001Good evening. The February 10th, 2026 regular meeting of the mentor exempted village board of education is called to order. This meeting is being held in accordance with section 3313.15 of the Ohio Revised Code. Please place your mobile phones on silent mode for this meeting. Mr. Wade, please call the role. >> Mr. Hardesty, >> here. >> Miss Ayo, >> here. >> Miss Martza, >> present. >> Miss Cook, >> here. Thank you. And please join me in the pledge of allegiance if you are willing and able. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [clears throat] >> I would like to welcome everyone to the February 10th, 2026 regular meeting of the mentor exempted
002village board of education. Board members have received the agenda and supporting materials for review and consideration through the district's paperless board of education agenda system board docs. The agenda is available for public viewing on the district's website beginning the Sunday prior to the meeting and board members may contact the superintendent or chief financial officer for additional information regarding agenda items if needed. The board provides two opportunities for public comment. The first hearing of the public is limited to comments on agenda items. The second hearing of the public allows comments on any topic. Individuals wishing to participate must sign up prior to the start of the meeting either online through the district website or on site. Speakers will be called to the microphone, asked to state their name and address, and direct comments to the board
003president. Each speaker may speak once per segment with comments limited to three minutes. The hearing of the public serves as an opportunity for community members to provide input to the board. While responses may not be provided immediately, all comments are valued and will be considered thoughtfully with follow-up provided when appropriate. to ensure an orderly meeting and in accordance with Ohio Revised Code 2917.12 and board policy 0169.1, any individual who disrupts or interferes with the meeting may be warned and/or removed. This meeting is being livereamed and recorded and may be viewed live or on demand via the district's YouTube channel, Cardinal TV Menor Ohio. Thank you. [cough] >> [clears throat] >> We do not have any district highlights and recognitions this evening. So we will move on to approval of the minutes. Do I have a
004motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Is there any discussion? >> Mr. Wade, please call the role. >> Miss Martaza? >> Yes. >> Miss Alo? >> Yes. >> Mr. Hardesy? >> Yes. >> Miss Cook? >> Yes. >> Motions carry 40. >> Next we have hearing of the public on agenda items only. There are no uh first session speakers tonight. >> Thank you. Um next we have the superintendent report and recommendations. >> Good evening, Madame President, members of the board, and Mr. Wade. I have the following recommendations listed under the consent agenda and recommend approval of items 6A1 through 6 A4. >> Do I have a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. Is there any discussion? Mr. Wade, please call the role. >> Miss Marchazza? >> Yes. >> Mr. Hardesty? >> Yes. >> Miss Apple? >>
005Yes. >> Miss Cook? >> Yes. >> Motions carry 4 Z. >> Madame President, members of the board, Mr. Wade, I am recommending approval of the Apple purchase agreement. >> Do I have a motion? >> Yes. >> So, >> second. Is there any discussion? Mr. Wade, please call the role. >> Mr. Hardesty, >> yes. >> Miss Marchazza, >> yes. >> Miss Ayappo, >> yes. >> Miss Cook, >> yes. >> Motion carries 40. Madame President, members of the board, Mr. Wade, I'm recommending approval of the contractual agreement with Classic Automotive Group. >> So moved. Second. Any discussion? Please call the RO. >> Miss Alo, >> yes. >> Miss Marchazza, >> yes. >> Mr. Hary, >> yes. >> Miss Cook, >> yes. >> Motion carries 40. Madame President, members of the board, Mr. Wade, I am recommending approval
006of theou with Kyahoga Community College. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Any discussion? Is this a new partnership? >> Uh, no. Continuing uh just part of our college credit plus program. >> Great. Thank you. >> Please call the role. >> Miss Apple, >> yes. >> Miss Mr. Hardesty, >> yes. Miss [laughter] Marchazza, >> yes. >> Miss Cook, >> yes. Motion 40. >> Madam President, members of the board, Mr. Wade, I am recommending approval of the IE observation annual license renewal. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Any discussion? Can you just talk about what this is and >> Yeah, this is our uh teacher evaluation program um that's aligned to our instructional practice here in the district. uh probably been utilizing this tool for oh probably almost 10 years now. >> Is there any more discussion?
007Please call the role. >> Miss Martaza. >> Yes. >> Miss Dur Hardesty. >> Yes. >> Miss Awell. >> Yes. >> Miss Cook. >> Yes. >> Well, that was number four, right? That was number four. >> You ready for number five, Mr. Wade? >> I am. >> Okay. Uh, Madame President, members of the board, Mr. Wade, I am recommending approval of the Shutterfly Life Touch Agreement. >> So moved. >> Second. Is there any discussion? >> Is this for the entire district? I know sometimes we do building by building. >> It is. >> Great. Thank you. Also, can I I just say I I there's some scary information going around saying that Shutterfly can share students photos and use them and use them. And so I looked into that and in their contract it's if you take
008a picture of yours child and you upload it again into one of their other like Shutterfly or anything like that or um one of their other outside of the school um program, then they can use that any way they want. So just just to you know in case anybody was was worried about that that your kids pictures are safe and private. >> And that's one of the things that uh they've indicated to us as well as we've kind of dug into this a little bit too. They've shared with us that they're they were one of the first photography uh organizations to to really dive into the student data privacy. um and obviously very well-versed in FURPA and and educational records and um we we've gotten the reassurance that they do not share that information. >>
009Y thank you for bringing that up. Mr. Wade, please call the role. >> Miss Appo, >> yes. >> Miss Marchazza, >> yes. >> Mr. Hardesty, >> yes. >> Miss Cook, >> yes. >> Motion carries 40. >> Madame President, members of the board, Mr. Wait. I'm recommending approval of the resolution ranking the top three professional design firms and authorizing the treasurer to contract negotiations with the firm ranked most qualified. >> Do I have a motion? >> So moved. Second. >> Is there any discussion? >> Just want to confirm. I did ask Mr. Wade this already, but that this these are not for specific projects that we have on hand. Um, this is just an annual thing that we do in case we have any projects that come up. >> Correct. >> Thank you. >> Please call
010the role. >> Miss Marchazza? >> Yes. >> Miss Apple? >> Yes. >> Mr. Hardesty? >> Yes. >> Miss Cook? >> Yes. >> Motion carries 40. >> Madame President, members of the board, Mr. Wait, I'm recommending approval of agenda items C1 related to certified personnel and C2 through C4 all related to human resource matters. >> So moved. >> A second. Is there any discussion? >> Please call the RO. >> Miss Marchazza, >> yes. >> Miss Cook, >> yes. >> Mr. Hardesty, >> yes. >> Miss Apple, >> yes. >> Motions carry 40. Madame President, members of the board, Mr. Wade, I am recommending approval of agenda item D related to administrative staff. >> Do I have a motion? So moved. >> Second. >> Is there any discussion? >> Just just wanted to share real quick that uh
011the the two resignations we have on tonight are uh couple of our administrators uh Mrs. Peremba, our principal at Ridge, and uh Mrs. Bowser, our director of student services, who both have done unbelievable work here in our district, and they will be missed. >> Mrs. I have >> Did you have a question? >> Yeah, I I agree. That was, you know, anytime you it's bittersweet when you see retirements um especially when they've been with us a long time, you're happy for them. But um I I wanted to bring up um the you had talked about the retire rehire option. Um and I didn't we we haven't had an opportunity to discuss it as a board and I just wanted to see where everybody stood on that. >> Uh we're working through um some of our
012final kind of administrative guidelines so to speak on um if we were to move towards a retire rehire situation just so that we can kind of standardize that. Um, you know, we've we've done it in a couple of ways here in the past, but uh we want to make sure that um whatever we do in that regard would be coste effective to the district for a period of time. And um but we should have more of that information for you in the board update this week. >> Okay. because I is if that is something that we discuss, you know, we want um to be able to have time to look into finding somebody else if that's not an option that we we take um because I think it's end end of contract in June. Is
013that right? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. And anything that we would post, we would want to get that posted as soon as possible as well. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Please call the RO. >> Miss Marcha. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mr. Hardesty. >> Yes. >> Miss Apple, >> yes. >> Miss Cook, >> yes. >> Motion carries 40. [clears throat] >> This concludes my portion of tonight's agenda. Thank you. >> Next, we have the board of education report and recommendations. And we have one item under board business. It is the first reading of a board of education policy. And because this is a first reading, no vote is necessary. Is there any discussion on that at all before we move forward? All right. Um, next we have the legislative report. Mr. Hardesty. >> All
014right. Well, this meeting has been moving on very swiftly, so let me keep up the trend hopefully. But there um the um Senate and the House, state of Ohio has come back into session. There's been committee meetings and a flurry of bills have been introduced. So, I'm not going to go through every single one of them, but I will go through six of them this evening. Um, going to start with the oldest bill first, SB34, which basically states that uh a school social studies and history classrooms would have four documents hanging in them. Um we have a choice between nine uh documents to choose from. Uh they are this is passed through the house and it's in the senate currently in committee. Um, so if that does well, when that does go through the house
015and go to the governor, we'll have to figure out which four of the nine we're going to hang in our social studies and history classrooms. These nine documents are uh the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, there's the Magna Carta, the Ten Commandments, the Declaration of Independence. Uh, but there are nine that we can choose from. Um, the rest of these bills were just introduced and are currently in committee. I'll start off with the HB661, which is no NIL for high school students. So, um, there's, um, I don't know how you all feel about that, but this is to ban NIL in high school sports. The next one is HB561, which is also called the Choice Act, which makes it easier for you to send your kid to school unvaccinated. So, it um that was just
016referred to committee as well. Um the next one is HB304, which was introduced in the House. It's in committee. is to extend recess for K through 8 from 15 minutes twice a day in mentor to 30 minutes twice a day. Um I'm sure there will be some logistical challenges in that but um like I said we'll see when that passes there will need to be some kind of um way to figure that out. And then finally, the last two is one that was introduced by our representative Jamie Calendarer, which is HB671. Currently, there is a challenge to the voucher system in Ohio. In the courts, a judge has ruled it unconstitutional. It is up for appeal and the state is appealing that. Um well this bill basically states that if a school enters into that
017lawsuit that the state will withhold funding from the school. So don't know how everyone feels about that but that is the bill on the table right now. Uh then there's HB 643 which will limit vouchers for people making uh over 500k a year. Currently there is no income cap cap on vouchers. Um so this introduces a 500k income cap on vouchers. So if you make 500k or less you can get a voucher. Uh, but this caps it. So, the people making over 500k will not be able to get those vouchers. And that concludes my legislative update. >> Thank you, Mr. Hardesty. We do not have a student achievement report this [clears throat] this evening, so prepare for next month. We'll have I'm sure Mr. Heg will have less to share. Um, we will move on
018to our chief financial officer's report and recommendations. Mr. Wait. >> Madam President, members of the board, Mr. Heath, we are at the point in the year now where we're giving our second update to our forecast. Uh, previously historically had been in May, but House Bill 96 changed that to an updated presentation to be done in February. So, back in October, uh if you remember, we were looking at a net cash balance of just over $3 million in fiscal year 2030. And again, just as a reminder for the entire board, uh the forecast now only has to go three years beyond the current year. So, technically only have to report through 29. However, uh we still look it out to 2030 for our 5year just from a planning and best practice standpoint. So, we were looking
019in October at about $3 million uh cash reserve uh based on our current forecast. Then uh fast forward to February, um we're looking at a deficit of about $9.5 million. So, that'll be one of the things that we'll look at and try to explain uh here this evening and kind of see where we're at. and we've pretty much have a balanced budget forecasted for 2026 at the current point. Uh negative $275,000. While again that's a large amount for all of us in this room on a single household. When you look at a budget on the level of $115 million, $275,000 um could be the difference between just a timing issue as we've experienced in the past. So, um, for all intents and purposes, materially, we're pretty close to being balanced for the fiscal year. What
020that will do then to our cash reserve is it will drop it uh slightly down to 47,35,000. Um, because we're projecting our revenue to be about just under 115 million and our expenses just to be over, like I said, $115 million. Key revenue assumptions. Uh anytime that we have a forecast, it's important for us to communicate our assumptions not only to the board, but to the community. Um so in this current forecast, uh there's been some changes to law that have occurred in uh December of 2025. There were four House bills that were passed. Two of them impact us directly. uh House Bill 129 uh which is what I would call the new floor calculation which now includes emergency levies uh will impact us as well as house bill 335 which limits the growth on
021inside millillage um which was the minimal growth that we saw during the last reappraisal in 2024. Uh we now are going to model the Lake County pigback provision uh we've discussed that the last few meetings so that should be no surprise to everybody. [clears throat] We are assuming a 15.8% 8% increase on all class one property during the trienal update in 2027 and we'll see a minus.34% in class 2 valuation. Um these assumptions were based on discussions with the auditor in the fall uh who stated that our trends will mirror probably what we saw in 2021 as well as what we're seeing across the state. Um, it continues to assume, as it did in October, that we'll have historical increases of class one new construction of about $10.5 million annually. And we'll see class two,
022which again is our business uh area, of about a $1.5 million loss for new construction. Um, increase class one of new construction from 8.5 to 10.5. And our most recent uh forecast in October was based on updates to historical trends of what we're seeing more recently. So, we'll continue with that going into February. Um, we assume historical increases in our public utility property tax of 2 million in 2026, but again, because of House Bill 15 changes, uh, we're going to expect that to drop down to $500,000 annually in the out years. Our collection rates in Mentor are historically very good, so we'll assume those to be 99.33%. And it assumes we'll have the continued implementation in all outy years of House Bill 96 for state funding. Uh the binding budget though only goes through 27.
023So we have to use current law to make those assumptions moving forward. Just as a quick explanation to the board and the community, House Bill 129. Um the floor calculator includes emergency and substitute levies. Uh it hadn't historically emergency and substitute levies were not included in the 20 mil floor calculation. They were exempt from being calculated in that. um when a district goes through its first reappraisal or update, that's when those will be included and I'll explain when that is for us here shortly. Um so that will impact us. House Bill 186 states that the 20 mil floor is going to be capped at a cumulative average of a deflator of the GDP. Um, another important piece of that is that the non business credit, the 10% non-b businessiness credit is going to go away
024and it's going to be phased out and it's going to be moved over to an owner occupancy credit which will go up to 15.38% and currently is about 2.5%. Um, so those people who own and live in their homes will see a increase on their credit by about 2 and a half%. because we were all getting the 10% non- business and we were all getting the two 2.5% owner occupancy. Um but to limit the credit to people who were renting or not owners and living in their homes. Um this was one of the part of House Bill 186 to give owners who are actually living in their homes an additional credit. uh as well. Uh House Bill 309 is our county budget commissions to have the authority to reduce the amount of raised by levy
025from any taxing jurisdiction when it's deemed unnecessary or excessive. Uh we saw a little bit of that discussion when we turned in our levy uh language to the auditor. Uh they had to add on line five if we were above 100% carryover for our prior year expenses uh which we are not. We are below 40% actually. Um, so there was a zero in that line for us. So, um, you're starting to see, you know, kind of that discussion that we were having of the caps being discussed more, uh, defined by unnecessary and excessive in House Bill 309. Um, and in our current situation, I don't feel that that should impact us. But we'll know more details on February 23rd when we go in front of the budget commission to share our fiscal year 27 budget
026uh that you guys passed a few months ago back in January as the first step into the fiscal year of 27's process. House Bill 335 uh relates to similar to 186. uh it creates a cap on growth of the inside millage um to a cumulative rate of inflation over the previous three years. So if you experience some of the larger valuation increases that we've experienced as of recent dates, uh your growth would be capped at that average rate over that same time period. So what does that look like? This is meant to overwhelm you and confuse you because that's kind of what the new four house bills have done to taxation across the state of Ohio. Um, it is the biggest tax reform since House Bill 920 in the early 1970s. What we thought we
027knew about understanding of property taxation and how it funded schools has been changed drastically. uh and it really has caused quite a bit of confusion not only for those receiving the tax uh funds but also those who have to calculate in the form of the auditors across the state as well as the the county treasurers who then collect the money. So with that I will try to briefly explain to everybody how this is going to work. So what is important are these arrows and what we see here for us is a new effective tax rate. Uh historically you've seen the number here this 21.77 or 21.86 uh after we saw the reappraisal in 2024. Again tax year 24 is collected in 25. So this one in fiscal year 25 tax year 25 is actually fiscical
028year 26 just as a reminder because we're collecting taxes in a rears. So you may be asking yourself why then Mr. Wade are we adding in our one emergency levy into tax year 26 which is fiscal year 27 when we don't go through reappraisal or trying to update until 27. Well, the answer is is because we have a sliver of our community that resides in Jiuary County. So, we're out in that like Morley King memorial area over there. If you try to visualize where we're at and because there is a sliver in Giaga County, the first time that you have a trial update in any portion of your community, so in any county, that's when that gets added in. So, for us, it's going to be tax year 26. So our effective millage rate on
029the outside mills. Again, we are above the floor, so this doesn't drastically impact us very much. So we'll add in our one emergency levy. Again, we only have one. So that'll take our new effective rate to 27.32. It provides our taxpayers an additional buffer in tax year 27 for the 15.8% 8% valuation increase that were projected keeping us above the floor of 20 in tax year 27 or fiscally 28 at 24.14. So now if we look at House Bill 335, so that was 129 we just talked about. Now we're going to go to 335 in tax year 27. We're actually going to see our effective millage rate on our inside millillage drop for the first time ever. So, similar to how our millage rate would dropped with House Bill 920, historically on our outside millage,
030we're going to see a similar impact on our inside millage because we're again expecting a 15.8% increase when GDP is closer to 8%. So, we can't see an increase higher than the 3-year average over GDP. So what they're going to do is they'll deflate our inside millillage to limit that growth and cap our growth at that 8%. Our new total effective millage rate when you add class 2 and now then is going to be 43.17. The piggyback is modeled on the bottom here. We see the homestead and owner occupancy credit in this fiscal year is going to be about $1.1 million and all out years it's about 2.2 increasing to $2.3 million of revenue that we'll lose uh from our collections because of the piggyback. Granted, it was only approved for one year. Here we're
031assuming that they're going to continue that credit into the outy years for some reason that they didn't or they change it and they say we're just going to do homestead and not owner occupancy. Obviously, we would change our assumptions at that time. However, I'm assuming they're going to continue out for the out years of the forecast. Again, just to explain that House Bill uh 335, when you look at our modeled weighted increase, it does drop a little bit when you model it out for all areas. Uh it's still above the GDP over the three years and that's why we see that drop from 4.8 to 4.4. four five, excuse me, 4.56. Again, capping it at that 8%. So, it's an added level of protection to all homeowners um for increases not to exceed the inflationary
032GDP over the the time period of the prior three years. Questions on that before I move on? So basically for us the ones that impact us the most are 129 and 335 >> actually. So I do have a question. So you you don't think 309 is going to impact us? >> No, I I wouldn't at this point. No, our our cash reserves are u below 40% which was one of the standards that was used. Obviously that's not the standard. >> Um the standard that they're using for um >> the levies and is is 100%. Mhm. >> Um and because we're deficit spending and we're deficit spending projected deficit spend next year, I wouldn't expect that to impact us. >> Great. Thank you. >> So again, the majority of our uh revenue comes from local property
033taxes, 67% which equates to 77.4 million with 71 million of that coming from class one and class 2. We receive about 6.5 million, excuse me, in public utility. We get 22% uh is the other majority of our state funding coming in the form of restricted and unrestricted about 17.8 million of it or almost 18 million. And again, the homestead credit, the owner occupancy and the uh roll back we get back from the state of about $7.6 million. The other revenue the majority of a big portion of that uh over a quarter of it's coming from investments that we have again lowrisk um high liquidity uh investments that we have in the form of about $3 million to $4 million a year over the last few years. So when we look at our revenue again it
034shouldn't be a surprise that the majority of our revenue is coming in the form of local property tax. That's the blue and the orange because that's the personal property tax in the orange. Uh state funding in the form of unrestricted aid is in green. Our restricted in red and then the reimbursements are here and then all of our other revenue above. I think the thing that we need to really look at on this graph is to make sure this just shows to you and the community that our assumptions are pretty reasonable in line with past revenue. Again, the increase that we see here of about $3 million is a result of the up trial update, uh, just under $3 million actually, which gets us to this new point. Again, that would be capped in the
035future based on House Bill 335. And we're pretty consistent across the board. And this is probably the most consistent that we've seen or the flattest we've seen um, ever. And that's a result of the new House bills limiting the growth even further for district revenue. Our annual change in revenue historically over the prior five years has been about 1.6%. Uh we're projecting that to be basically zero or slightly less than zero. Um that slightly less than zero goes back to kind of right here. We're seeing a slight drop and that's mainly because of if you remember we had to advance some money out and then we had to return that advance in. Um, so our revenue is a little bit inflated because we were paying oursel back for with because of the grant money we
036had to fund at the end of last fiscal year. So it's relatively flat. It's basically zero. So key takeaways from our revenue. Um, revenues is forecasted to be about $15 million and by fiscal year 30 it's expected to be down to about $13 million. Um, which is down from 117.7 that we were expecting in October. Uh again, the majority of that is because of the piggyback provision that was enacted by the county commissioners. Um this equates to a 1.62% decrease over the next 5 years. Um and inflation is expected to be about 2 and a half% a year over the next 5 years. So we're seeing growth that's less than inflation over that same time period. And I think it's fair that we can actually say our revenue is truly flat. not essentially flat. It
037is truly flat uh based on the assumptions that we're making uh on the recent changes that we've seen. From an expense standpoint, uh it should be no surprise personnel costs in the form of salaries and benefits for our teachers, support staff, exempt staff, and administrators make up uh 85%. Our purchase services are our next biggest uh category make up 11%. And our other areas which would be our supplies, our capital uh purchases make up an additional 5% with some additional things that fall into that area as well. Being a school, our enrollment data is hugely uh important to us because it really tells us the the picture for where we've been and where we're going. U with regards to staffing since it makes up 85% of our budget. Uh again, we're going to use this
038three-year uh average here um which is pretty much where we're trending u which is the gray line. Um so we're expecting a continued decline in student enrollment based on live birth data and our live birth data to kindergarteners showing up. Um so we continue to track this and look at this on a regular basis. particularly were having staffing discussions um which was taken into account by Mr. Heath and his team when they were coming up with our $2 million a year of annual reductions um to begin to continue to cap and slow the growth of our budget the most as we can. Um so with that, our key assumptions for expenses are what's on the slide uh behind us. We're expecting 3% in years 26 through 28 for salaries and benefits for our our certified
039and classified staff. So, our teaching and our support staff. Uh in 29 and 30, we're assuming one and a half% increases. Uh we're assuming the spousal coordination of benefits impact uh changes in prescription drug coverage. Uh our adjusted severances severances, excuse me, and supplemental changes. Uh we've reduced staff by eight staff members in 3 and 28 2 and 29 and 2 and 30. Um it assumes the net savings from the projected retirements and hiring of replacements uh at BA0 for next year to be about $740,000. It includes the addition of the school safety officers uh two next year and two the year after. It accounts for our our five-year capital plan, our five-year vehicle replacement plan, and our five-year technology plan. We assume less than typical inflationary growth in our two-digit object codes. And except
040for our 410s and our uh 450s, we actually bumped those up to be about 2 and a.5% and 3%. And that's because our 410s are our services that we provide. um they're they're really relying on people and typically uh most industries are giving their employees raises at that. So we're assuming that's going to be passed on to us. And our 450s is our public utilities. So we've seen drastic increases in electric and gas. Um actually much higher than 3% but we're able to lock some of our pricing in. So we feel that that's a really good assumption. Um we modified how we're calculating the impact of health insurance modeling um to be a little bit more conservative. Uh we've reflect lower rates in 27 of about 4% in and 28 and 5% in 29. Um
041we feel that these years will come in better than we had expected uh even back last year based on the rate that we saw this year before we had the R exchange and spousal coordination benefits being implemented. Um and then we'll kind of kind of go back to what would be the new normal. So we're going to shift the curve we feel with regards to our health insurance based on those plan design changes uh and concessions made during negotiations. Um which we'll we'll experience some savings on. Um so I did tweak the way we were modeling that based on this. Um it assumes a 0% increase and a freeze on steps and no performance bonuses for administration in 27. In years 28 through 30, it assumes 1.5% increases and all current benefits are continued. As
042such, again, a visual representation of the various categories of the budget are on the screen. Um, this is one of the first things I look at after I go through and kind of update my forecast just to give me a visual cue to see if anything seems out of the ordinary or something I can't explain. Um, based on the assumptions that I share with everybody, this is pretty consistent with what we would expect. You're seeing modest increases year-over-year uh in in expense growth based on basically inflationary increases. Um, so by 2030, you know, we kind of see that. I think the thing that's most important to point out to the board and the community is historically year-over-year the district has seen previously about a 2.9% increase. Uh our projected expenditure change is less than 2.5%.
043So we're expecting a change that's less than historic increases as well as lower than inflationary increases into the future. um again our commitment to continuing to control the growth of our expenses and making reductions when uh we can. The average cost to educate a student in mentor schools for fiscal year 26 is $101 a day per student. Um and that's a pretty impressive uh value if you have young kids like I still do and you have to pay for a babysitter, particularly when it's not one of their siblings. um to get 8 hours of education or 7 1/2 with transportation and only cost you $100 I think is uh pretty impressive particularly when we're talking about we're not just watching kids were providing them um with great well-rounded educational experiences. What does this mean for
044us? As we said um again highlight here where we've really been working hard to control our costs uh increases and and reduce our budgets. You can rel you know we've been able to kind of maintain a we've definitely shifted the curve I guess is what I'm trying to say here with regards to our days cash on hand. Uh, and I would just remind the board and the community, while this may seem like a big drop here from 22 to 23, the majority of that money that we took, we put into a separate fund, our 070 capital improvement fund. Uh, and we've been spending that money um on our capital improvements. And again, we adjusted that plan after the levy failure in 23 to focus strictly on uh the outer envelopes of our buildings, uh roofing,
045paving, windows and doors at the high school that needed to be updated from its original windows and doors. Uh so, you know, we've been able to kind of, you know, again, while this may even seem like a little bit of a drop, that that wasn't really money that we spent. We put it away to to have to do specific projects. Um what we're seeing though as we continue on based on the assumptions that we've made for revenue and expenses that we will continue to deficit spend and start to spend down our cash reserves. Uh and obviously we know this is not allowable in the state of Ohio. You can't have a negative cash balance. Um so that's something that we need to address. Likewise, the district has its own general fund operating budget reserve policy
046that states that we can't fall below 15% of our annual total general fund expenses. So for us, this is about 17.3 million, which we would fall below at the end of fiscal year 29. Uh don't forget as well, we set aside a 5% kind of rainy day budget reserve fund, which statute totally can't exceed 5% of the prior year's revenue. So, we can't be above $5.7 million in that fund. So, between the two, basically what we're stating is you can't allow the board, you cannot allow our cash balance to fall below that without action. So, in October, this was our general kind of path. Uh, you know, this year we're in the green. Next year we were in that middle yellow, bottom yellow, getting into the the danger zone. Remember, we only had about $3
047million in 2030. Well, based on some of the changes that have occurred from revenue loss, we see that that has been shifted down as we would expect, which is the reason why the district uh made the decision on my recommendation to put a 4.9 mil levy that would generate about $13.5 million a year and cost the average taxpayer about $415 a year as well on the ballot. So I did update this chart again just for everybody in the room. This top turquoise area is our benchmark that we established last year because we said that we can't just ask for revenue. We have to make cuts. >> Um we have to be committed to making cuts um to to slow growth and um to take a dual approach to any sort of consideration. Uh we have
048met those benchmarks this year and next year. We're off by a little bit again here by $162,000, but that's that's not material. Uh we still have some work to do in 28, 29, and 30. You can see those numbers listed here, how much we have to continue to find uh to cut to meet those out years. Um as we get later on, we will get more in line with those. You know, some of that's just mathematical assumptions. When you're talking about such large numbers, a tweak here or there has a ripple effect further on down the line. Uh Mr. Heath and his team have a good plan in place to make sure that we hit our benchmarks. The key being then if we were to pass a levy and we'd collect the first payment here
049and then $13.5 million in the out years and we stayed true to the cuts that we've committed to. we would be deficit spending again by and looking at additional revenue again in 2032. So that levy would last at least six years. Again, higher than the average levy uh cycle in the state of Ohio. And our goal would be to push that out to, you know, seven or eight even. Again, again, when you're talking about assumptions, the further you get out, the margin of error, as you can imagine, like kind of fluctuates the ripple, right? So 1% on $115 million 3, four, 5 years out causes a bigger fluctuation. So um kind of where we're at on the current picture. I wanted to show this slide. I know it's confusing. There's a lot of information on
050there, but for us as a board and with uh Mr. Hagen, Mr. Hary joining us, I think it's important to kind of continue to have that systematic approach to this. The key being that we're talking about strategic cuts with a benchmark ceiling that we've we've we've agreed to and then seeing that again even with a 4.9 mil levy um with the current forecast we're still getting out six to seven years. So the summary is we continue to deficit spend. Um so we got to continue to find ways to monitor our spending and control cost to keep our growth below inflation if not better to bend that curve, stretch that dollar while maintaining the level of excellence in the classroom and the programs that we have here in the district. Um, again, we'll fall below our
051recommended minimum standard 90 days cash after fiscal year 28. So, why now? Why are we talking about a levy now? That's why now. You know, you don't want to be driving off the cliff. You know, you this is good planning. We've been talking about this for years. This isn't the first time we've had this discussion. I know it may be new to some people um because it's the first they're hearing about it, but we've been saying this for for I I've been saying it since 21 since I started. So, we finally kind of got to this point. So, when we fall below 90 cash, that's that's a that's a systematic problem that we have to do. Um and again by policy by the end of year fiscal year 29 the district has to to take
052action per policy. U if we don't pass the 4.9 mil levy in 2026 as we've discussed we'll have to cut $3.4 million going into 27. And if it doesn't pass in November 26, it would be my recommendation that you cut another $3.4 million as soon as possible. That does not mean the end of the fiscal year. That means as close to November as possible, just to be clear, so that we would reduce $6.8 million in expenses to make up for the loss of $6.8 million in revenue that we would have collected in that next fiscal year in 27. Um, these cuts would be in addition to the annual reductions to meet our annual expense goals. I did share this uh forecast presentation a little bit more detail uh with the citizens financial advisory last Wednesday,
053February 4th, and it was recommended for approval uh by the board of education. I'm happy to answer any questions that the board may have. Can you go to the bar graph on revenue? >> So the blue portion is property tax, correct? >> Yes, correct. This is the Yep. property tax. >> And you talked about how it's flat, and I can kind of see that it's flat. I mean, there seems like just out in the community when we're talking, we've had re-evaluations. Like, where's where's the spike? What am I missing? Like, is why aren't we seeing a big spike in property tax revenue? >> So, if I'm understanding correctly, and I'm going to I'm going to use the graph that's up here as a reference point. The teacher made me. So, you're you're saying, why are
054we not seeing something like this? >> Mhm. >> Over here. >> Yeah. Well, remember the only growth that we saw after the 24 re-evaluation was on the inside millillage >> which caused the majority of this increase here. So, let's just say a little bit under $3 million. >> Yeah. >> However, now with the House Bill 335 keeping that growth to not be higher than GDP, we're not expecting to see that same kind of bump. from 27 to 28, we'll see a little bit of an increase. It'll be about 8%. Um, but with that reduction factor that we showed here of 4.8 going down to 4.56, it'll be even less than we saw historically. >> So, it's not a windfall. It's not like we >> Well, I would argue Yeah. We we see this is the
055confusion across the state of Ohio, right? >> Mhm. I don't know if I would say any district got a windfall, but if you're on the floor, some districts experienced a much larger growth in revenue than districts like ours who weren't on the floor because our community was protected by House Bill 920 as I've shared a number of times. >> So, even a district next door like Willie Eastlake who was at the floor, they saw double-digit increases in revenue based on the fact that they were on the floor. Uh we didn't. We saw uh again I'm not dismissing that $3 million or just under $3 million isn't a large >> sum of money. >> Yeah. >> But when you look at $3 million on $112 million it's it's under 3% or way around 3%. Um >>
056that doesn't that's not even a day's operating, you know. So when you look at it from that perspective, you got to kind of normalize it a little bit and it's hard to do when we're talking about such such large numbers. Um, but understandably so, the legislature had to make some adjustments to protect local taxpayers like they did back in the 70s because of House Bill 920 because we were seeing higher than normal increases. >> Um, so that's why you have House Bill 186, that's how you have House Bill uh 129 and 335 coming into play. We could argue for days on the rationale behind that and everything else, but it is ultimately to protect the taxpayer from those large valuation increases, particularly when you have 23 of your districts on the floor. Again, we're not
057we never saw that, but there's an added layer of protection for our community in the form of House Bill 335 that will limit that inside growth um even further. So, we will not see increases. I think the to your point the the confusion with in the community and this is this stuff is very confusing to th even those of us who hear about it and learn about it every day but um when when when you say there we didn't get a wind there was no windfall people are saying but you got an increase so it sounds like you're there's the play on words to deceive so I think if you follow with your that with your statement and your explanation of yes we did get an increase yes you did see an increase in in
058your um property taxes, but it's it it's not enough to make us whole or bring us to another, you know, to where we need to be. But it's misleading when people say, "Well, wait a minute. What do you mean? You're telling me that I I just feel like the way it's phrased whether we didn't get a windfall is being like, well, we you didn't get enough money. You still got an increase." And that's what people feel at home. And so, I think that is why there's such a misunderstanding, you know, out out with the public. So explaining the whole picture I think is important versus just making it look like we didn't get anything extra. >> Well, we we've always said we got extra. So I I don't think we've ever not said that. I
059think the confusion >> not necessarily you know I think I think the confusion is different districts the extra they got is substantially different than neighboring districts based on your your own situation. Right. So, and if I'm talking to a neighbor, let's say in Perry or a district like Willie Eastlake who's on the floor, the increase that I would have saw in my property taxes would have been substantially larger than it would be a taxpayer inventor. So, just when you're talking to your friends and you you think you understand and it's just that added layer of confusion, right? That it's not what's happening in our community is not the same thing that's happening in in a community that's directly adjacent to us. So that causes confusion as well, I think, added to, you know, a couple
060that um but whether you like it or not, or we like it or not, or wherever we're at, the reality is is the legislators put additional safeguards in place to help protect from these um atypical spikes that we've seen in valuation over the last five years, particularly since a lot of districts are on the floor. Other questions? >> Okay. >> So, with that, Madame President, members of the board, Mr. Heath. Um, action required by law, items B through E and addendums may be acted on in one motion. >> Do I have a motion? So moved. >> Second. >> Is there any more discussion? Please call the role. >> Miss Ao, >> yes. >> Miss Martza, >> yes. >> Mr. Hardesty, >> yes. >> Miss Cook, >> yes. >> Motions carry 4 Z. I have three
061separate [clears throat] ones we have to do separately. So, I'll I'll just do each one of those at uh once. >> Thank you, >> Madam President. Members of the board, Mr. Heath, I ask the resolution for accepting roof project bids be considered. >> So, moved. Second. Is there any discussion? Please call the role. I would just note for the board and the community um the bids came in about $800,000 lower than expected based on some um project engineering that Mr. Beckello and his team did with our consultant. So, we're pleased to announce that. >> That's great. >> Miss Cook, >> yes. >> Miss Marchazza, >> yes. >> Mr. Hardesty, >> yes. >> Miss Aylo, >> yes. >> Motions carry 40. Madame President, members of the board, Mr. Heath. I ask that the physical projections for
062years 25 26 through 28 through 29 be certified. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Is there any discussion? >> Please call the role. >> Miss Cook, >> yes. >> Miss Marchazza, >> yes. >> Mr. Hardesty, >> yes. >> Miss Appo, >> yes. >> Motion carries 40. >> Madame President, members of the board, Mr. Heath, I ask that the district liability fleet property and casualty insuranceances be accepted. So moved. >> Second. >> Any discussion? >> Again, just happy to announce that we did not see a rate increase. Our premiums did see uh an increase uh but that was more so in the lines with the fact that we added some extra coverage uh for our buses to make sure that they are fully insured on the new prices because we've seen such a spike in the
063price of a bus in comparison to when we bought them. So full replacement cost as well as a property valuation increase that we saw that occurred um which raised our premiums uh for that. Our actual increase year-over-year is about 4 and a.5% um down drastically from last year as I shared with you. U so we're happy to secure this uh for this year. >> Thank you, >> Miss Cook. >> Yes. >> Mr. Hardesty. >> Yes. Miss Alo, >> yes. >> Miss Marcha, >> yes. >> Motion carries 40. And that concludes my portion. >> Thank you. We have one item under unfinished business this evening and we are going to revisit the discussion of um 2431, which is Intercolastic Athletics. Mr. Heath, would you like to start this off for us? >> Sure. uh back in
064the fall uh we brought some of this language uh to the group uh for discussion um and decided at that point to table it until uh a little bit later on. Um one of the things I can share with the group that uh we've been kind of working through is just taking a close look at all of our expenses as it relates to all of our uh intercolastic athletics uh including ice hockey. Um just to to see again what's you know the supplies, officials, workers, police, uh entry fees, rentals, the supplementals, transportation, everything. Um what is the total cost of each of our programs? Um to kind of get a a sense of what it is that we're looking at. Um and really trying to identify what is that cost per athlete for each of
065our sports as well. Um so we're we're continuing to dig into this a little bit more. Um obviously right now uh as we enter um you know an operating levy and and continuing to uh try and cut $2 million per year um in addition to some of the other things that Mr. Wade just shared with us. Um, I I think it's it's it's probably good to maybe have this conversation uh maybe towards summer as we get ready for our u 2627 school year. Um, we obviously would have time to to make any adjustments at that point. Um, but we'll have a better picture financially where we are in the district. Um, and then, uh, the other thing we're we're looking at is, you know, what are those pay to participate fees right now? Um, could
066a a slight increase help, uh, in that regard? Um, could we have a a kind of a sliding scale based on the actual sport? Um, since we'll have a pretty close estimate to what those uh per athlete costs are to run that uh particular sport. um looking into some of the legal guidance with that as well because uh obviously we we can't charge uh one athlete in in a sport a a different amount than another athlete in that sport. Um, I know that was one of the things that was asked if we were to consider this this type of uh policy language change. Could we actually charge the out of district students more than our indist is no. Um, but could we charge the same amount to all of the athletes in that one particular
067sport and have that different than the others is is one of the questions that we're kind of digging into as well. So, we've done a lot of work uh over the last couple of months on this. Just kind of seeing where we are financially with all of our our athletics. Um and and really I think probably the the best course would be to maybe bring this up again uh June July time frame to get get us ready for the 2627 school year. >> Thank you Mrs. March. I know you have asked to have this discussion so if you wanted to >> appreciate that. Thank you madam president and thank you Mr. Heath for coming to us with a re-examination. And I just I did want to add this to the agenda because we heard from
068a a large number of folks about this both in district and out of district and um you know they're they're advocating in absolutely the right way and um I can definitely see their perspective here. Uh so I thought it was worth a re-examination. Thank you for doing that. Uh, and just, you know, I look forward to looking for some solutions for these folks um that are also going to allow us to stay in line with the expenses that we need to be cutting and the cuts that we need to be making. So, um, looking forward to the discussion and and thank you, >> Mr. Heath, what is the amount of students and I think mostly are from Riverside. Is that right, that want to come on for the hockey? >> I Yeah, I think think
069there were a couple from Riverside, maybe one from Kirtland. Uh there was one other one. I can't remember what district they were coming from, but uh I I think when we originally brought that to the board back in the fall, there was one uh and I think it was the Kirtland family. Um and literally the next day, there were three others that that came on board um that wanted to to potentially participate as well. Um so we're not talking about a huge number at this point. Um, uh, I think a lot will depend on, uh, Lake Catholic and their move. Uh, I believe they're, uh, reinstating their own ice hockey team for next year, too. Um, and and that's been, I I believe some of the, um, concern from some of the emails that we've
070received. And again, Miss Marcha, to your point too, I think that the nice thing about it is uh some of these families that are reaching out are now currently participating in the youth program here in Menor and they're just trying to plan ahead as well. Um so, uh you know, it's not a lastm minute type of of of decision that would need to be made. This is something that they're trying to plan for the next >> few years because they're still in the youth hockey program here in Menor, >> right? Yeah. So, if we're only talking about four, is it is it something that the board would consider asking you, you know, to can you talk to the superintendents at those other at the two districts and just do something tentative just for four and
071cap it at that? Um because that is like you you mentioned I mean if they are planning you know we don't want kids to who are in the youth program to consider who may otherwise consider menor to to look at private school because they can't because you know let's face it I'm an example a lot of you know people choose schools based on extracurriculars that's a big part of their you know their child's um experience. So, you know, if it's just four people, I think that that's something that can't really, you know, you're not talking about increased costs on busing for four people, uniforms, um, paperwork for admin costs. I mean, that's not going to really affect anybody for four. Um, and then, you know, see if they want to those districts want to pick
072up the tab on and a little bit just to to offset any minor costs. But I think that's something I know this these families have been um great about speaking up and advocating. The students have even been advocating and if it's if it's a if we could do it on a case-byase basis, not change policy or anything major because so we can always protect um our students um I think that that's something that's worth doing versus making them wait to the summer. >> So two parts to this. I just want to make sure I've got the questions uh because these are probably going to be more legal questions than uh just moving forward with them. But uh can we cap the number of students coming from outside districts to participate is question one. And then
073question two, are we allowed to ask the superintendent of those respective districts to help offset the cost? >> Yes. And I think that is um Ohio Vice Code that you can you can't charge them more, but you can ask their district to foot the bill. >> We'll look into th those two questions and give you guys an update ASAP. >> Thank you. >> Thanks. >> As as we're discussing this, I just wanted to talk a little bit about a discussion um Mr. Wade and I had just about what does it cost to to run the hockey program. So, our current costs um it's currently $76,000 for a hockey program and we do cut athletes currently. So, some of our athletes don't not all of our athletes that go out for the team make the team
074and so we have a really a set number of athletes on the team. It costs us $2,000 per athlete. So, we are really funding, you know, our our participation fee is currently $200 for all of our sports. So, we're funding the extra the extra money. So, you know, what we're looking at here, while, you know, I like the idea of being inclusive and and having kids that have played together be there and have a strong team, we we also have to really think about how the men are taxpayers would be subsidizing these other communities that cannot or choose not to fund a hockey program. So, that's a consideration that we have to make with this decision. >> Yeah, I mean, I agree. I spoken with Mr. Heath and talked about how frustrating it is because
075you can't increase the paytoplay because we're st statutoily restricted. But I do like Rose's idea. if there is another way to have these non-district athletes pay their freight rather than having the community that they're uh not contributing to financially to pay the freight. Um then I would have no issue with this. It's all about, you know, basically not having the community pay for non-district students. So, if there is a way for uh the other school districts to, you know, pay the fees or if there's a way to pay for non-residential ice time to the to make up for the deficit or to pay the freight, I would definitely be for this, but I know our hands are kind of tied with the pay to play. So, if there's other avenues like the districts, you know,
076paying for their students or like I said, a non-residentime fee, which maybe isn't a payto-play, but is a different fee? I don't know. We could definitely move forward. >> What is the bulk of that 76,000? Is it the what we paid of for the ice rink for rent the rental? Um, >> can you give us an itemized list of what that because that's high for a year. >> Yeah, the rental is about 28,000 in and of itself. >> And that's what that you're putting that's part of that the 76. >> Yeah, that's part of that 76. >> You were including for me when we spoke coaches, rentals. Um, we also rent like >> we rent the ice and then >> Yeah, that was the Yeah, the 20,000 is the rental. It's fees, police officers, workers,
077officials, supplies, supplementals, and transportation. >> Okay. But again, four players is not going to >> I mean, that's true of anything though, right? I mean, you could I mean, we could I mean, I think we're trying I I guess the only thing that I'll say is the thing that I've said before is it's our responsibility to provide opportunities for district residents. If Riverside or Kirtland want to provide opportunities for their students, they they should incur the cost or to your point, Miss Appo, I think is a good one is if they're potentially if it's allowable and that's something that the board wants to consider >> if they want to co cover the cost of a student athlete and we have space available. I don't know. You know, now you're going to get into things like
078open enrollment and open enrollment policies and you're going to get, you know, trying to do those into school and that's that's for smarter people than the CFO to kind of get into that discussion. Uh, but from a strictly from a financial standpoint, subsidizing the cost of athletics for any other community when we don't need to do that does not make fiscal sense to me. If they can cover the cost to it and it makes it saves them money because it would cost them probably relatively the same, right? It doesn't matter how many kids are playing, it's still going to cost about $70 to $76,000 depending upon the investment that you have into it. It's probably why they don't have that sport, right? Or they don't have the interest. So, um, if they wanted to provide
079their students with that opportunity and we had the space here and it's something that could be worked out, I wouldn't stand in the way of the board of education from a fiscal sense of that. Um, but to say that the men are taxpayers are going to subsidize Kirtland's $2,000 or Riverside's $2,000 per student athlete doesn't make a whole lot of fiscal sense to me. I'll I'll leave my final point will just be yes, we want to make sure that we are investing in our players and I would I think it's important that having some of these players um from outside these are um teammates that they've had since they were youth hockey. Um they this that does having them on the team benefits our players and it was actually we didn't receive a single at
080least I didn't receive a single um email complaint. I haven't heard anything from someone saying we they're against it because then my kid might get cut or men or kids might get cut because I think it's just they're they are uh I'm pretty impressed by their family unit in this hockey. I didn't know a lot about our hockey program until all of this. But um it does contribute to the positive experience of our players. Um and we want to keep them here. We want to keep them happy. So, um, but yes, I think we agree if we can figure out if the other if their home district wants to, um, contribute, there's really no reason not to do it on a case- by case basis. Thank you. Is there any more discussion about [cough] Excuse
081me. >> No. Okay. Um, let's see. Our next No, we are now on new business. We have two items under new business and our first one is our administrator cell phone discussion and I'm going to ask Mr. Wade to start us off on this one because I know he did some research for us and then we will move to Mr. Hardesty who requested this on the agenda figures I can't find my notes. Um, Madame President, uh, appreciate that. I had sent out a survey to all the CFOs that are affiliated with, uh, the Northeast Ohio ESC. Um, I got 41 responses back uh, on that survey. At the time, uh, 27 districts pay a stipend, 12 didn't pay a stipen, but of the 12 who didn't, there were four who provide cell phones. So, you're
082looking at 31 out of 41 that provide either a stipen or cell phone. And then there was another district that just gives their treasurer a cell phone. >> It's interesting to me. Um, [laughter] >> convenient. >> Yeah, very convenient. I I don't, for the record, I don't want a cell phone. Um, the average stipen was $60.60 for those who gave stipens. Um, I did reach out to AT&T and Verizon as well to see what their corporate plans would cost the district. Um, their per month, per phone line cost was $30. Um, obviously that $30 doesn't include the cost to administer the plan on our end from an oversight. Um, and logistic piece of that as well. Um, so, you know, that's that's the information that I had. Just as a reminder, our current cell phone
083stipen is $80 per month and has been that for years. >> Thank you, Mr. Hardesty. >> Yeah. So when I joined the board, there were some community concerns and this was one of them. So I started to dive in and asked a bunch of questions and it just seemed like our current rate is $80 a month uh per uh administrator and that just seemed high. So I reached out and Mr. Wade was already doing a market survey. So, um, I asked if there could be an adjustment to the cell phone, you know, uh, aotment or stipened, and he stated that there could be. So, I wanted to bring it up for discussion and see if all of you agreed. And I would just caution the board that or remind the board, I don't know if
084caution is the right way to say it, is that um typically in the past, historically, we've done types of discussions on benefits and and negotiations in executive session. Um I think it's good to share initial information out in the open session, but if the board's considering a reduction of benefits or compensation for employees, we've historically done that in executive session. So I would encourage the board to consider that. Um you then can once a decision is made come back out in open session and share what you would but um typical discussion particularly when you talk about the reduction of a benefit or salary uh is done in executive session. >> Do we want to enter executive session? I'm assuming that's what the point of the topic was. I would be more comfortable having any discussion
085about a current contract that we have and we have employees that agree to that contract to happen in executive session and I don't know if the board feels that you know maybe we could do that at the end of our meeting tonight or if we wanted to um schedule executive session in the future on this topic. I don't know how urgent we feel it is, but I'm I would feel more comfortable with it's it's a kind of a point of negotiation. >> I'm fine with if we tack it on to the end. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> Thank you. We're going to move on to our next discussion then and this one is the Manor Schools Foundation Pasta for a purpose. M [clears throat] >> I think that's me. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I
086thought Mr. >> I defer to Miss Mark. >> Thank you. I asked to add this just as a a note to the community um that the Met Schools Foundation trustees have been working hard to organize this event. It's an annual one. Normally happens in the past. I think it's happened at yours truly. Uh however, this so this is a new location for us and we're really excited about it. It'll happen this Saturday on Valentine's Day. Yes. Uh bring your sweetheart. It'll be from 1 to 4:00 p.m. It is familyfriendly. Um kids are most welcome, of course. Uh it'll be a pasta bar with salad, bread, drinks, and desserts, several raffle prizes, and a 50/50 raffle. Um, there is a minimum donation of $20, [music] uh, suggested, not required, but suggested, and all proceeds benefit the
087Menor Schools Foundation, which is, as a reminder, an independent nonprofit organization that supports teacher-led projects to enhance the education of our students. Um, so if you can make it, please do attend. Bring your friends. Um, and if you cannot attend, you actually still can donate to support the event. Um they have actually just pinned a donation link on their Facebook page so you can navigate on over there and donate if you can't attend. Thank you. Next we have hearing of the public on any topic. Mr. W. >> Thank you. Our first speaker is Alex Fish. Can you hear me? Okay. So, thank you for the time to address you. Thank you for adding the intercolastic hockey discussion on the agenda since um I can't speak for myself because I was not a hockey athlete, but
088a number of people who I played pickle ball with are affected by it as well as people who I hang out with at the rec center who also are affected by it. And then uh to close with using just over 30 seconds, I'd have to say this is the best board me school board meeting in a while. So, thank you for the time to address you and have a good night. And thank you for your Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker is John Sanford. Thank you. I just wanted to take a quick moment, Madam President, members of the board, to thank you again for putting the levy on uh getting the levy moving. I think it's a very important piece for us to consider how do we budget for
089good education. One of the things that I know is this area when we moved here was identified as having a solid educational system in place. I am concerned that as we begin the process of looking at the steady de decline that um Mr. Wade has outlined, you know, what will that do if we have to continue to take that much money off of our funding? >> Mr. Samford, could you speak into the microphone a little more? It's a little hard to hear. >> It's always set too low. >> Thank you. >> Sorry about that. Just that I I I encourage you to consider to continue the process. Uh the metaphor that I've seen out there is what does a family do when their incre expenses increase and they are stuck with no increase in their
090funding in their job? If you lose a job or whatever, how many families have to work? Two jobs. Um this is in effect a way of keeping us from having to cut things off. So I really value this. You're going to see more discussions like can we reduce this benefit by this much while we increase that over here? How's it going to affect our students? I wish you the best of luck on it and I again support the levy. Thank you. >> Thank you >> David Le for sure. Board President Cook, Board Members, Mr. Heath, Mr. Wade, House Bill 671, which proposes withholding state funding from school districts involved in lawsuits against the state's voucher program and releasing those funds only if a school district withdraws from the lawsuit is a travesty [laughter] and represents
091a strong arm effort a aptly described as nothing more than extortion. Jamie Calendarer, who introduced the legislation, and Senator Serino, who supports it, are two local legislative representatives, I believe, are attempting through legislation to pressure the mentor school board from joining the lawsuit. I urge the board to not bend a knee and join the lawsuit. Joining the vouchers hurt Ohio lawsuit will protect public school budgets and Ohio's voucher system drains resources and creates a separate and unmonitored educational system that lacks accountability, transparency, and anti-discrimination standards. This lawsuit seeks to uphold our own state constitutional mandate to fund a thorough and efficient public education system prohibiting any part of the state school funds from going to religious or other sects. This unprecedented effort to dismantle Ohio public school system through the voucher system must be challenged
092by this board. Failure to do so means that this board would share responsibility for withholding state funding to school districts involved in the lawsuit should HB671 become law. join the vouchers hurt Ohio lawsuit. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Zoe Baringer. Good evening. My name is Zoe Baringer and tonight I am here to address a very important topic that I once brought up to the city council. Last spring, as I was on my daily trip to the park, I saw a border patrol vehicle parked at Menor Beach Park watching a family play on the playground. My immediate thought went to the children playing on the playground, the mother watching them, and maybe even the fear that they were feeling. I then spoke to the Menor City Council, questioning why they were
093there and if Menor would work with them. The city council offered me no concrete response at the moment. I have not seen border patrol in Menor since. I did question the Menor city council if they had a plan if I were to go into the schools and I was informed that that is completely up to the school board with some research especially in schools around us. Schools and districts like Akran have released a plan in case ICE were to try and go into a school building and protocol if ICE were to try to take a child off a bus stop so at least someone would be aware of the child's whereabouts. Um, one thing that concerns me is the potential of a FURPA violation because one of the school resource officers does not understand that
094legally the school reserves the right to deny an ICE officer entrance into the building because the property is private and that school re that the school resource officer may offer privilege information into that student's whereabouts. Students and parents have a right to to privacy under federal law and that includes their right to privacy about their legal status, where they live, and most personal things. Schools have the right to reserve their status as a private property and deny entrance to an ICE officer looking for a student as long as that ICE officer does not have a judicial warrant to enter and search the building. Most people, including myself, have a difficulty distinguishing between a judicial and administrative warrant. That is why the ACLU of Ohio in their letter to school districts states that very clearly that
095at every step of the process of an ICE agent approaching the school that there is the advice of legal counsel. I'm not asking that the school district try and interfere with an ICE operation. I'm just asking that they reserve their right to protect their students like many other districts in the area have done. There are grave consequences for a child who is taken into ICE custody. Throughout the past few months, ICE has been unable to locate people. There are reports of rape and sexual assaults happening within these detention facilities. And in 2025, the amount of people who died in ICE custody rose exponentially. And even people with legal legal status like 5-year-old Liam Kjo Ramos leaving who was leaving school was detained by ICE and he was a legal citizen because of the increased present
096presence of homeland security and ICE within Cleveland and the surrounding areas. It is of my firm belief that the school district needs to develop a clear and instructional policy so that no one gets hurt. I understand that the Minor school district and city does not have a large immigrant population, but if the school district can have a plan in case a nuclear bomb goes off, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for a plan if ICE tries to enter a school. Thank you everyone for staying seated and good evening. >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Lim Mazika. Madame President, members of the board, Mr. Heath, Mr. Wade, thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening. After listening to Mr. Wade's report. I am more and more convinced that we have to pass
097this levy in May. [sighs] I feel like I'm falling down and spinning in a rabbit hole. Every time the state legislature meets, things just get more and more complicated and ridiculous. Instead of accepting their responsibility to fund public schools, Hello. It's instead of ex accepting their responsibility to fund public schools in Ohio, they seem to be doing everything in their power not only to avoid their duty, but also to continue to cut funds to public schools. What a sad state of affairs. Even with all men's cuts to the budget each and every year, the state and the county keep cutting our funds. I want Menor to continue to provide a highquality public education to our kids and I see no way we can do this without the money we'll get from the levy. Thank you
098for your time. [applause] >> Thank you. Our last speaker is Brian Baringer. I'm here to speak in favor of the levy. Um I have four kids in Menor schools and I have a business in Menor. When I'm trying to recruit people to come move to Menor for my business, um I can I can start with offering them a six-f figureure uh starting bonus. And the first thing that they switch the conversation to is, "Yeah, but how are the schools?" And I can say, "They're amazing. The schools here are great." Right? [snorts] I moved here 18 years ago so that I so that my kids could go to these schools, right? And I know what the alternative looks like. And my freshman class had 500 people. Of that 500, 300 graduated, right? The top 10 kids
099in my class, a handful of them graduated college. And I know that's that's hard for people in menor to imagine, but that's where we're headed if we don't pass this levy. Right? People here live in a wonderful suburban bubble and they can't imagine what it's like in other places. If you think I'm being dramatic, um I I'm not. That's what the world looks like outside of here. I I've heard people on the board talk about um making sure we have competitive benefits and salaries. Competitive is not good enough. These these schools are like a business. If you cut benefits, salaries, increase uh class size, um reduce the quality of our of our buildings, the best administrators, and the best teachers are going to leave. They're going to go somewhere else. the quality of our education
100is going to go down. So, I guess I'm here, you know, just to beg everybody to take this seriously. Like, if you're on the board and you're in favor of this levy, then say that. If you're scared by everything that Mr. Wade is saying, say that loudly and often. Go out there and tell as many people as you can why the city needs this. If you're not in favor of this lovey, then I I just I just beg you to listen to Mr. wait and ask questions, right? This is not a time to score political points, you know, for some gig that you want in the future. It's not the time for posturing. If you're panicked, say you're panicked, okay? Um because there's real consequences. Like real people are going to get hurt. You know,
101the city is going to suffer, the community is going to suffer. That's all I have to say. Thank you. [applause] Thank you. Was that our last speaker? Okay. We will now be going into executive session to discuss the compensation of a public official. We can leave our >> Do I have a motion to move into executive session? >> So move. >> Second. [clears throat] Please call the role. >> Miss Apple? >> Yes. >> Miss Marchazza? >> Yes. >> Mr. Hardesty? >> Yes. >> Miss Cook? >> Yes. >> Motion carries. 40. Head into executive session at 7:30 p.m. So moved. >> Yep. >> Do I have a motion to adjurnn? [laughter] >> You give me the You give me a point. >> Do I have a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Please
102call the role. >> Mr. Hardesty, >> yes. >> Miss Martza, >> yes. >> Miss Apple, >> yes. >> Miss Cook, >> yes. Meeting is adjourned at 8:00. 8 8:21 my husband 8.