BCSD Board of Education meeting 3/4/2026

001All right. If we can reconvene our meeting to open session. The board has been in executive session since 6:00 to discuss three personnel matters, a student matter, and three legal matters. If we could please stand for the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> We have introductions. Oh, John just walked. [laughter] Dave Hurst, Lauren Graasso, >> Bobardi, Ali Dylan, >> Jody Monroe, Katherine Nat, >> Yan Mcn. >> Um, do we have any pig or soup students here tonight? Thanks for coming. Um, you guys need to stay until the meeting is over or 9:00, whichever one comes first. Um, don't leave without signing out on one of the

002sheets that are up here. And if we hit nine, we will take a short break so that you guys can come up and sign out until >> though you're always welcome to stay for the whole meeting if it goes past that. [clears throat] Uh first on the agenda is our approval of minutes. It is recommended by the superintendent that the board of education approve the minutes from the February 25th 20 26 regular board meeting. >> So moved. Second. >> Uh any discussion? All in favor? >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? >> Uh, that carries. Um, item three, meeting reports. And first up is our superintendent report. Sure. Just a couple of quick announcements. Just a reminder for uh parents who have students entering kindergarten if they have not registered yet. Just a reminder, we our uh

003registration process is all online now. Uh the deadline to um guarantee spot in homeschool is was March 1st. Um, so the sooner they register the better. Uh, also just a quick update on the elementary zone changes. So we have heard back from most of the fifth grade families who um were offered the opportunity to remain at either Glenma or Eagle. Most of them did say they were planning to stay. Um we're also updating the data making sure that the families um who are moving schools are entered and update they're being updated in Aspen. So that will help us with our elementary sectioning. Um it is still a bit of a work in progress and I know Dave's going to speak to that tonight during the presentation. Um so we should have that done in the

004next couple of weeks to help us out with sectioning. So those are the only two updates I have for this evening. >> Any questions for Jody on those? Um, I just quickly I wanted to just recognize all of our winter sports teams that are continuing on in uh in um all of their um their competitions and wish everybody luck. Um I also wanted to congratulate Becky Ber and um the Odyssey of the Mind uh program. I think there were about 70 kids that participated this year. >> Wow. Um, and I believe five middle school teams and two high school teams are going on to the New York State Finals, which is great. It's a great result. So, congratulations to all of them. >> Um, anyone have anything else they wanted to share? >> One small

005thing actually related to yours. Um, the indoor track team. I know there are at least I think it's seven boys going down to New York City for the nationals this this um coming weekend, which is the most we've ever had. So, just nice to see them qualify it at that level. >> Yeah. >> Uh, student reports. Um, first I want to comment on the success of the job fair at the high school today. Um, from everything I've heard, it was very popular and it was a very big success. I also want to update the board on the status of the ongoing conversation regarding parking at the high school. Today, we have a student who is going to speak and release the results from a survey she did. So, I just wanted to introduce the board

006to that because that'll be coming at the end of the meeting. And if there's any questions on that, you could ask me that now. Um or email me later or email the student later. >> How did you put the Did you put the survey together or who put that together? >> No. Um Anna Paul put the survey together and she's going to speak on that later today. >> Okay, great. Thank you. Any questions for Rose? Uh so moving on to our presentation. Our presentation this evening uh continues our series of our 2026 2027 budget presentations. And this evening we are talking about our athletics and instructional programs. Good evening. Before we jump into the heart of the presentation today uh on athletics and instructional quick recap for for the board in terms of where we

007started and ended uh last Wednesday, February 25th with the overview and the administrative component of the budget. So we'll do a couple of quick slides just as a refresher for uh the board and our friends and family at home [clears throat] with regard to revenue. uh a comparison between 2526 and 2627 on the major sources of revenue uh that finances our annual operating budget. The largest revenue source being property taxes for 2526 and 2627. At this moment in time, we're assuming a flat tax levy just to u maintain a basis point at roughly uh just under $74 million. pilot payments, you'll see an uptick uh from 3.6 to $3.9 million. And that uptick is associated with the new energy pilot agreement that was just closed last week. That's finalized. So that is a secure revenue

008source over the course of the next 12 years. Um it's not uh it does decrease over the course of those 12 years which does provide a little bit more of uh opportunity for the district to plan and forecast rather than losing under the old pilot agreement the full value of the pilot in one fell swoop at the end of the year. State aid uh you'll see from a $34.6 million revenue source in 2526 to $34.9 million in 2627. That's roughly a 350,000 yeartoyear uh year-to-year increase. Foundation aid, which is the largest source of state aid at roughly $19 million, that increased by only 1% under the governor's budget proposal, which accounted to $211,000. There's various other sources of revenue within state aid, building aid, high-cost access aid, uh transportation aid, all those other revenue streams

009were up a little bit. Some other ones were down down, but overall roughly a $350,000 increase. Other [clears throat] revenue sources were down a bit from $3.7 million to $3.5 million. Over uh our discussion last week, I highlighted that I'm anticipating lower interest in earnings associated with recent changes at the Federal Reserve level in terms of uh reduction in basis points coupled with the uncertainty with a new Fed Fed chairperson that was named today uh for was nominated today for uh consideration for Senate approval as well as what additional uh federal fund rate reduction may come over the course of the next 18 months. We balanced the 2526 budget with the use of roughly $715,000 of allocated undesated fund balance to bring um $116.6 million in total revenue for 2526. At present, I'm not recommending

010or proposing use of fund balance at this juncture. We very well may need to do that as we uh bring budget discussions further uh or or closer to to the endgame here. But as it stands right now, 2627 budget is roughly $116.3 million. It's a rough increase of 311,000. We were able to close that structural gap by by roughly about half. But as you can see, those revenue sources are relatively stable and flat, representing only a.3% increase or $312,000. [clears throat] The budget summary by program area. Uh last week we talked about the administrative, transportation, operations and maintenance, technology, fringe benefits, and debt service. Um, and you can see where those numbers stack up year-toear, budget to budget. This evening, we're going to be uh talking about the instructional programs, student support services, and athletics.

011Um, but overall, you can see that last year for 2526, $116.6 million in terms of the appropriation side of the budget for the baseline for 2627, $120.4 million. Now to go back, we only increased revenue by $300,000, but our proposed appropriation is significantly higher than that. So there's quite a gap that we have to close. We started those conversations last week. We'll continue them tonight as well as for for future budget conversations over the next few bud uh budget meetings. [clears throat] Quick comparison here in terms of where that baseline is. The current gap for 2627 as of last week was roughly $4.1 million. That's where we started. And over the course of those conversations, there were some additions and some reductions in these uh administrative transportation technology and operations and maintenance. On the administrative

012side, just for a recap in terms of additions, there was a $5,000 request for um upgrades to the nursing office in the high school along with $7,500 with the acquisition of several um evacue track chairs, which are um devices used to remove individuals with physical challenges from a multi-story building. So, our Elmer Eagle High School and Middle School uh those are needed or have been requested to be replaced. On transportation, I'm sorry, also on the administrative side on the reduction. When we first put the budget together, our estimate from the state controllers's office on the teachers retirement system was um a retirement rate of 8.75%. Right before we we presented last week, I did get an updated revision to 8.24% of payroll for the teachers retirement system. That resulted in a $25,000 decrease. Overall, a

013net decrease of 1925 when you take into consideration the additions on transportation. Um Ellen Dorado, the director of transportation, discussed the she has some vacancies, three drivers, two attendants at a total of $350,000. Those are current vacant positions given some of the challenges or the continued challenges in hiring um drivers in attendance. Um it's prudent to remove that surplus appropriation at at this time because it's only adding to the bottom line. On the revenue side, the operating budget for the past several cycles has included $135,000 in sale of bus revenue. We have not achieved that revenue target for a number of reasons. One, the marketplace hasn't really provided for um that revenue figure in terms of the sale of buses and the board will be considering what to do with a bus proposition or options

014on a bus proposition. Uh certain options include the use of grant funding to offset the acquisition price of EV buses. If the board elects to choose EV buses, there is a scrappage requirement to secure that grant, which means if we're scrapping a bus, there wouldn't necessarily be an opportunity to sell the same bus that we're scrapping. So, in order to not create an artificial hole on the revenue side of the budget, uh the board may want to consider removing that revenue line. On the technology side, um a little bit in, a little bit out. Um Erin Chvers, our chief technology officer, uh spoke about a smart bond initiative of roughly $317,000. There's some available funding from the state. Uh Erin proposed the use of updating, upgrading and replacing the VIO boards in various uh classrooms

015throughout the the building along with the uh ancillary um equipment, elevators, laptops, PCs, what have you. Um along with that along with a $15,000 salary adjustment uh for a staff member that has reached their um their training status uh for that for that salary. On operation maintenance, there were a couple of replacement requests put in by Nick and Sonia, our director of facilities. A $20,000 consideration for camera upgrades. uh $10,000, $7,500 for radio replacements, and then a $6,000 request for a maintenance agreement for um various um athletic equipment and stage equipment that was recently purchased with the most recent bond project. So overall, as of the end of our meeting last Wednesday, we decreased the gap from $4.1 million to just under $3.8 8 million, which translates to a tax levy increase of 5.1%. Now,

016that [clears throat] 5.1% needs to be balanced up against the concept of the tax cap and the tax levy. [clears throat] Over the past several years, you'll see that the under the tax cap law, what the district was allowed to increase the tax levy by and what it actually increase the tax levy by. In 2324 and 24-25, the board uh elected to choose a tax levy increase that was actually lower than the tax levy increase allowed under the tax cap, which provided for tax savings for the community of roughly $534,000 in 2324 and uh just a touch over $600,000 in 2425. Fast forward to 2526 because of some of the pressures that the district was experiencing with that operating budget. The tax cap was only 1.12%. And which equates to roughly $820,000 in year-to-year tax

017levy increase. The board elected to use that entire 1.12% in conjunction with the appropriation of $715,000 from the undesated fund balance for 2627. The allowable tax increase for the district is 22 2.61% which translates roughly to1,928,000 in taxable authority under the tax cap law which would not require an uh an override. I haven't made a determination or make a a recommendation to the board yet. We still have a lot of presentations to move forward with to decide what additional additions may be, what reductions and uh strategic forecasting and planning ahead before we get to that point. At the uh end of the the meeting last week, there was we Nick and Sonia had presented um a large component of his presentation focused on utilities and the impact of utilities and cost to the district. Uh

018we had highlighted a the solar farm. Uh there were some follow-up questions on that that I just wanted to to circle back on. Uh as a reminder, the district has a solar farm that's a 2.1 megawatt facility uh up at Delaware Avenue, just a little bit past the YMCA that's been in service since July 2019. Um, we actually benefit from the solar farm the district to the tune of $393,000 in solar credits. But because we have the solar farm under contract, we are actually paying a a vendor to actually maintain and um monitor the solar farm at a tune of $361,000. So the question was asked, hey, is the district actually benefiting from the solar farm in terms of a dollar value, profit and loss from over the course of of the year? So I

019uh went back Nick and I pulled for the uh past several years reminder that the solar farm went into effect in 2019. And you can see over the past several years the profit and loss associated with the solar farm between what we're paying Nautilus solar versus the solar credits that we're getting that are then subsequently applied to our energy bills. First two years were obviously a little rough. The solar farm was getting up. My guess is the first year probably wasn't a full year of the solar farm um being fully operational and then some years are better, some years are worse. We must have cloudy times and not so cloudy times in terms of um making this work, but overall the overall profit to the district was roughly $360,000. Within the solar farm contract, there

020is a estimated production that the contract provides for in terms of uh kilowatts produced and you can see those laid out in that that first column. But there's also a minimum production of 90% because we're not necessarily going to be guaranteed to hit the estimated production. I sort of highlighted what the actual production was over the course of those years. I don't have 25 26 just yet because we're we're in that year presently. And then comparison between the actual production versus the estimated and then the actual versus the minimum guaranteed. And the reason I highlight the actual versus the minimum guaranteed is if for any two-year period, the dis uh the solar farm is sort of in the negative, there's the district can recoup some savings. So, I put that formula up there in case

021anyone was interested. Dave's going to actually be covering this in the instructional section of of the um the presentation, but here it is. So, [clears throat] admittedly, I don't know what this means. um particularly I don't know what the weather performance ratio is and what an actual isolation versus a typical isolation is um but it's in the contract. So [laughter] this is how it gets calculated. We haven't hit there yet. So I'm not necessarily worried about it, but it's I I thought it was just an interesting formula. What I can tell you though with certainty in in all seriousness is there's a capped loss savings amount of $25,000 per megawatt of production. So we have a 2 mega 2 megawatt 2.1 megawatt facility times 25,000. The most loss savings we can get is 52,500 probably

022be less something based on that formula. [laughter] But I I just thought that was a interesting little tidbit. So I now unless there's questions on the larger piece before we turn it over to to Len um on the athletic side, I'm I'm happy to answer those questions. >> And just remind we've got a 20-year lease on the farm. >> Uh yes. That's good. >> Okay. >> Good evening everyone. >> I like to hold it. It makes me feel taller. Um, yeah, we uh before I get into uh the 2627 uh budget presentation, I did want to echo the words and provide a little bit more information. It it was an outstanding winter season. We have actually uh seven swimmers going down to uh Ithaca College for the states this coming weekend. This is capping an

023undefeated section championship, the first one since 1997. For our boys, we have four student athletes going to Staten Island and Ocean Breeze representing us in the indoor track and field championships. We have the district's first girls wrestling section champion and Charlie Ike. Katie Quang came in second. Both qualified for states. And James Nailbone was the division one section 2 wrestling champion. Our boys uh first boys section championship in 28 years. So it was really a historical winter season. Um and our girls uh will be playing Friday night girls basketball in the semi-finals against Colombia. So, as I always do, I just want to kind of uh demonstrate the breath and depth of our intercolastic athletics program continues to grow. We have representation uh from the modified 78, modified nine level, obviously through certain freshman teams,

024JV and varsity for a total of 79 intercolastic athletics teams across 36 different programs. Uh we have our coaches, chaperones, athletic trainer, obviously all contractual uh through the BCTA. uh you see a bit of a jump. Again, that's contractual. We have also been adding more supervision, more chaperone supervision uh really since fall of 2024 when we had the swatting incidents and things of that nature. Um our after school evacuation plans and programs that we put into place this past school year. So, you do see a bit of a jump there. As always, we have our equipment budget code of $5,000. That's the standard. Our officials fees, security, and other I'll I'll give you an idea, remind you of what some of those other costs are, but our official fees are again contractual. The security is

025the Bethlehem Police Department who we have at all night events depending on scenarios, opponents, rivalry. We may sometimes have additional uh police both inside the game as well as outside in parking lots and conducting traffic, things of that nature. But these are some of the other program costs that are in that budget code. Our officials fees, as mentioned, are contractual. Our contract with the YMCA currently is $27,000. You see the entry fees. Those are all the invitationals, the tournaments from cheerleading to girls and boys wrestling, girls and boys cross country, indoor track and field, a variety of them. Lifeguard fees for our two pools in the district. Again, our police coverage with the Bethlehem Police Department. God bless you. >> And our equipment reconditioning, which is a mandate. We are mandated in the state of

026New York to recondition our football helmets. Boseies uh sorry yeah Boseies supplies uniforms we have three Boseies programs Bosey's adable programs that's our schedule galaxy which is our scheduling system huddle which is our live stream we have live stream cameras both at the turf stadium the football stadium as well as gym B where we have our boys and girls volleyball boys and girls basketball boys and girls lacrosse field hockey um football flag football all have the ability to be livereamed. Our supplies and our uniforms um also are are within that budget code area and again there is just we're being uh we're noticing a change in shipping costs or have certainly increased over the last year. Um as well as Huddle has has gone up a bit, schedule Galaxy has gone up a bit. So

027it's just kind of just keeping up with the cost of doing business. So budget to budget is an increase 5.36% and just under $71,000. This is just breaks down the again the scope of our program. We have 18 girls programs, 15 boys programs. The four co-ed teams programs are our three unified sports. That's botchi in the fall, bowling in the winter, basketball in the spring. The fourth is our modified swim and dive, which is the only co-ed program that that section 2 allows. You see, you may notice, those of you who've been seeing these presentations from me for a while now, we have 133 coaches. Those are board of education appointed contract BCTA coaches. Obviously, they're all board of ed appointed. The 27 volunteer coaches now incorporates both the straight up regular volunteer. You may

028remember back we had program assistants which are no longer part of of our of our BCTA agreement. So those are now strictly volunteer coaches. Total of 79 teams. Obviously we are heaviest in the fall both in the number of offerings as well as the depth of program subarsity. 22 in the winter and then 24 in the spring. Additions. So couple of few additions needed. Uh the soccer goals are an absolute necessity. It's a safety issue. We need two sets of soccer goals and anchors and wheels. We need one set on our turf stadium. Um they need to be rounded posts. We actually could have uh been had play stopped and assessed a penalty both with the flat posts. The round posts are safer due to goalenders, players crashing the goal uh to be cut. So,

029we do need rounded posts. Um, which is timely because we do need goals that are in better shape to be moved out to the other exterior fields. The second goal set would be going to the middle school where that set currently is 26 years old. So, it is certainly time for another gymnastics springboard and equipment. This came to light about two months ago at a gymnastics coaches meeting. To remind you, there are four and only four schools in section two that have gymnastics. Bethlehem, Shaker, Gilderland, and Saratoga. The other three schools all have spring-loaded floors. When you do floor routine as one of the elements, Bethlehem is the only district that does not have spring-loaded floors. We have styrofoam. Styrofoam, just like, as you would imagine, over time, and that floor is over 20 years

030old, becomes dead, a dead zone. So when competitors are doing floor routine, they're accustomed to springboard just like our girls when we're away. It's dead and it's causing some shin splints. It's causing the concern for stress fractures. So it truly is a safety issue. We are the only one of the four that does not have the spring floor. The $20,000 [snorts] um is a kit that retrofits our current system. We can use the hardwood. we just would be replacing the styrofoam with with springs. So, it's actually a pretty cost effective way to deal with the issue. And finally, modified flag football. We've been talking about it for several years. We are now entering the third year of our high school level program, and now the suburban council is ready to move forward with at least

031nine teams, which is the minimum number needed to create a schedule. That $10,000 would include six bus trips to local uh suburban council schools. That would be uniforms, supplies, section two suburban council fees. That would be two step one coaches, the modified level, a head coach, and an assistant coach, which you would need offense and defense. Um, and that would be that would pretty much be what we would need for just to get modified flag football off the ground. I believe out of the 14 schools at the suburban council, we do have 10 that have it on their budget proposal for this year. >> Questions? I have a question. So those additions that you just discussed, are those subsumed within the the $70,000 that you discussed earlier? Those are >> additional. That's additional. >> Yeah.

032the the the $70,000 increase is just to continue business as usual with no extra programs or repairs to some much needed repairs. I promise you those the soccer goals and the springboards are truly safety issues. They really do need to remedy be remedied. >> Question. >> Thanks. >> Thank you. Okay, good evening. Um, I'm now here to present both the general and special education programs across the district. So, start as we always do just with some overview information. Um, so fairly um most of these are contractual issues in terms of where the increases are coming from. Curriculum development um slight shift. We did move some of because of the federal grants being reduced over the years and some contractual issues. That's why there's a little bit of a higher jump there. Um but other than

033that, most of them are um you know within sort of the contractual increases. Um same with slide two where now it kind of breaks down a little bit more into on the different areas in particular. Um again, these are all contractual increases and you can see that here a little bit more clearly. salaries um clearly the highest um dollar amount and that's where the largest increase comes from um almost $2 million um in salary increases again contractual um the others are just things that we again typically purchase yeartoear some of the costs have gone up Bosei services um again they operate on um contracts as well so their services go up um in kind tuition paid to other schools I'm going to speak a little bit about in a second um because I also want

034to talk about Bosey's tuition um And then just our other operating costs again um nominal increase just based on the fact that supplies go up. So the one area I do want to point out because this is um something that's been increasing pretty dramatically over the last six seven years um and that's our special education out of district placements. And this is not this number is not because we're sending more and more students out. Um so our at our low point we sent um 33 students out. That was in the 2019 20 year. This current year we have 35 students out. But actually the middle years are 21 22 22 23 we had 42 and 44 students out. So this isn't a pure numbers game because we have eight fewer students out now than we

035did then. Yet the the cost has gone up dramatically. And you can see that the private costs those bars are all pretty pretty similar in size. Right? The private costs really have not fluctuated all that much. It's the Bosey's costs that have really driven this increase. Um, so I mean that's a pretty dramatic increase over this time period to go from 2.3 million up to 3.7 million um in increased costs. And we have we really have no control over the way these costs rise. Each year Boseies just updates their programming and they come out with new cost guidelines. Same with the private setting. But the private setting seems to have just been able to keep the costs at bay a little bit better than the Bosey's costs. Um we do receive reimbursements on some of

036these um thankfully. Um so about $1.3 million in reimbursements either for um state aid for our out of district placements in general uh Medicaid eligible services and then we do receive funding through Albony County for our um preschool special education services that we're required to provide. Um HI do report out sort of our our grant funding. Um you can see that the special education grants are the largest portion of this. Um so you do you do see um you know in the last three years it has increased almost $700,000 which is nice. Um on the instructional side it's it kind of went down and then it went up a little bit but it's that's main stayed fairly level um for the last five or six years. And then we also received money back for our

037food services budget and I know Claire is going to be here at the next meeting to speak a little bit more about food services in general. Um something else that we've talked about for years now, um there's about 7 FTE in the special education grants. So you can see that that number's going up next year, which is a good thing that helps us absorb that um 7 FTE. But if the federal government were ever to pull back on that, we would have to figure out a way to make up for that gap. Um each year, I do like to present our enrollment numbers because this largely um sort of dictates what our FTE would need to be. I do want to point to the kindergarten numbers. Um our projections from what we've been using from

038both Tyler and the um Capital Region Planning Board are at about 281 students. Um to date we have 200 or 150 students actually registered and there's about 50 in the queue um when we look today. So we've had about 200 students that were you know fairly confident are registering. So we're still 81 students off. Um that's fairly in line with the way the things have been the last few years. We've had a lot of late registrants. Last year we had um 47 register after the March 1st deadline. Um so but you know I don't know that we're going to hit the 281 target but I don't anticipate that we're going to stay at 200 either. So that causes us to sort of be in a holding pattern in terms of um the number of classrooms

039that we're going to need at the elementary level. So this is our best guess as of right now. Um, so you'll see that there is an increase, but I'm not [clears throat] I'm not going to propose any increases to FT tonight because we're just not to that point yet. We still have two more meetings before adoption. So hopefully we'll have enough information to be firm by then. Um, but we do see an increase of two teachers overall um in the the primary grades and an increase of one teacher in the intermediate grades. And this again is all sort of in flux depending on how the numbers play out. some that we have the ability to collapse some sections um where again we had the guidelines that we developed during the resoning process where if you

040recall like K1 was at 18 students and then we gradually went up 19 and those were just guidelines so if you're using we saw this with some of the projections from Tyler um if you go by those strict guidelines sometimes you end up classes 15 15 just because if you go to the next one you're one student above whatever the guideline might have been well we know that we're not going to run three classes of 15 and sixth or fifth grade, we would run 22 and 23 because it's still it's only one above the guideline. So, we're still kind of working through some of those decisions as well. But overall, um primary level, we're down two students, so fairly flat, and intermediate level, we're down almost 60 students overall. Um and you can also see

041that um the ratios have gone down um from year to year. Middle school, high school, um middle school increase of 48 students and that's because of that large incoming sixth grade class. Um and the high school is essentially flat. So I want to talk just about some program enhancements to give context around some of the additions and reductions that we're I'm going to be proposing. Um the first thing is reading support. Um currently we have um several special education students who receive reading support per their IEP and that reading support is provided by a special education teacher um not a reading specialist. So I guess the analogy I would use is that you know when you go to your doctor for sort of general things you might go to just your general practitioner but once

042you have a diagnosis that hey this is what's wrong with you or this is what you need support with you're going to go to a specialist to help you with that particular issue. Right? So I'm going to use that sort of same analogy. So you know a special education teacher is in some ways a generalist. They're helping teachers with accommodations. They're helping students um navigate um so that they can access the general education curriculum. Whereas a reading specialist, that's their true focus is designed in teaching students how to read. Right? So while special educators have the ability to do that, they don't have the same level of expertise as a reading teacher would have. Right? Similar to how, you know, a general practitioner doctor would not have the same expertise as somebody that specializes in

043um shoulder surgery, say, right? Um so we are going [snorts] to I'm going to be proposing um an increase in reading FTE so that we can intensify um the way that we're doing things um so that services are designed around student need not tiered. There's no reason that our general education students are getting support from a reading specialist but then once you're classified as special education and have reading on IP we now shift away from you getting it from a reading specialist towards a general educ or a special education teacher. So all students are going to be included within the reading model um regardless of label. So it's based on student need not label. The other thing that does is it allows us more flexibility in terms of not servicing students solely because all third

044grade students are or fourth grade students are going to be in a particular reading group. No, we have a group of three students that are all reading at the same level. We're going to work with those students at the same time as opposed to sometimes it happens in grade bands. Um aligning expertise to the science of reading. again using reading specialists where they are experts in explicit reading instruction where the special education teachers can now again spend more time scaffolding core instruction and allowing students access to grade level content. Um so I just mentioned this a little bit about the integrated service delivery. So students are grouped by instructional need as opposed to age or um grade level necessarily. Again with a reason we're not going to put a kindergartener with a fifth grader. So,

045the impact of this additional 2.0 FTE that I'll be asking for, it obviously ensures that the IP reading mandates are being met, but by are being met by um folks that are literacy specialists. Um the special education teachers can then fully support access to core curriculum across the disciplines. This will strengthen our MTSS process, tier 2 and tier three, and it builds long-term literacy capacity across the district. And some of this came out of um just sort of lessons learned, but it also came out of we've been doing a lot of um work with um Mike Mattos's group and one of the the books that they put out um really just talks about schools providing intensive intervention um by highly trained staff in targeted areas of need. So that is a model that we are

046u moving towards. The other area is ENL. Um there are five levels of ENL student and not all levels are equal. You can see that the minutes required um to support those students varies but not only by grade level but also by their um proficiency level. Um so like an entering student which essentially means that they have very very limited um use of the English language if any. Um at the elementary level they're getting 360 weeks and minute minutes per week of support and at the secondary level 540 minutes per week. Um so what this is doing for us is when we take a look at our program over the last few years you can see that we are gradually increasing the number of ENL students um but a lot the bulk of our students

047um tend to that that orange level is really starting to grow um which is an increase in minutes. So as we're getting more and more students they're coming in at the lower levels which means not just more students but more minutes. So, I'll just explain. There's two types of tests or two versions of the test. The nice tell is what students take when they are new to a New York school system. So, this is sort of a diagnostic test that tells us when when parents enroll their students, they have to fill out a home language questionnaire. And if they indicate that a language other than English is spoken in the home, then we test the students to see what their English proficiency is to determine whether or not they re they um are able to

048get services, if you will. Once they're in the system as being ENL, they then are tested on an annual basis to see how they're improving. Right? So the goal for all ENL students is to get to that commanding level because that's what essentially tests them out of ENL. But keep in mind that once you test out, you still receive services for two more years. So again, that's where so we started back in 202021. Overall in a district um we had about 80 ENL students um sort of testing in or taking the test at the end of the year we are now at about 120 students. So not only have we grown about 40 students over the past five years but we're also seeing an increase of their needs which means an increase of minutes which

049is why I'll be asking for some additional FTE. >> Yeah. >> Can I just sorry while we're on the slide is that okay? >> Yeah. >> Sorry. What are we seeing? Is this the Is this the the range of the test score? 0 to 40. >> No, no, no. That's number of kids. >> That's number of kids. Oh, and you were saying >> I'm sorry. I thought you said there was >> So, let me back up to Nice. So, you have kind of put the two numbers together in some ways to get the actual number. >> Um, but there's also the number that's missing is a student that tests commanding are still in the pipeline for two more years, but they don't keep taking the test. So right now we have almost 40 students that

050are either commanding one or commanding two which means they've tested out but we still have to meet with them 90 minutes per week for the next two years. >> Okay. So we had we had we had just about 70 students. >> So this so well so this year I'll use this year's bar. So this year we had 30 new students to the district. >> Okay. >> Right. A little over 30. And um >> or maybe this was last year. Hang on. Let me back up. Yeah. So this year we had 30 new students enter the pipeline. Okay. That's the last bar. >> Yeah. >> Last year we had almost 80 students take the test. So let's assume those 80 students are still in, right? Because even if they're commanding, they're in it for two more

051years. So that 80 plus that 30, you're at 110. >> Okay. >> Plus the students that are still in the pipeline because they test it out, but they're not three years out yet. >> Okay. Thanks. I'm sorry. I was just trying. >> It's it's a very complicated system to follow. >> Just how many complicated formula. Right now we have we have we have we have 119 students that actually need minutes. >> Thank you for unpacking that. I apologize. >> No, it's very confusing. >> Um so here's our asks. Um >> did I do ask for? Yeah. >> Um 2.0 foundations of innovation and technology teacher. This is actually I'm going to also propose a 2.0 reduction in a minute. Um so currently we had um Jim Farnon and Tom Michelik teaching the sixth grade um

052computer literacy course. Um Tom is retiring at the end of the year and Jim retired in January. So we are um going to fill those positions. Um we are also sort of rebranding that program. We're calling it foundations of innovation and technology. Um and it's going to be a much more um STEM focused, research focused dualpurpose sort of class. Um, so it more to come as we develop that. Um, I would imagine Jen Gier will want to do a presentation next year on that, but the the course is no longer going to be just sort of the traditional computer literacy course because kids are coming into sixth grade with quite a bit of computer literacy, right? So, there'll still be a piece of it, but it's going to be much more hands-on, project focused, um,

053research embedded, so um, some reading and writing with it to sort of supplement the ELA program. So, I will um should have more to share probably in the spring of next year because that'll give the course kind of a half year to be running. Um the 2.0 reading teacher that I just mentioned, 1.0 ENL. Um elementary instructional coach, we added an elementary instructional coach two years ago now. Um and I know they spoke uh I think it was in the fall about the the um the embedded coaching that we're doing right now, the lab classroom. Um the need has grown. Um, our current coach technically is a was hired as a K2 coach, but has expanded to do K5 and it's becoming just it's becoming a very valuable commodity. So, we need to increase that.

054Um, 0.5 [snorts] physical therapist. We currently contract out on any given year small pieces of physical therapy just because when you have a 0.1 or 0 point 2, you can't necessarily hire that, but there is an increased need to rise raise that level to a 0.5. Um, six clubs. These are all clubs that have run um for a couple of years with volunteers. Um they've they've had they've met the minute requirements for meetings, the student um participation requirements. So those have been um asked. And finally, kindergarten kickstart. This is a program we did last summer, but I used title funds to pay for it. Um so now we're just looking to move that to the general budget. And then some basic equipment. Um we have some kils that we use that um are very old.

055So, one of the things we're looking to do is um there's one of the things is Wi-Fi enabling. Right now, you kind of turn it on and hope for the best. This will allow you to similar to like the charge management system. You can monitor how much time is left. Um you can turn them on and off remotely, those kind of things. Um it's just a safer >> charge management. >> Yeah, I know. But it's a similar concept. Um, so just looking to replace some of the older kil kils and then retrofitting some of the ones that are newer that can be retrofitted with the Wi-Fi piece because all the new ones are Wi-Fi. And then music. Um, this is a an item that's just, you know, the budget that's been in place for these

056um items is just not adequate given the cost of things these days. So $25,000 there. So reduction, we're looking um about 8 FTE overall. Um these are all due to attrition. Um so no um impact to staffing. Um so we've got um cse chair, English, business. So business, social studies, that's the sixth grade piece that I just talked about. Um and then math, science, library, and aid to students with disabilities for a total of um almost 900,000. And again, all of those are due to attrition. and we are far enough along in the high school scheduling process now to know that we are we're safe to do that. So the budget impact all told um just over 700,000 in additions almost 900 in reductions so almost 150 net decrease so I guess other questions >>

057the math science and English teacher that's all high school level >> high school Um, >> and again, all due to where we are with the scheduling, we have adequate FTE to cover sections. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Um, and the kindergarten kickstart, is that to keep that the same size as it was last year? Are we >> Yes. It's just moving the budget line from title one funds to general fund. >> Okay. And we found that that was the right size. I know it had a lot of good feedback. >> Yes. Yep. they felt that it was a very worthwhile program. Um, rightsized, [snorts] very positive feedback to that program last year. >> Um, and then my other question, which is from the very beginning of the presentation, but um, with respect to the kindergarten

058enrollment, I mean, I assume we're doing outreach to the families that >> we are, >> we know think exist that haven't registered their kids yet, >> right? And we're almost at that number because we had um just through our informal process of knowing who's in the preschool pipeline, parents who had let us know through various means, we had 199 I think was the number that we had um of sort of known kindergarteners. Um so we had 200. So it's this, you know, what's the real >> number? But are there 80 missing out there? >> Right. I would I don't anticipate there's 80 missing really. No, that's where we were about last year at this point. >> It was we were 47 short last year. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Um I we get a lot

059of just late registrance. Um I think a lot of people are kind of waiting it out. Um I do get a lot of emails about sort of the idea of, you know, should I wait another year. My my student has a September, October, November, December birthday. We're kind of not quite sure. We're just going to kind of wait a little bit longer to see maybe they mature a lot over the next three months, maybe they don't. So that'll kind of help guide our decision too. We do get a lot of that. >> Okay, >> other questions. >> Couple um what's the cost per student to go to Boseies versus >> It varies by program. Some of the programs are 75,000, >> some are 150, some are outplaced are 200,000. It really depends on the student.

060It's very specific to program and student need. >> And how are those set >> by Boseies? And that's a Bosey's council independent of all the school districts. >> They have a board um but they also >> you know they come up with the rates internally I would suppose and then the board would approve those rates. >> It's part of their their budgeting process but if you're have there's a difference between they have programs that are essentially they could be in a 1211 program an 812 612 412. So we have if you have students who are in for example a 412 the cost is much higher than students who are in an 812. So depending and I think one of the when Dave talked about the Boseies increases we actually have had a shift where more

061students are going to the Boseies programs and less students are going to the private where about 10 years ago we had more students going out to private placements and some of that's because some of the private placements have shut down. Um there's a far less private placements than there used to be. So Boseies has also picked up some of that that need and so that we have actually more kids going to Boseies programs and out of district placements than they used to. But their cost because they're servicing kids that years ago would have potentially gone to private placements for more intense needs. Their costs have gone up as a result of that. So the figure you showed us, you know, OC's component has gone up more than 100% over those five years, but it's not

062that we've had the same number of kids going to >> Boseies. Yeah, it's fluctuated a little bit, but it hasn't gone up >> like three to five student in >> private versus Boseies kind of back and forth. >> Yeah, >> it's still a heck of an increase. Is that because the program they're going to different programs or is it the cost for the same program has increased? >> It's both. I mean the cost of programs in general have gone up but we also have students requiring more intensive supports as well. >> Go ahead. >> Yeah. >> And did I just hear you say that it seems as though Boseies is the provider for those more intensive programs these days? So used to they wouldn't like you they may have not had those programs in the

063past and they may have gone to >> another outplacement and those outplacements are full. There's there's huge capacity issues with out of district placements that they're there's a waiting list of students um in districts to get into out of district placements that just aren't available whether it's through Boseies or private placements. >> Okay. >> Did you? >> Yeah. I was just, you know, I think the, if I recall rightly, the average cost per student in district is like $18,000 a year. So it's it's a several x multiple of that to go to a vote, which is um at the elementary level, we've got no increase, maybe a decrease in students, but you've asked for six additional FTEEs. That seems an odd jour. >> Wait, I haven't asked for any additional F yet at the elementary

064level. >> No, those foundations of innovation, those are six. >> No, no, it's six. That's the computer literacy class. That that's a one for one swap. >> Those are all middle school positions, >> the reading teachers, the in so the 2.0 innovation teacher. The that's the in. The out is the social studies teacher and the business teacher because that's that was their tenure area before they went to the sixth grade position. >> So we're shifting people around rather than asking for different positions. >> Positions code. So they're basically it's a position cut of a business >> certification. The two the two staff that are retiring have business certification and social study certification but they're teaching sixth grade computer literacy >> which are elementary. >> So in terms of reducing I have to reduce those two

065positions. And when I replace them I'm going to replace them with somebody that's sixth grade certified which is an elementary teacher. >> Okay. >> The reading teachers and the ENL teacher correct me if I'm wrong. They're they're additional but they're not classroom teachers, >> right? >> They're K they're both K12 essentially. >> Sure. >> Yeah. >> But if we have fewer students or you know >> why the new need for these additional teachers, I guess we got six additional FTEEs. >> I'm still not following the six. >> So you under the additions faculty, right? You've got two FTEEs for the sixth grade foundation, >> right? Which that's a wash because I'm reducing two. >> Okay. You've got two FTEEs for reading teachers. >> Correct. That's to meet the needs of students K12 with people that

066specialize in reading. >> And those are new needs. >> The they would be picking up Yeah. >> It's not new students necessarily. They're picking up special education students that have reading on their IP that were traditionally served by special education. We're still in the process of annual reviews. Depending on where things land there, we may have special education reductions to offset the reading. But until annual reviews are done, we don't know that because we don't know what our special education programming is 100% going to look like. >> Sure, but we've always had students who need reading support and so on. Why then >> reading teachers were not support? >> Reading teachers, right? But let's depending on how the special education all the the rest of the IEP meetings go. >> Yeah. depending on what the

067the new program the the amount of programming that is needed outside of reading next year. We it's there's a potential I could come back in two weeks and ask for a reduction of 2.0 special ed. So now that's a wash. I just don't have enough information yet because we're not far enough long in the IP season. And I think what I hear you saying with respect to the need for the reading specialists is that we we have a certain number of kids that have been getting reading instruction, but they've been getting it from the special ed teacher, not from a reading specialist. >> Okay? >> And that as a matter of best practice, it would be better for them to get it from a reading specialist. >> And I'm just not comfortable at this point

068saying I'm going to reduce 2.0 0 special education because we're not far enough along in that process yet to know whether I'm going to need those two for other areas that could come up through the annual review process. >> But nobody's proposing that right now, right? >> No, that's what Well, that's that's point is that I'm adding >> several FT >> but not washing it, right? So like the the computer one's an easy one, right? I two FTE went out, two FT came in. It's just even Steven, right? But for the I brought in two reading teachers, but to Yan's point, it's it's not like we're gonna all a sudden have >> ton of new reading students that require this 2.0. So where's the 2.0 offset? And I can't give you that offset yet because

069we're not done with the IEP season yet. I don't want to propose cutting two today and then four weeks from now say, well, after the IEP season went through, we have to adjust some other other programming outside of reading and now I got to take that one back. I'd rather hold off until I have an absolute firm number whether or not I can reduce special education based on other programs not reading but other programs that special education serves. >> Okay. So as of today >> as of today is holding ground. Yes. Yes, I guess if two of them are washed, an increase of four FTEEs at the elementary level, the >> instructional coach >> and the population of the special ed program is somewhat independent of the population of the school because even though the

070school population would be X within that X, the the the the the special ed could go up or down depending on the >> and this is similar to ENL. It's not just about the number of students, it's the programs that they require, right? So, sort of back to Jod's point before about some of the ratios, you know, if you have more students needing intense support versus less intense support, then you need more programs, right? So, if all the students are in a 1211, I could put 12 students in a classroom with one teacher and one paralle professional, right? But if it's a 411 and I've got 12 kids that fit that profile, I need three classrooms now. Same number of kids, but three classrooms versus one. And that's why I say we're not far enough

071along in the process yet to know whether I can do two 811s or do I need four. Right. So now the FT shifts >> and you and I think to your point about the where the elementary enrollment factors in is that if I'm understanding it correctly, the reading and the ENL teachers would be K12. >> They're K12. reading. >> I mean, reading is going to be 99% K5, >> but it could >> but could could shift to the middle school a little bit, >> but ENL is definitely K12. >> Okay. >> Question. >> Um, just a a quick question if we could go over the reductions again. >> Um, I believe you had on there um a cse chair and an aid to students with disabilities. um even though we haven't finished the IEP program

072yet, how why do you feel comfortable saying we can produce? >> So, in working with special education, the aid is an unfilled aid position um that has gone unfilled for >> at least a year now. Um so that's really for that one. the cse chair. Um um just based on this the this the size and scope of responsibilities for our cse chairs are looking at what our K5 cse chair does versus 68 versus 912 we feel that K5 612 um will sort of rightsize those responsibilities. Um right now the K5 has a much heavier sort of responsibility than the 68 and the 712. And if we combine those, um, it'll be more equitable, if you will. Um, and this is all part of still moving ahead. We know we're still reviewing some of that as

073well. >> Okay. >> But for now, um, we we're going to go a year without that position. >> Okay. >> Cath question. >> Yeah, a couple of questions. Um, for maybe not. Sorry. Give me one second. is I'm sorry about that. Um, you know what? I will hold and come back later. I will think I will have a thing. >> Thank you. >> Go ahead. >> Thank you. >> See, I knew I knew if I went around the table. >> I appreciate it. Um, one of the things I just always want to highlight when we talk about sending um, students out of district, can you just give us the, you know, 45 seconds on why that happens or what, you know, what kind of what that means? >> Sure. Our our goal was obviously to

074keep students in district, but there obviously are times where needs of students um, don't match the programs that we have. Um, so again I'll use like so someone with intense needs that for say like a 411 program if we only have one student 41 is four students, one teacher, one pair professional. Um, so if if we don't have if we have one student that fits that profile, >> it'd be great to say let's keep them here and build a program, but who are the other three students that you're going to put in there? Right? You're not going to run a 111 program. Um, so you need students with liked profiles in order to be able to run some of the more intense specialized programs. So until we achieve the numbers that make it possible to

075run it and sustainable to run it because you don't want to run it today and then tomorrow I'll be like oops now we can't run it now you are sending students out right you want them to have as continuous an experience as possible. Um so it really comes down to just programs that we just don't have the right makeup to be able to to serve here in house. >> It's also programs out of district that offer more therapeutic environment that public schools just don't have the ability to offer generally. So that there's students who go up for that reason also. >> Got it. Thank you. And then when we were talking about um reading support the um you were talking you mentioned um grade bands >> for for reading and could you just repeat that

076part of what you were saying? Were you saying that we are going to keep students within their grade bands or we're gonna No, no, no. >> We're going to try to do it more by need. Um I mean you're still gonna you're not going to have a kindergarter with a fifth grade. still going to have, you know, K1 together, say one, two or two three. Um, but right in some cases, just because of the way it they're being serviced by special education providers and the schedule's not as flexible. Um, you end up with three first grade students, say, in a group, but they don't all have the same reading need. They just they just all have reading on their IP, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they have the exact same goals. Yeah. Yeah. >>

077So, this because now the pool is expanded because now you're putting general education students and special education students together. You're going to have more opportunity to grab students with the same need than you would if your pool is smaller, if that makes sense. >> So, that was the other thing I was that that was the other thing that I was stuck in is are these are these additional FTAs um and reading coaches are they >> um assigned to the special ed program? These are so I'm hearing that correctly. Anybody >> the re the way the way intervention should work is it label or not label students with needs should be um grouped according to what their needs are and served by a professional. Right? So the fact that you're special ed or not special ed

078shouldn't matter. Right? If if two students have the same exact reading profile, why would you say you student go this way, you student go that way? Why wouldn't you bring the two students together and have them work in a group together? Okay. >> With a spot. Yeah, that's essentially what's happening. >> So then would students um students who aren't part of the special ed program right now who have been identified as having some additional needs around around reading, >> right? So they're some of them are receiving reading. I mean the two sort of levels of support are um you know a couple days a week say in small group like four to five students to more intense needs where they might get reading support every day in a group of one to two. >> Okay.

079Yeah. Yeah, >> I'm just sure. And I'm trying to imagine how this works in real life. Like this is the reading coach comes into the classroom and is working with their students during the day. >> They can, but normally for the intense reading students, they're being pulled out and targeted reading um instruction. >> Yeah. >> Pulled out during not during core instruction time. So, it's not like I'm not pulling them out of English class to work on reading with them because now they're missing the core instruction for the day as well, right? >> Yeah. It's it's an add-on. It's not an instead of. >> Got it. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. That's incred. Thank you. It helps me kind of see the ask a little bit more. >> Appreciate it. >> Um, one uh question

080about the elementary coach. Is that specifically um are you thinking about somebody for um reading the reading programs or would it extend to math? >> So, that's one of the reasons for the ask as well is Allison is being pulled away from reading to some extent now too to be asked um to help with some math coaching as well. Um, and I think it's because we're now um, a year into Bookworms's implementation and we had the pilot groups before that. So people, as people are becoming more and more comfortable with that, um, and I think we're three or four years in now with foundations. As people are becoming more and more comfortable with that, they're asking less questions about um, reading. So now they're naturally moving to, hey, I can you help me with math?

081Um, so she's just being stretched too thin >> to be able to try to do K5 >> ELA and math when Sure. the original scope was supposed to be K2 ELA. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Any other questions for Dave? >> Thank you. >> Thanks, D. Following up from last week's uh meeting, we're going to regroup on bus proposition and options. Uh Ellen Dorado from the the director of transportation is here as well to lend any support and assistance if there's questions more on the operational side outside of uh the finances. Um so I may tap her for some support momentarily. >> [clears throat] >> Last week, we talked uh about some options and alternatives in terms of the uh the district's vehicle fleet replacement plan. We highlighted that over the past several budget cycles.

082Um we've increased our EV bus fleet, but there have been some challenges there. We talked about the operational challenges. Um Ellen provided some information last week on the um obstacles with the charge management initiative uh that we were hoping was the next step forward, but we run into to some hurdles there given the uh the age of the bus, the type of the bus as well as the type of the charger. So that has not been as successful as first hoped. We remain diligent, however, and optimistic that by working with our partners, we'll be able to to address some of those. Uh this is a slide that we presented last week on for a full calendar year, 180 session days, the number of days out of service, the EVs uh were in the shop for

083various reasons uh and the percentages there. I do want to highlight that EVs 8, 9, and 10 uh were only delivered in August of 2025. So they were only in service um or available for 71 session days and those percentages reflect that. As part of that conversation, the board had asked, well, can you kindly just pull some information that's similar with regard to the traditional fuel types? We did that. Um we tried to pull as, you know, we pulled 10 diesel buses. We picked an oldest one. We picked the newest one. We picked one with high mileage. We picked the the dog one that tends to be in the shop a little bit more frequently compared to uh to its peers. So, we tried to pull a a true cross-section of of those diesel buses.

084What I can what we can highlight at least from that data pull is that for many of those buses, sure, there's issues in the same way that you have issues with with your car and I got a broken tail light bulb or you know that won't start for whatever reason, but most of those buses were addressed all on the same day. Uh there were that being said, there were some that were out of service for for a period of time. Um but again more of your traditional issues in terms of vehicles brakes, exhaust, um what else do we have there? Detect uh defective wiper blades or or light bulbs out. All things that need to be pulled from service under the Department of Transportation rules and rags. Uh but certainly marketkedly less than what we're

085seeing on the the EV counterpart. So I hope that at least provides some some better frame of reference and context um for uh for the comparison. We also talked about the number of large buses the uh district is recommending the board to to consider. We talked about traditionally looking back uh for the past several years there was a replacement plan where 10 buses in 10 buses out uh it was it was sort of routine. What we looked at this year was all right well rather than just 10 buses in or nine buses in or whatever that number may be what actually should be replaced based on a number of factors. What's the body condition? What's looking at high mileage? where uh the the the bus is in the shop more often than not and is

086requiring more funds to actually keep it running than it may be worth. So based on that analysis uh with Ellen and John Hazelton, who's the assistant director in charge of of the fleet in the garage, they recommended nine buses be replaced. Um and given the challenges with the EV component uh of the fleet, recommended those buses be diesel. The cost of the diesel today is roughly $182,000. Replacement of nine of those brings the prop amount to $1.6 million. State aid reimbures at least 65 a.5% of those costs over the course of 5 years. So the net cost of nine buses to the district would be $580,000. However, despite the EV challenges, I I I want to highlight that the district still has grant dollars available through the New York State bus improvement plan for the

087acquisition of up to three EV buses. The way that grant opportunity works, there's a base voucher of $147,000 with two add-ons, $12,000, 202, $250 if that bus is vehicle to grid enabled, which our buses are. as well as a $61,000 scrapage add-on that should we decide to get an EV bus, we would need to scrap a bus for a total grant award of $220,000 per bus. So, there's three options that I laid out here should just to provide some better context and options for the board. still recommending a replacement of nine buses in total, but using if the board elects to use the grant funding in some capacity, what those propositions would look like in terms of the net. So, here we have a 1/8 split between the EV and the diesels. Again, because of

088the way the grant funding works, the EV does not have an impact to local taxpayer dollars. That being said, the grant funding is funded in with tax dollars in some way, shape, or form, but there's no local impact uh to the district because whatever when you back out the grant funding off the total cost of an EV bus at $485,000, state aid picks up the balance. So, that's a 18 split. If you were to do a 27, again, the the net um cost of the prop goes up slightly. And then if you were to do a 36 split. So those are the options that I I I took away what the board wanted to see from the last meeting. I I hope I captured that. Um at the present time, the district does uh and

089and transportation feel that small buses are not needed at this point in time. we have sufficient inventory in the fleet given age, mileage, and in overall condition. That may change over the course of the next several cycles, but right now, transportation feels that we're okay with our our small buses. Um, so is there any before we move on to the wrap-up section, I wanted to make sure that there weren't any uh any questions on the bus side. >> You want bus questions? >> Yes. >> Okay. Could you remind me how many charging spots we have left with the 10 buses? >> So, we have 10 EV buses. On the transportation building itself, we have seven wall-mounted chargers. As part of the 21 bond project, we installed three fixed chargers each with four chargers each. So,

090we could charge 19. >> Okay. However, alluding back to what we talked about last week, the ch those 19 chargers work theoretically with the overlay and umbrella of the charge management platform, but because of the types of buses that we have, those buses don't necessarily readily accept charge management, nor does the actual fixed chargers. So originally the the concept of charge management, you roll in after your your morning route, you know that bus one needs only 20% and bus 4 needs 40. You start pulling levers and gears to make sure that for your afternoon run, all the buses you need are charged sufficiently to meet that that next run. Because of the challenges with the charge management, it works sequentially, meaning that you plug in the first bus, it's going to charge bus number one

091until it gets to 100% before it sort of rolls over to bus number two. >> Ideally, we thought like, okay, we would be able to manage that a little bit more effectively. Not so much the case at present. We're working to sort of address those hurdles with Matthews, with the charging company, and with Mobility House, who's our charge our charge management vendor. So that that's the challenge there. We could charge 19 theoretically, but in terms of actually getting them all fully charged in the way we were hoping to, we can't. >> Sure. And then if I understood what you were saying last at our last meeting, [snorts] this is without a waiver or a change in the law. This is the last year we can buy diesel buses. Is that correct? >> Absent the waiver.

092Well, let me phrase it this way if I can. 2027 as the law is currently written. The last time you can purchase a traditional fuel type bus is 2027. >> Okay. So, next year. >> Next year. But there's there is a waiver process that provides a window of two additional years. But the waiver is available now, but despite being available, the state said, "Hold up. Don't file it just yet. Wait." So there there there's somewhat mixed signals from the state in terms of the the waiver process and the 2027 date. >> Okay. >> 2035 under current law is when the entire fleet >> is supposed to be >> supposed to be electrified EV wise. >> Okay. Thank you. Other questions on buses. >> Could you just say again the um the scrapage incentive [clears throat]

093that we get? So, it's an option for the board. >> Yes. >> We don't we don't have to. >> Yeah. >> It's roughly $61,000. to be exact. Um for for scrappage. >> Yeah. >> Now, they take it, they drill hole right through the engine block, never to be used again. >> Yeah. >> Now, getting back to the earlier conversation we had in terms of the sale of bus revenue. >> Yeah. I probably even the best bus we would get, we wouldn't probably be able to get $61,000 on the marketplace, which is why would not be able to >> we I I I would be very surprised that that's what I was wondering. Okay. >> I think the last time we got like $8,000 when we put now it was an older bus with a lot

094of miles. Um the other component in terms of the bus revenue given the impact of those mandates in those years whether or not it's in the district best interest to get rid of the existing fleet at all if we can still use them while the >> well parameters of the mandate may be changing >> right um so so there are two considerations there as I understand it first is we're looking if we're looking purely $8 and cents. If we were to choose the EV route, there's no reason not to take the scrapage incentive because we're not going to get that much money on the open market for that same bus. >> And then what I hear you saying as well is that there is also a fleet consideration as to would we want to scrap

095would we want to scrap or would be be better off holding on to some excess diesel in the fleet? >> Yes. Okay, just sorry just to make sure I'm understanding correctly and then if I could just ask a couple questions around in charge management to try and unpack that. I'm I'm a little perplexed because in any other charging scenario that one encounters in the wild, you plug in and it starts charging. And if Holly plugs in next to me, it starts charging. and if you in part you know so on and such forth. So if the charge management system is not allowing for that what is the benefit of our charge management system? >> Yes. So that that's a fair question right so when we started this process >> I I'm not trying to make

096anybody uncomfortable I'm trying to understand like what is happening here. >> It's it's an uncomfortable conversation and and I'm happy to have it. So when we started started this process, we knew that charge man like we had our buses, we had our charge look. The next thing is on the management side of it, right? >> So we wanted to be able to look remotely like okay of our fleet, where are they on on a dashboard in terms of you know battery life, the the rate of charge and you know will it, you know, be able to meet whatever needs we are >> this today or tomorrow, right? >> Yeah. when we were uh conversing with various vendors, we're like, "Yep, we we can do this. We do this, you know, for for the Teslas at

097home or or or what have you." I think what was not necessarily understood on our side because we're learning as we go on this as well as well as on the vendor side is that >> the battery and configuration of the bus is not >> uh programmed or or structured in such a way to accept the charge management in that it doesn't automatically you know accept a charge or cancel a charge absent the actual physical act of plugging and unplugging. Right. So, so, so you're saying like I could, so the goal with charge management, as I understand, was just to plug everything in and then be able to toggle as needed. And what you're saying is the battery can't figure that out. >> The battery cannot does not recognize that functionality. Nor does the charger,

098if I'm speaking correctly, Ellen, correct me. You know, me hanging up here by myself. I wonder [laughter] what you're doing. >> Nor does does the charger sort of provide for that as well. Right. So in retrospect, if we were doing the capital project today in 2025 as opposed to when we started the project in 2019 2020, right? We would have been like, "All right, we know that this is an issue or this is what we want um or need." So we're we went got the chargers, we got the battery, charge management wasn't really a big item on the agenda at that point in time. It was the next phase. >> Yeah. >> But this is some of was a blessing that I'm being ahead of the curve and you know >> and I want to

099be perfectly clear. I am not asking to assign blame. I am >> I'm frustrated not it's not an insignificant cost. I mean, the charge management is roughly $35,000 on an annualized basis. Yeah. >> Um, >> yeah. I mean, again, I I'm not I'm not expressing any frustration with with the folks who are doing this work. It's just like, well, then what's the point? Um, so so then let me ask the next question. If would it and it this is up to you all, right? Like if you just took the charge management off and just went back to just plugging them in, right? Like what is what is >> So the the challenge I understand your question, but the from a functionality perspective, the chargers we have >> charge sequentially. >> Meaning that for any one

100charger, there's four tails on it, right? Four plugs. If you were to plug them all in at, you know, roughly 1, two, three, and four, it's not going to one's not going to roll over to two until it's charged 100%. >> There's a trickle charge associated with that as well because bus one doesn't go from 0 to 100 at, you know, a clip. It gets to 0 to 85 and then slows down. So you're never going to get and that's about a 2hour conditioning time between that which means that bus two is not going to get to >> have its chance at the the charging trough until bus one's at 100% which is at minimum two hours. >> Yep. Um >> and I got bus three and four by the way waiting in line. >>

101Yeah. No, no, I I I see I see what you're saying. And then um so what have the conversations I mean what are the conversations among all of the various vendors here to address this problem because this is this is I mean we got somebody's got to figure this out. [laughter] >> Well part of the challenge is the charger's made installed batteries made installed and running. I I haven't necessarily been privy to the they're working on it. I don't know what the hope is or what technological or programming fix there may be to address it. Yeah, >> I mean this is it's not recent recent but like we've been in these ongoing discussions operations and maintenance information technology transportation business office Matthews Proterra the mobility house so there's a lot of individuals looking to >>

102to get this you know up and running because it's without it >> it's it's overly it's particularly cumbersome and it's hard to manage the fleet in that Okay. >> And to to the long term, if the goal is to have an entirely EV fleet, Yeah. >> without that, it's impossible. >> Yeah. >> Really? >> Thank you. How how many of the are the current the first five buses we received, are they out of warrant? Is this the last year under warranty? >> Uh, we're getting close. I think we have maybe two years of warranty left. >> Two more years. >> Yeah. Um question about buses. >> Yes. >> Um talking again about the scrapage value, not taking into account whether the 61,000 is worth it or whether we should keep them in order to keep

103more diesels in our fleet. How many buses do we think are at the end of their life and should be scrapped in the next year? I I don't out of the nine that we're, you know, we're recommending to to replace, I think two of them uh were we're we're like, okay, like it was a good bus. >> Okay. [laughter] >> It got a lot of kids to school on time. It's it's it's time to put those two out to pass, so to speak. >> So, we have nine that we feel like, >> right? [laughter] So, you know, >> great. >> Transportation does a good job of monitoring this. And you know, just because something is high mileage doesn't necessarily mean that it's it's it's time to to retire it, right? Like cuz we do have

104some runs that are all highway miles, right? Like as opposed to ones that may be running up the the hill for for our friends up in um in Clarksville to to get those down in all sorts of conditions and in rougher terrain than you know some of the suburban streets, right? So you got a wear and tear issue on that. you have maybe some additional rust depending on which roads are more salted versus sanded. So there's a lot of stuff that goes into the equation. They they really monitor the the body condition of these. I know Department of Transportation does and they note like okay you got a little bit of rust on the know the rear rear rear wheel well you got to get that addressed. But at some point part of the calculus

105is okay how much time effort parts are the mechanics and the garage putting into buses where like okay you know it's a risk for you know costbenefit analysis on on that as well. But right now nine is what's recommended. Now, if you say like we're only going to do five, like they're not all ready to to be put out of service. They're just they're closer to it than they're not. And then you may not be able to answer this, but regarding the 2035 um date where we're supposed to have all EV buses, I mean, obviously that that date was put out so that people would have time to continuously buy EV buses and and get to that point. But if we don't have a full fleet of EV buses in 2035, what are the consequences?

106So there's a practical operational consideration here is that uh even we're far ahead of the game than many other districts throughout throughout the state, right? >> 2035 I know it sounds like far, but it's folks it's really not like in about 3 years we're going to be about talking about the 3435 budget as so it's close. The demand is such compared to the the supply restrictions to get full buses out to every school district even if everyone were to adopt it today is is slim. I mean the the lead time for the EV buses on our side is 18 months. >> They're saying a year now >> year. All right. So >> yeah. So you're looking at a significant lead time if you were to say buy a bus today. you know, I'll be like,

107we'll be lucky if it's it's on the lot and running um within 12 months. So, >> yeah. And in discussion with the the governor's office and obviously the legislature about the deadline, I mean, the repercussions could be that the state could say, well, if your fleets not EV, we're not giving you state aid on that. But they would have to literally do that for every district because as John said, we're we were just at a, you know, budget meeting. I was just at a budget meeting a couple days ago with the governor's some of the governor's staff and most of the people in that room I'd say threearters of them have not even purchased one AV bus >> so and many of them may they need uh bus garages and charging station which is capital

108bond projects you need voter approval for all of that so I think in in theory the state could say well you won't get state aid on any of the diesel buses you're running but I I'm not really sure how realistic >> also theoretically department of transportation has to clear those from a registration operational component. So there's been subtle innuendo that department of transportation may not just simply approve or reregister or reertify diesel buses at a point around the 2035 or future. Now, like I said, that's not in writing anywhere, but that was raised as a concern. >> Have to extend our walking distances. >> John, did you have a question? >> Yeah. Whether we purchase electric or diesel, is there [clears throat] any consideration for how many out of the nine that we're replacing that

109we would be keeping? I mean, obviously if we get electric, we have to scrap, but >> Well, I think that's an important question and [clears throat] >> we talked about this more on the EV side only because it's there's the opportunity tied to to the scrabage. I do think in in conversations with Ellen, there's at least two of those nine that probably if we kept them much longer, we we'd be putting more money into them than than worth it. um high mileage older buses 2014 2015ish and you know that they just they're older and more worn out than than some of the other buses. The other ones hey you know we can keep them for you know as a as an extra bus if there's a run on you know DOT or other repairs just

110to have it as a fleet as a as a substitute bus. Um, but keep in mind the more buses that we have in the fleet still require the, you know, the routine maintenance, the DOT inspection regardless if you know it's used or not. So, they're going to be on a cycle which pulls out the resources of the garage, right? So, there's a there's a balance in terms of what you need for your number of runs. We have roughly 55 routes. Uh, now we have 104 vehicles uh fleet vehicles. a certain percentage of them are always rotating through the shop for DOT inspections, just regular repairs and maintenance, field trips, and the like. So, it's not necessarily a one for one. Um, but I think Ellen and John would would take that back and be like,

111okay, 104, we if we bring in nine more, that brings you to 113. Do we need 113? Do maybe 110? Like, that'll be an ongoing conversation, and then we can decide, well, do we scrap them? Do we keep them because of the mandate? Um or do do we try try to sell them on the open market and see what um what we can get from them? >> Do you have another question? >> I guess I'm curious. Um >> I'll hold on actually. Thank you. I'm curious about all sorts of things. >> Um I'm assuming John that you need some guidance from us. >> I do. I had a conversation with bond council earlier this week. I sort of laid them out the options what I presented here advised that the board is considering uh some

112options. I want to give them some lead time. You know as simple as these as complicated as these slides may be when you look at the actual language of the bus proposition there's a lot of language in there that we want to make sure is accurate. So if there is guidance that you have um that I can share with bond council I think that will give them a leg up. Now, I know we have a couple of additional meetings, but there is some time that they'll need to to pull this together. So, if you have some guidance or direction on on our we will welcome that. If you have additional questions, if you're looking for information or uh data displayed differently, we can certainly take that back as well. Uh but I am cognizant of

113the calendar. >> Okay. Um, do people have thoughts at this point on the different proposals? >> I'd appreciate a little bit a little bit of time to to kind of consider and take in some of the conversation this evening. >> Do you have any additional questions for for John? >> Not in this not in this moment, but if it's okay, I would love to be able to follow up on email like when I go back through tonight and last week as well. Okay. >> Thank you. >> [snorts] >> Sorry, you're not done with me yet. >> All right, to close out the process for for tonight's meeting, uh just a a summary of where we were and what uh additional information we uh added tonight. Again, the baseline, the initial gap was $4.1 million uh

114after, you know, the things we talked about earlier and then the addition of the athletics uh additions and the instructional programs, ins and outs, we're at $3.6 million gap at roughly 4.9 uh%. We made some headway tonight, but not a significant amount because you may recall that the gap was 5.1% when we started. So I don't think we have enough meetings between now and then really to to get there by small percentage points. So again, the gap is 3.6. This is sort of a summary in terms of options and where we're at. As a reminder, the maximum allowable tax levy at the 2.61% if you if the board would maximize that is a,928,000, which still leaves you about roughly half the gap of $1.7 million. The board has some options here that the business office

115and the district office can take back. We can look for additional reductions. We can revise our revenue projections and try to maximize those. I'm hesitant to do that because I can tell you that many of those revenue estimates are maximized already um and arguably overleveraged. um they they're aggressive in that, you know, I didn't want to necessarily leave any revenue on the table understanding that it was going to come at the expense of of the tax levy. So, business office really sort of tighten those up. There's the tax cap override, which again for um as a reminder, that would require a super majority approval and adoption of the budget if the board were were to do that at 60% plus one. There's also the option to to use reserves and fund balance. Again, for 2526,

116the budget was balanced on $715,000 of undesated fund balance. At the time we did that, the rationale was thinking back to 2425 that rolled into 2526. We had an additional pilot payment that was not budgeted for or anticipated was which was roughly the value of that fund balance. So that was the board's rationale like okay let's see if we can sort of weather the storm let's see what 2425 closes at what 2526 looks like and where we're heading into 2627 as anticipated things did not quite shake out as well as first anticipated or hoped for and then there's always I you know the the budget process is about 10% budget development and 90% management once it's adopted though in conversations with Jod and Dave and and district leadership, there's the opportunity really to aggressively manage

117in 26 the 2627 budget when it's adopted. That means really um working with departments and division heads for any you know request that comes in for equipment or or contracts really making sure that it's absolutely positively essential given the the impact to to the budget. Same thing with vacancies. As positions become available over the course of the year through attrition or retirement or um ju just leaving um on their own accord when those positions come up for for refill. Should we be holding off on that for purposes of our 2728 budget? So, uh, that is a a an aggressive tool that the business office and the district office has that it's willing to use. We do that a lot of the times anyway, but we just have to be somewhat heightened over the course of

118not only the remainder of 2526, but over the course of 2627. >> Yes. >> Tax cap. Let's hypothesize that we decide to get a supermajority override the tax cap this year. next year. The tax permission, the allowed tax levy doesn't look backwards and say you were evil last year, so we're going to reduce your amount. It's just percentage on the currently approved budget, right? >> That's correct. So the basis point is the approved tax levy, right? And then, you know, so I I I I did this understanding that next year's tax cap calculations somewhat dependent on the decisions you make over the course of the budget process. But back of the envelope, if the district were to maximize a 2.61% tax levy increase for this year, >> looking forward to next year, it's 2.8%. So,

119there's ins and outs. It's all tied to debt service and pilot payments and you know uh a bunch of other uh calculations. So one of the challenges on the tax cap um I just wanted to show this because I I think it illustrates somewhat to Ean's point. Just bear with me. It's like slide two. So in those years where the district did not fully tax on the municipal side, your your counties, your towns, your your your villages, you can carry over that unused taxing authority to help you out the future year. School districts do not have that option. So while we didn't need it in 2324 or 2425, the the goal is never to to no one wants to tax in general, but you don't want to tax any more than you absolutely have to.

120So in those particular years, we didn't need it, so we didn't do it and we left unauthorized taxing authority on the books, which translated tax savings to um community to the community. If I was a county, I would be able to roll that $500,000 into 2425 and then some portion of that into 2526, which would have helped us and not result in the use of fund balance. School districts just do not have that option. So, that's a challenge with the tax cap law as it relates to school districts. But again, you know, there's something to point out that the board did not tax as much as it could have because it didn't need it. And that that's that's somewhat lost in the takeaway because we're talking about the 26 27 budget and it should the

121board choose to override those prior years in some ways don't matter but they do when you look at this from a longitudinal perspective. >> Do you have a sense of how much over the 2.61 we would need to close the gap? >> It's roughly, you know, if we were to close the gap now, it'd be 4.93. So it's it's roughly um Got to go back. Bear with me for a second. >> 2.31. >> Yeah. So, so 2.6. So, you're looking at 2.32, >> which is roughly, you know, to >> almost double. >> It's it's only 2%, but it's going to look at 50% more. >> Yeah. >> Than what you're allowed. >> Yeah. >> From from a nar narrative perspective. So in terms of options for the board, all the you know none of these

122are necessarily mutually exclusive, right? You you can pick from from any one of them. if the district or the board wanted to to close the gap temporarily and when I say temporarily is because there's not any there's very limited in u items in the 2627 budget that are one-time ones meaning that it's a structural deficit that we're we're confronting here and we're offsetting with sort of one-time band-aid fixes here. So at the end of our 24-25 fiscal year, we had various reserves and fund balance at our disposal and that's what you can see in the first column as of 63025. I wanted to show what was available today should the board elect to manage part of the gap or all of the gap with reserves or fund balance. So th this is the how they

123stack up. um you can use your retirement and retirement reserves either for the employee retirement system or the teacher retirement system to offset some of your retirement expenses. Uh I want to highlight the capital reserve is for a designated purpose but that is totally committed now associated with the 2025 capital project on the appropriated fund balance. Again, we use 715, but over the course of 2526, we appropriated an additional $400,000 for the emergency repair of gym roof A. But we still have roughly $6.5 million in undesated fund balance available as of today. You may recall that under state law, that fund balance should not exceed 4% of the operating budget. At the business office recommendation, the board authorized, you know what, let's have 6% because we anticipated, we felt our spidey spidey senses were tingling

124that, hey, we're going to maybe need some additional revenue over the course of the of the next few years. So, we do have that flexibility. For the next um meeting on the 18th, I'll have a better sense and can sort of tell you where I anticipate 25 26 to end up. I can tell you that if we can go back to our financial statement meeting, there was some state aid that we had budgeted for in terms of receipt in 2425 that because of the timing is actually going to be recorded in 2526 that was not budgeted for. That's roughly a million $ 1.9 million. So that $1.9 million will certainly more than offset the million1 that we've already allocated, which means our fund balance is sort of replenished, right? That being said, there's still a

125lot of unknown territory for 2526 in terms of where our other revenue estimates are compared to our expenditures. I think we will be in a good spot. I don't think we'll be to the tune of where we have been in the past in terms of reserve contributions, but the the board could, you know, appropriate, you know, roughly um the same amount of fund balance as present without necessarily hitting the reserve fund balance figure too too hard. >> [clears throat] >> So, if there's any additional work that you want us to to do, I I know that's that that's a lot to absorb and we do have a couple of meetings, but I I just wanted to lay out some options that the the board had at its disposal or could direct the business office and

126district office to know. >> One followup on you mentioned you'd for, you know, done some back of the envelope forecasting. Let's say so next year will be 2.8 if we just go with tax levy. If we decided we were going to blow this out and ask for 6% this year and the voters said yes, >> what does that do to next year? Is it >> I have to I'd like to run the calculations but I think it's the >> because it starts off at the new tax levy. >> Yeah. >> So if you did it would still be roughly 2.8%. Oh, >> because [clears throat] every year the calculation starts at the prior year's levy t, you know, with some ins and outs. So, thanks a question. >> When we're looking at the different options,

127you mentioned aggressive management and if we were to ask the business office to pursue that, that would that change any of the numbers that have present been presented so far or would that help the line? it it would it would help address the structural deficit moving forward. Right? So as of some of the budget for 20 as an example absent the additions and reductions it doesn't necessarily account for attrition midyear >> right >> so if there uh I don't want to necessarily pick on on a title but you know if there were three carpenters that you know went off for for better jobs elsewhere or changed retired what have you would be like okay we're going to try to see about doing all the carpentry work with the remaining carpenters and not necessarily backfill >>

128those vacancies which means for our 2728 budget those would be available for board consideration for hard reductions to help balance the 2728 budget when we get there >> understood thank you >> um do you and if you don't recall off the top of your head you could just let me know later but what our budget the percentage it has passed at over the past few years >> I it's been above 70% at least the um the past 3 years or so 72 74 it varies um sometimes it it's >> the passage let me rephrase the the turnout and the the voter interest is not necessarily tied to necessarily the operating budget It could be an interesting board race or an interesting because the library board of trustees ballot is on the on our ballot or

129in the library budget. It could be associated with that. It could have been because of a uh the bus proposition that was more um interesting than the operating budget. So the percentage while we're we're very fortunate in terms of the the community support in terms of not only the operating budget but the other proposals that the district puts forward to to the voting public. Some of that's dependent on the issues that are on any one given ballot. >> Okay. Um and just remind us all if we say we went for a super majority and it did not pass what happens? >> So [sighs] it goes there's options. Um the board could put it to the public again as is. See if it passes. Mhm. >> If it doesn't, there is a state formula that pulls

130back on red like forced mathematical reductions in certain areas. Admin instruction um programmatic. Um I I can certainly lay that out uh for for the next meeting. Um, >> you could also put it out at a different budget proposal. >> So you could lower it back to the levy limit and ask for a revote. It failed again, then you're required [clears throat] to make reductions in certain areas of state law. And are you able to provide like per percentage or I know I know sometimes you'll say like this means about x amount of tax increase [snorts] based on a home of a certain size like some numbers like that just to kind of make it more >> I can do that for the next meeting. I I don't have that available now and I I

131>> I always get a little uncomfortable with that part of the presentation because the data set's incomplete. It's using a set current assessed value with equalization rates and it's not a true >> it's not a true number. It's not a true number uh because the um the the um the evaluation rate could significantly change between town of New Scotland and the town of Bethlehem and the uh the overall assessed value could be significantly higher where a 2% >> or a 3% tax levy increase does not necessarily translate to a 2 or 3% tax rate increase. >> It could be 5%. It could be 1%. And that's where the conversation and narrative gets a little bit confusing because we're presenting what the tax levy increase is because that's what we have to do. But the actual

132impact to community members may be more or less depending on where they live. It may be more or less compared to where their housing um their assessed value is individually compared to to to the whole. >> Sure. Yeah. We're we are also planning because Dave had mentioned in his presentation the uncertainty with some of the sectioning because of the enrollment changes and the the kindergarten registration we can um for the next couple of meetings particularly the next meeting um and then by the April meeting when the board has to adopt prioritize. So you've right now you've seen transportation requests, athletic requests, instructional program requests. We can certainly put those in kind of order of priority and and explain why they would be um priority and I mean sometimes it is just about these are choices

133we have to make to live within the budget. Um and then I think that will help also because we'll have more information on do we have a special education reduction? Do we have some elementary increases based on sectioning or not. So, some of this is still work in progress, but we'll put those together in priority or order for the board to consider um because we do have a little bit more time still to help with that. I mean, the other thing I would be helpful would be I mean I mean I know all the different program [snorts] all the different areas the pre the budget presentations seem like they've been pretty tight but if there's a way to go back and even I mean the answer might be no like there aren't additional reductions we

134can find but if they're out there and you know >> times I [laughter] haven't got I haven't gotten too many takers on it surprisingly I wonder why >> usually it's I forgot to tell you I needed this. >> Yeah, but I mean it might be worth at least asking. >> We we we can certainly do that. I I mean we do that as just for context. We do that as part of the process. Try to move like okay year to year. >> Um >> and you never want to leave more appropriations already than you need. Yeah. But there are times where because things change over the course of the year, if something was slightly higher and something was slightly lower, you're you're you're moving funds more or less within the budget, not necessar to cover

135unanticipated um changes. You know, I I am still concerned about, you know, some of the utility components in there. I think we were as aggressive as we were on the um the revenue forecast. We were aggressive on the appropriation needs as well. So, we're moving both sides of the ledger in opposite directions which creates more risk and vulnerability over the course of the year. I hear your point. We'll certainly take that back if there's something. I don't think we're going to be finding a million.7, but it, you know, it is certainly if we do find something um important as part of the larger budget discussions with some of our legislative reps, you know, most of the districts in the state, there's just about 750 districts in the state and almost 500 of those only got

1361% increase in foundation aid. >> Um, and many saw decreases in building aid, right? And you know that's one of the points uh being made was this is during an election year. >> And so I think we do need to be mindful. I mean many of us uh uh live through the recession in reductions that needed to take place which were not pleasant. So trying to be mindful of, you know, what do we need? What are our priorities? But I don't think we're going to based on decreased enrollment in schools generally across the state, we're going to see, you know, oh, this year we only got 1%, but next year we're going to see big increases. There was large increases to schools with the school breakfast and lunch programs. That's a huge cost to the

137state. There's other things looking at UPK funding and thing that essentially takes away from the allocations for general foundation aid and I see that's probably going to continue >> um at least in the short term. >> Um are there other things that John could do before the next meeting in terms of gathering information for the board questions people have? Okay. Okay. Then just two quick wrap-up slides here. As a reminder, uh there are three open board seats for our May 19th vote for three-year terms that are expiring on June 30th, 2029. Nomate nominating petitions first became available February 20th and are actually due by April 20th by no later than 5:00 p.m. to Britney Barrett, the district clerk. And this is the remaining calendar that we have. March [clears throat] 18th, two weeks from now,

138we'll have some additional discussion on food service, additional decisions, additions, reductions hopefully um as as Dr. Hurst had highlighted during his presentation, possible adoption. However, to Jod's point, there's one additional meeting date on the calendar presently, and these are regularly scheduled meeting dates. If the board needs to meet off cycle, that's certainly a possibility as well. We're not necessarily confined to this. Um, I do want to highlight that the April 1 date is pressing only because the 45day notice has to be sort of available for publication no later than April 4th. Um, which doesn't lead >> doesn't provide a whole lot of lead time. We'll do everything to try to work with our periodicals of record to get everything in place, but there's not a whole lot of lead time between the April 1st and

139uh April 4th public notice date. On May 6, there [clears throat] will be a public hearing on the proposed budget. Last week, we also talked about having a public hearing on the smart bond initiative that Aaron presented because that does require a public hearing as well. We may the board may want to just consider running those in parallel. On May 13th is the meet the candidates night and ultimately on May 19th is the budget vote in the gym a in the high school from 7 am to 9 p.m. >> In next at our next meeting the board has to give us direction on the bus proposition because you'll have to have language for the authorizing >> April for the April 1 board meeting. Understood. >> Thanks John. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thanks John.

140>> All right. Um, next on the agenda is our recognition of public comment on an agenda item. If we have anyone who would like to address the board on an agenda item and if um if no one on the board objects, I would at this point I would invite our um visitors who wanted to uh present to us about the high school parking lot because we're coming up on 9:00. >> Sure. >> Coming up on 9:00 and that way if any of them need to drive themselves home. >> Yes, please. So, if you guys want to come up now. >> Hi. Um, I just wanted to talk about the parking lot specifically in the morning, the student parking lot. So, just to like kind of like give like a brief explanation, like I'm just going

141to be frank like it's pure chaos like in the morning every single day. And um I spoke to Mr. domel about some potential solutions and um he advised me to come speak to the board. So yeah, so I conducted a small survey with um my economics teacher. So all the seniors who have my economics teacher um submitted a survey with six and 68 responses um were collected and 46% of the students h had parents parked in their parking spaces in the morning. 79% of the students had said they were delayed due to parents dropping off their children in the student lot and 65% of the students stated that they were late to class due to traffic in the parking lot. And like one of the main issues I think with the parking lot is that

142parents um don't go drop off their kids in their own drop off lane to leave the parking lot earlier causing a lot more um traffic in the student lot because there's already teachers um there and juniors and seniors and children who are um walking and biking to school. And it's just adding additional traffic which is kind of like causing chaos and more students to become late to class. And um yeah, and some of the like and like there was also an open response section in the survey that I collected and like students said that parents have yelled at them in the parking lot. They've almost been hit by negligent parents in the parking lot when they were walking or biking to school. They're almost been hit when they were driving to school. um parents fly

143through the parking spots to leave earlier and they swerve around students causing um a lot of like distress and potential danger to students. And actually Mr. Don Mel told me that they had to look at cameras because a student was almost hit by a car going over 20 miles an hour in the morning in the parking lot. And I also like wanted to add like according to the NIH like high school students are more likely to take part in riskier driving behaviors because of like lack of sleep and they're more like and their reaction time is lower. So like because and like a lot of high school drivers are like novice drivers. So like having like this like chaotic environment in the parking lot in the morning is just like something that's causing people to

144be late and it's like a safety issue. And I talked to Mr. dol about like some solutions that could be brought up. So, we talked about maybe adding signage so that parents know that they're not supposed to be dropping off their students in the um student lot or having like in the middle school like adults or police officer guiding traffic to prevent any like issues in the parking lot. And that's all. >> Thank you for putting that together. Um it's nine o'clock so we'll take a one minute break at this point so that if um any of our high school fake Supa students would like to leave just make sure you come sign out. Okay. cafeteria entrance. >> Yeah, that's a nightmare, too. It almost like runs down. >> I But I feel like that

145is like >> But that's where the buses, it's not very safe because the buses are unloading kids there and then you have parents who are supposed to come in one way and but they cut through the lot and kids are getting on the buses and that's a pretty small area. So it gets really congested >> and you have the you have cars like the buses are trying to exit and the cars are in the way too, >> right? >> Because the buses go out there >> left and right and then if you have car traffic >> I did there is a traffic study that I'll have to see if I can find it or I think might have >> appreciate it is an issue. So we need to minimum some signs. >> Yeah. I will

146say when you're a new parent, >> at least I remember at the middle school they they showed they had a map and said this is what you're supposed to do. The high school they never freeall. >> Yeah, it's a freeall. >> All right. Let's uh >> All right, let's reconvene and finish. Um item six, action items. A finance action items. It is recommended by the superintendent that the board of education approve the following finance action items one through three. >> Some move. Second. >> Any discussion? All in favor? I. Any opposed? Any extensions? That carries. B. Professional personnel action items. It is recommended by the superintendent that the board of education approve the following professional personnel action item number one. So move. >> Second. Any discussion? >> All in favor? >> I. Any opposed? Any

147extensions? >> Abstain. Sorry. >> That carries. Um C. Support personnel action items. It is recommended by the superintendent that the board of education approve the following support staff action items one through three. >> So move. >> Second. Uh any discussion? All in favor? >> I. Any opposed? Any abstensions? That carries. Uh D, other action items. Um it is recommended by the superintendent that the board of education approve the following action items one and two. So moved. >> Second. Uh any discussion? >> All in favor? >> I I >> Any opposed? Any abstensions. That passes. Um item seven, recognition of public comment on a non-aggenda item. If we have any visitors who'd like to address the board on a non-aggenda item. Uh item eight, future meetings and events. Um on Monday, March 9th, the district office,

148we have a policy committee meeting at six o'clock. Um and on Wednesday, March 18th is our next regularly scheduled board meeting to anticipating executive session at 6 and reconvening to open session at 7. Um and seeing no need to go back into executive session, can I have a motion to adjourn the meeting? >> So moved. >> Second. All in favor? Meeting adjourned.