regular education to offset special education. And I will protect the funding that we have coming in so that the actual expense of special ed will be realized and we will not have to be in this situation again. And I also would love for us to find ways to bring in more grant money this year. There's opportunities for us to bring in grant money and to bring back some of these um resources in these jobs. And in no way, shape, or form do I think that we are any better off today than we were because we've, you know, met
219our goal to put forth a balanced budget because the impact that this will have on our children, our families, and our staff, we don't even know what it will be, but it will be good. Um, and so thank you to all the commissioners for doing this hard job tonight. We have to vote the actual dollar amount of the budget. >> Dante, can you make a motion? >> I'm still online. >> I'm here. So, you want me to just You guys want the bottom line? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. I make a motion that the board of ed approves a budget in the amount of $137,61,815. >> I'll second. >> Motion's been made and seconded. I'm going to just do I'm not doing a roll call at this point. All in favor? I >> Yes. >>
220I >> opposed. Motion passes. Meetings agend.