001Um, let's go ahead and take a 5-minute break while we wait for it to come back on. Did Is that Just wait? Okay. All right, let's go ahead and take a 5-minute break. Yeah. >> Mhm. >> Um All right, we are returning after a short break due to some technical difficulties. Um Sammy's into questions seem a bit more involved than just clarifying. Would you mind if we opened the community save them until after the community comment section? Sure. Okay. Um then Are we asking questions about things in the document or just your presentation? What are we asking questions about right now? Sorry. It's just if there's any like clarification on what was said in the presentation. We still have the public comment period and then also the discussion period after that. Yeah, yeah. Okay, thanks.
002Okay. Uh we will now open the public comment period. We value the lived experiences of students, families, staff, and community members and welcome public comment as an necessary and important part of the committee's work. The complete guidelines for public comment are available on the registration table at the back of the room and are electronically attached to the agenda for this meeting. I will share a few important points now. When it's your turn to speak, please come forward, have a seat, and direct your comments to the committee. Before you start your comments, please state your name for the record and state whether you reside within the school district and boundary. You'll have 3 minutes to make your comments. I will alert you when you have 30 seconds left and when your time is up, the light
003on the is on lights on the counter will turn from green to yellow at the 30-second mark and from yellow to red at the end of the 3 minutes. Following your comments, the committee will have 3 minutes to ask clarifying questions, but we are not able to engage in conversation. If committee members would like to revisit a topic or issue brought up during the public comment, they may do so at the appropriate time in the agenda. Please recall that the budget committee is different from that of the school board. Specifically, the budget committee cannot set salaries, benefits, or contract terms, set staffing levels, or change the district's organizational structure, make decisions regarding programs or services offered or funded, make or alter district goals or policy. Additionally, please note that the superintendent's proposed budget is balanced.
004Uh If you are commenting on a request to increase or decrease budget expenditures, it would be helpful if you also identify the corresponding decrease and vice versa. Um There are no public comments. Hearing no comments, the public hearing is now closed. Um Let's see. Before we begin committee discussions, does any committee member wish to make any disclosures for the record? Okay. Um we will now move into our deliberation phase. I'll open the floor to the committee for discussion including any specific inquiries or requests for further data from Ryan or Lauren. Um Yes. So. Bernie? Yes, I have a question for Lauren. Um fund 100 general fund um object 590. Um can you explain what that's for? Momentarily, yes. What What page are you referring to, Bernie? >> I I I I just wrote down the
005notes. I don't have the page itself. Oh, wait, wait. I got it. Yeah. Okay. Um yes. So, that is uh really just a accounting function. Um and so, we are required um by GASB, generally accepted No, that's GAAP. Uh standards board. Thank you, Carla, for the assist there. Um And so, we are required by um a recent GASB, probably 3 or 4 years ago, to account for another acronym, which is called SPIDERS, which is fun. Um which is a subscription-based information technology arrangements. Um and so, um that is what that is related to. So, in the budget, it's a neutral expense, so you'll see there's a corresponding revenue and expenditure. It's how we have to account for them. Um it in my opinion is meaningless and um, annoying that we have to do that, but
006it is what it is um, and that's something that our auditors track. So, that is why it's there. Um, so it's GASB um, and that is the offsetting entry is the long-term debt financing sources and then capital outlay um, of that 400,000. So, it recognizes in the um, in the budget, it recognizes the total value of the software um, as an intangible right to use. It's again, not very relevant to school districts, but it's required in uh, governmental accounting. And it's neutral. Like it's net zero. Apologies to Sammy for skipping you, but we'll go to Sammy now and then Cassandra next. Thank you and apologies for the community if this is a repeat, so we don't know when the recording cut, so I'll just repeat it for the record. Uh, and I think I mispronounced
007it to Lauren, could you clarify what's the meritorious budget award uh, mean for uh, what does it what does it mean and how would the school district gets it and then the second question is related to page 33 uh, the budget to goal alignments methodology. As you map the strategic alignment of resources to board goals, uh, could you walk us through that methodology and any revelations or learnings that have transpired from this process? Sure. So, the first question regarding the the MBA um, award is um, it is issued by ASBO International, which is the Association of School Business Officials um, the international organization. It's the membership is largely um within the United States, but we also have members in Canada, Australia, South Africa, so all around the globe. Um and it is an award um
008that really shows a budget that provides information with more clarity, context, um and purpose for all um community members so they can better understand the financial decisions that the district is making. Um so what it requires is a uh pretty substantial um list of things that must be in your document. Um and then you have to you get reviewed by your peers every year upon submission um and then have to then on the subsequent year if you apply for it again, um show your progress based on the changes that are made. Um we have received it I think for eight eight or nine years in a row um and we are one of five districts in the state of Oregon um that have earned the award. Um the second question, do you want to answer
009that or you want me to? Okay. We're I will let her cuz she largely did that. Um so this was the first year that we were kind of tasked with this exercise, so we kept it pretty simple for this year and we can always um grow upon it and refine it in the future. Um but essentially the methodology was mapping our function budget codes um typically to a single goal and as Lauren kind of mentioned, normally a program or a function probably serves more than one goal, but for this first year um we selected kind of a single goal um that addressed kind of the core nature of the service. Um from there it was primarily the instruction um function that we realized that really splits into many different goals, so we then did a
010position override. Um and my example for that is a kindergarten teacher who has a function of 1111 would map to excellent learning. Um, whereas a, um, elementary art teacher would map to, um, relevant and engaging. So, that was kind of the structure that we did. Um, the first one it would look to was the function, and then it would also look at a position code and kind of override that to a different, um, goal. Phenomenal. Thank you so much. All right, Cassandra. So, my question is similar to Sammy's. Um, I'm really curious about this methodology, and I thought that the community could also benefit from understanding I I don't think I heard about the revelations cuz this was a new process, and I will also add a thank you cuz I brought this up last
011year. I don't know um, I remember Lauren, and I was really excited to see that roll up cuz that tells the community and staff and all of us why you're making the choices you are. So, I want to thank you for that, but I am really curious about how you landed on the methodology, perhaps where those best practices came from, where the idea of it, and how did it benefit you? Like So, as we're going through this, the context of this is looking at the budget document and translating that here. Um, and so, when we think about budget, it's a very technical process built on account codes, right? And so, we tried to as going through this exercise, we are wanting to make those two things connected. And so, really looking at those functions, which
012is the section second portion of the, um, account code, and then the object in the third portion. Um, and so, that that was like the initial lens of going through this is like this is for this is taking the budget data and translating it into this and connecting it to our board goals. So, that was sort of the lens that we started with. Um then I would say that well, we went through many different iterations of this back and forth uh Maria's office is on one side of the department and then mine's on the other. So, we just go like this like every 10 minutes during budget time. Um and so, we're back and forth. And so, we went through many different like well, what if we did this or what if we did this?
013Um and I think probably like the the biggest revelation that I've come to and I think we talk about it a lot is just that this work requires like to serve the whole student requires so much um blending of different things to address every student's unique needs. And I think that's why this exercise is a little difficult to do because it's not just about account codes. Um and but as we're presenting this tied to the budget, that's sort of the context that we're using um to to bring this to you. And so, I think um knowing how all of these different these different pieces connect in our school building really informs this. We have um robust board goals that are um they have strategies on them um you know, a vision and then a strategy.
014So, using those and going through that process again to think about how this is really landing. Um and then also looking at our scorecard work. And so, that's a little backwards timing-wise, right? So, I have all all of our scorecards for 25-26 are developed in our scorecards are developed in the summer and fall, which is after the budget is adopted. So, I have scorecard information for what were the goals were of our all of our departments and all of our schools for 25-26. We have not yet done the score scorecard work for 26-27. But when I go back and look at what were the strategies that they used to meet those board goals um in the current year, and then assessing like are we going to continue to do those things because they they were
015helping us move towards that goal, um that also helps map it backwards a little bit, too. So, it's pretty I think it's complex. I think that if you reviewed this, um like if you went through and did the process, I'm not sure that every person would land with the same methodology, um and we could be very particular and split things on crazy percentages and do all of that, and I'm not sure that that work is really um going to tell us anything different other than I think it's just important to see how all of these different pieces come together, and at the core of it, um we're here to provide that the excellent learning experience, and so that's our largest category, and then we're building on all of those other things that also help us
016do that and support that work. When I I just add two things. One is that um in your question, um I don't know of other districts that are doing this, so it's not that we pulled this from anywhere else. No, we had to So, we So, we've sort of this created >> created this. >> created it, yeah. Nice. And the other thing about that that I think is important is that establishing those board goals, revising them took over a year, and it included um a number of community listening sessions and opportunities for community to give us feedback. And so, when I look at it, I see alignment between what we heard from community that cascaded into board goals, that led to bet greater alignment with our budget. And so, that's how I've thought about it.
017All right, let's go to Seth and then Chris. Hi, can you guys hear me? Yes. So, on page 128, uh I noticed the travel expense for instructional staff development appears to have doubled in the budget from 49,000 last year to 105,100 this year. I was wondering if you could explain why the variance. And what that is. Yeah. So, it's right you can kind of see the function crosses over for people who are trying to follow. Um but the function starts on 127 and then it's on the top of page um 128. So, Oh, the So, this is So, we follow the uh PBAM, which is the program budget accounting manual that is set by the state. Um and I don't really agree with this, but any uh any expenses related to professional development, even if
018you're doing professional development in your school, like if we're on site on the district, um the PBAM dictates that we code all of those expenses there. Um and so, that's why you see that uh amount. They're not actually traveling anywhere to do anything. It's paying for potentially um if we have a consultant or someone coming in to facilitate those trainings um or just that time spent um where they would be having a training on site. So, it's not actually traveling or doing anything else. The increase need there is just based on um all of the work being done with the Corvallis promise aligning K6's with the junior high model and continuing to to develop our staff for professional development. It's not actually travel and it's very misleading and that's how we are told we have
019to code it. Okay, thank you. So that the increase is primarily driven by consolidation effects is that accurate? I wouldn't say it's directly related to consolidation. I would say it's just the alignment of how we've shifted our models. So it's like a byproduct of that but not directly tied to consolidation. Okay, thank you Lauren. You're welcome. Jesse before you go to another question. Sorry to interrupt your chair duties. Lauren's mic is crackling. I don't know if we can switch it maybe. Another one. This is really noticeable to my ears and so it's probably worse online. Thank you. Is that better? Okay. Sounds the same to me but okay. >> [laughter] >> Okay. Okay, so we'll go to Chris now. Thank you so much. Mike first questions about the student investment account. I was looking at
020some other budgets from other schools that are in our comparative district list and they seem to either do a line item audit, you know, showing where every dollar goes, you know, by like level 1000 level 2000 and and more granular or they also show like the FTEs that are provided at the different levels. You know, just some kind of granular audit of you know, where is that I think for us it's like six plus million dollars going. And I and I and I may have missed it, but if you could just direct us to what page I could find that. I just can't find that in the budget and I was curious why that wasn't there or if I'm just missing it. >> So, we don't budget by fund. We budget by major fund type.
021We budget by So, that's 100 level, 200 level. Within 200, we have about Is it better or cuz now it sounds weird to me. Okay. >> [snorts] >> Um within 200 level fund, we probably have about 80 separate funds that go within there. Yeah. Really? Okay. Well, we have several. We've condensed a lot of them. Um but so what we do for our grant awards, we when we make a budget, we only have preliminary allocations. We also have mini grants that come in. Many as in multiple. Mini as in small grants that come in after budget adoption. And so, we plan like we give ourselves the appropriation to spend up to a certain dollar amount there, but that doesn't mean we'll actually receive in those funds. So, we budget at the major fund level at
022the 200 level. So, we appropriate that way versus other districts may budget on every single individual fund making making it so that if they get more or more than that, then they have to go back to the board and do a supplemental budget um which those cost money usually because you have more posting requirements and different things. It's not very efficient. Um and so based on the dollar amount that we're working with, we do budget um on the major fund level. So, that's why you're not going to see a page that has a financial table with all of that information in our budget document because this budget document is aligned to how the legal appropriation for our budget um will be approved. That being said, in the budget document on I think it's page Let
023me look. 57. Um you can see and I know you have a paper copy here, but the electronic copy online, you can see that we have linked to the integrated guidance application, which is what we have to submit to ODE and is approved, which includes all of the narrative around the needs assessment, um talking about um how we are meeting the requirements of SAA, um how we are how we are addressing the goals that that um will that that grant is um supposed to be used for. You'll also see then a link to the budget um that also goes to ODE and gets approved um by ODE. So, that budget, because we don't have an actual allocation at this point, doesn't the reporting for that doesn't go to ODE until the fall. Is that correct?
024Um and so, we don't have um we plan to continue the same goals that were approved in our biennial application by ODE um for the 26-27 budget. And once we have an approved budget, then we submit that information to ODE with the actual expenses by line item. You can look at the or the approved um submission for year one of the grant for 25-26. It's actually Student Investment Account is not as really a it is still a separate grant, but it's included within integrated guidance, which now includes um early literacy, um EIIS, high school success, um and student investment account. So, that's all within one application. So, if you open that budget that was approved by the board, you will see the um SAA allowable use category. So, that's how it aligns to the requirements
025of SAA. You will also see the object code um in which that expenditure is tied to. You'll see the FTE that's a tied tied in there as well and then the dollar amounts for all of those grants in that grant application. The SIA budget also has to be approved in a separate budget hearing by the board during a public meeting and so that's sort of a separate piece of information that is brought to the board when we actually are submitting that to ODE for approval. So, as a preliminary, we have a preliminary allocation on SIA. We plan cuz it's a biennial budget to still meet the same um needs that we found through the doing the needs assessment with the programs that we indicated there and so we will continue to do that. We don't
026have um we don't necessarily have actual expenditures for SIA because most of the staffing in there is our certified staff and we have an open contract with them so we don't have actual costs. So, we'll balance that out once we have a certified contract and then submit that to ODE and there may be plus or minus, right? Like we may be over our allocation or we might be under. If we're under, great. That's usually best case scenario. Then we can allocate more resources to enhance those goals that we are addressing through the needs assessment. If we are over, then we just will cover that with the general fund. Currently, as working through the budget, we have about 33 .44 FTE across many functions directly tied to student investment account. But it's it's really sort of
027a separate and out of cycle process that happens and there's some real technical and efficiency reasons why we don't budget to that fund level um and again, like I said, I mean our our our budget has been um heavily scrutinized and peer-reviewed by people all across the the country and internationally. Um and you just because it's in a another person's um budget document, I'm not sure that that necessarily means that it brings a certain level of value. Also, the student investment account is about 3% of our overall funds. Um so, we're really looking at all of the funds that we're braiding together to support kids, not one singular fund. Just to follow up, the reason I ask is about 2 years ago, the way I kind of got involved in all of this was to
028ask Ryan and and I believe you were in the meeting, too. Um why the student investment account funds had been shifted away from smaller class sizes in K-3 3 and art and library access to other functions. And I was curious cuz I was at a title one school and and we got our libraries cut. And so, I was pushing like, "Hey, can we just see an audit of that budget?" Because like I just pulled up McMinnville's budget today. They they have the 2026-2027 budget. And we're spending, you know, percentage-wise, we're spending a lot more on support services. And we spend actually more on support services than instruction. And looking at their budget, you know, they spend like 73 million on instruction and 43 million on support services. So, 30 million more on instruction. I believe
029we're the only district in our comp that still spends more on support services than instruction. And trying to figure out what's going on and why that's happening. And I'm and I I'm not trying to say I suspect it, but I'm wondering if the student investment account is being pushed towards support services. Where if you look at like Bend, for example, they spend the majority of that, like 60-70% on instruction. And I'm just trying to ensure that And again, based on this >> [clears throat] >> budget parameters, it says that we should drive the budget process by student outcomes and data. And I think like class size, like that like when we first applied for student investment account, we had to provide data on how we were going to use it, which was smaller class sizes.
030And I believe Ryan during that meeting mentioned that there was this new study, some meta-analysis, that said that after you get past 18 students per class, that class size is no longer statistically significant or relevant. And I don't know that the community or this committee agrees with that. And so if that's the data we're using to decide how the funding is getting distributed, I think we want to discuss that and say maybe we really want to see how the student investment account is being spent, like Bend or like Beaverton or like McMinnville. Like why is it that all of the other districts are doing this and we're not? What is transparency and data-based analysis? Why does that hurt us? So, I think there's a misconception on what student support services are because a large or
031you're assuming that support services are the people like us that are sitting at this table, which is not what that money is going to. The large percentage of the money in SAA is actually funding our mental health program and our mental health therapists that provide direct support to students. So, yes, that is not um instruction like a classroom teacher. We have other funds that we utilize um in order to sustain class sizes. We shouldn't be using a grant to support to um necessarily address as the main driver to address class size because that's not sustainable over time. So, we just because it's support services does not I think there's like this misconception that that means that's people at the district office. That it it's just not true. Um and so the positions that are under
032that category um are providing a tremendous support and directly working with students every single day. Just one last question comment and then I'll be done if that's okay. Um as I understood it and this is where I'm I'm learning. I'm new to Oregon, new to the whole district, but I understood that 2018-2019 Student Success Act, which was passed just, you know, 6-8 years ago, which created the student investment account, did have pretty specific language on how that money was supposed to be used, and that grant money was supposed to be used for like specific purposes that I want to make sure that we're doing. And I think that's where the the the the parameters that were given to us, like our job is not to change or to to offer like changes to policy or
033staffing, as you said, but it is to inspect what we expect. You know, so if we expect that to be used that way, we at least have to have that audit, that granular data, otherwise that money could be used, like you're saying, towards all mental health, which is a great purpose, and I understand that, but if 6 million of 6.7 is going to mental health, and our class sizes are ballooning bigger than our goals, I I I don't know how to I I just don't have the data to even know. So, I would suggest you review the the budget that was approved by the board and approved by ODE, because that budget specifically tells you which allowable use category um it is for SIA. It tells you the the object code, which is a part
034of the account code, and it also tells you the dollar amount attached to all of those things, as well as the FTE. So, that data is it's [music] been on it's required that it's on our website. It's required that it's prevent presented and approved by the board any separate hearing um of the board, and it's also linked within the document. So, I guess I would say, since we submit this to ODE, and the grant is monitored and and and controlled by ODE, and they're approving our budget every year um based on the information that we are submitting to them, which is granular data, um I would say that we are meeting the requirement and the intention of the grant. All right. Anyone else have questions? Okay. Go ahead. I have a few questions. So, some
035of them are really short and some of them are maybe not as short, but on page 17 the projected enrollment um Yeah, we it's messed up. I'm sorry. >> Okay. I just wanted to ask if you were up to date. >> edits and I went back and forth between changing it and the one that's online and updating this and I decided to make sure that this matched what was online so everybody had the same and it will be updated for the next version. This is the first year that Marie and I have done this by ourselves because we don't have administrative support. Okay. That leads us one of my other questions in a second, but thank you. If this is so folk know and or it's clear what I'm asking about the projected enrollment um
036says that it's the projected for next year, the actual for last few years and then for projected for a few years out and it's just missing those graphs. Those We'll update it. >> Yeah, so thanks for letting everyone know you're going to update that. And then the other one's on page 19 and it goes to probably what you're just talking about a little bit on staffing. I know we were this is either first year that we haven't heard of a lot of positions going away and very specifically certain positions like like EAs and from losing things and program staff and teachers and stuff like that, but um I noticed that there was only one licensed staff that was where we went down, which is much lower than what we were projecting if we would have
037kept things going the way they were cuz it was over 20 estimate and I just wanted to say thank you for that for the students and that goes to actually Chris's point about retaining teachers for classrooms, too, in other ways. Um And I noticed that the admin went down by a couple. And then other staff went down by about three. And then classified was the biggest area. It looked like around 14 or so FTE. And um I just wanted to recognize that and kind of help people understand what kind of positions those may have been for next year. Sure. Um so as So we have licensed staff in um several different roles. So we do have a reduction in classroom staff. Um but we have shifted some additional support. So for example, like at our
038um title one schools we'll have the math um interventionist, and those are certified staff. So they may not be Just want to make clear that licensed staff doesn't always mean like a classroom. Um there's other ways that um licensed staff support in our schools. So the um classified positions we've reduced um some. I'm just thinking in no particular order. Um EAs based on ratios. So if we have less students, um that's a ratio-based um allocation. And so the student ratio will change. Or the the student-to-staff ratio stays the same, but that requires less staff because we have less students. Um so EAs, um by closing our schools, we've talked about the efficiency of running um under-enrolled schools, and how that's largely think about um office managers. So we have two less schools, we have two
039less office managers as their classified positions. Um we have a uh less registrar position because of the the closure of Sheldahl in um food service staff, custodial staff, all of those positions that are supporting those schools. And so, that's what made it really hard to run all of our schools when they were not at at the appropriate enrollment capacity because you're still staffing at a certain level for all of those positions. So, that's largely um what's in there. Obviously, reduction in administrators because we have two less principals there. We also and then in the non-represented staff we reduced Well, the technology director position cuz that's Byron and I now. Um and so, there's that position in that category. We reduced our um culinary supervisor position. Um which is difficult because we had some hopes for
040like how we how we could adjust that program and our and the quality of our food and all of that. And so, without that position, some of that work has to go on pause. Um there's just different pieces there that we have reduced to try to not affect that classroom teacher number. And And then the other piece is looking at calendar days, too. So, a reduction for some folks from >> there are reductions that you're not seeing in here because they they remain at the same FTE, but we have reduced calendar days for them. So, for example, there's two less staff members at the district office supporting technology. Actually, three. Um Two two were layoff situation and one was a retirement that we're not filling. So, there's three less people that are supporting the infrastructure
041work of um in technology and we actually we moved two of those positions to provide more support um that is in the schools for technology because that was a request like a large request from our our staff when we surveyed them on what their technology needs are. So, that's then now a burden that the the district office tech team is now going to have to carry because they have less people here to do the same amount of work. Um and at the same time we balance that with supporting uh our schools because that was the ask. And so, those people will experience a calendar reduction because of that. So, their FTE still looks like 1.0 in the budget um but they are impacted because they for example were on a 260-day calendar and now they
042are on a 200-day calendar. So, that's a partial layoff as well that you don't really receive reflected in this process. Okay, thank you. I think it's helpful because before especially like when we're thinking about consolidation, we didn't know how it would impact the budget like with positions and like everybody that works for the district is here for students and regardless of what classification they're in. Correct. And I just wanted to um recognize where that reduction hit the most and Yeah. stuff. So, thank you for taking the time to explain that. I have more questions but I don't know if other people do too but I can keep going or if you want to come back to me that way I can share the space. >> see. Does anyone else have Yeah, go ahead, Carla. So,
043uh first of all, thanks, Lauren. This is a really nice comprehensive budget. It's really helpful too as a new member of the budget committee to be have this amount of information. My question for you I'm sort of going back to Superintendent's memo and trying to focus primarily on the general fund component because that seems to be the most substantive aspect of the budget. Um and so as I'm looking at it, I'm seeing um the revenues projected at 101.9, and that seems to be the combination of state and local resources. The expenditures at the 103.1, which I think is embedded within that total. Um and then it's then there's some transfers that are happening. And And so I start to put it all together starting with that revenue less expenditures less transfers. And it seems to
044me then there's about a $13.4 million gap. And so is it Is my understanding correct then that that will be a balancing coming from reserves to to have that balance? Is that Am I understanding that correctly? Um No. Well, the we will be using reserves. So if you're just looking at the general fund, we are buying down some of our reserved and we have budgeted to the 12.5%, but it's not um $13 million worth. Okay. >> Um and so if you look at Do you Are you looking at a specific page that I could look at with you? Um yeah. So I um I So what I'm just looking at for I'm pulling from the memo. Okay. >> So it was it's talking about the revenues at 101.9 and the expenditures um at budgeted at
045117.7. So we budget the the difference is is that um the reserves that are required by board policy are we budget those um in a specific uh function because we are required to sort of hold them aside, and those are an expenditure function. So that's the That's the gap there. And So may I May I add to that question? Um so then um I was looking then at what is the beginning fund balance. And I had a couple of different numbers. Okay. So, for all I think it was showing 25 and 1/2 million. Is that right? >> right. Yep. And so, whatever would be pulling from to balance, would that be coming from the 25 and 1/2 or that be coming from the general fund? So, the 25 and 1/2 is the total on all
046funds, which includes um about 15 million from the general fund specifically. And so, yes, we will be buying down because we will I think our our ended ending fund balance is around 12.7 in general fund. Is that correct? So, we will be using um some of the 15 million to cover that gap. So, you're projecting then your ending fund balance at the end of fiscal year 27 to be 12.7. >> 12.7. And that's still within that 12 and 1/2% >> of operating revenues, not full revenues. Got it. Okay. Okay. >> That's the difference. Yeah. And you feel like that's enough. I don't love it. >> a >> [laughter] >> I know. No. Um I mean, I think that like I've said, I think I understand why um um why we need to budget down to
047as close as we can. Um and also, if I was I mean, you do this work. I think you you know how fast things can change. >> margin. >> It is a really uh really slim margin for error there. And so, yeah, I mean, it it I lose sleep over that amount. And um that's what our board policy is. And I also to be honest, I'm thankful that we have a board that understands the complexities of K-12 finance. We recently there's an article that came out today um about one of our fellow districts who um their board policy was eight and their board just approved to uh up it to 12 um because of the volatility and funding. and so to in order to set them up um in a better spot, they have increased
048their board policy. Um and so I think people are realizing that based on all of the the different things that have happened in the K-12 finance landscape um in the last several years. Um I think realistically when you look at our budgeted to actuals, we spend about 98%. Um of what we budget. And so I anticipate we'll be a little bit higher than the 12.5. Um but we we budget to spend it. Um and that's largely because if you if you look at the general fund budget, about 80% of that is salaries and benefits and we do not have one like every FTE filled for 100% of the calendar days. Um and so there's that's largely where the savings comes from is that component. Um so I think we'll be a little bit above what
049I like to have a better savings account. Sure. Um that would be great and we're also tasked with serving the kids that are in our buildings right now. And so it's balancing those two things. Thank you. You're welcome. Um just to editorialize that a little bit. Um we are often asked to to access and or tap those reserves um more than on an annual basis for a number of different things. So I appreciate your question and your comment and your perspective on that because that is definitely something we spend a lot of time discussing. Therese. And probably um a pretty quick question, but on page 67 looking under supplies and materials, I noticed a couple of things that numbers that have dropped off from the 25-26 adopted budget. The first one is 420 for textbooks.
050Um so that's a just under $600,000 decrease and I was wondering what's driving that reduction? Yeah, so I don't all of the time squishes together for me, but if you remember a few months ago, I know that that the coordinators came to you and let you know that we would be pausing on some adoptions because I think it was science they had said the they went through the preliminary process and the staff wanted to stay with the curriculum that they had. The ODE adoption curriculum adoption schedule is quite wild and and hard to wrangle in because there'll be some years where it's like math for example and then it's every single piece of curriculum in the district where is then some years it's like French and we need a set of I don't know 60
051versus a set of 6,000. So that just the expenditures there are volatile based on where we're at in the adoption cycle and which things we've chosen to renew and not. I figured that's what it was but I wanted to just be sure I hadn't missed something else. And then under under that one 430 and 440. So pretty big drop off in library books. Is there I mean are we in a not going to expand library collections or we haven't been using as much as we thought or what's the idea behind You might not even be the right person to >> No, well why not but So when you're looking at this page 67 is all funds and I don't know why but our schools like in their either foundation accounts or their PTA accounts um
052I don't know why but they always just kind of put whatever they didn't budget to something else into library. When you combine that across the the 13 different sites then it would add up but that dollar amount is quite small and also just remember that we appropriate on function not on object. So we like you can look at the objects to see exactly what we're spending but really like the biggest thing to to know is that if under that category, say they're buying library books for kindergarten classroom, they could spend it on library books for kindergarten classroom, they could spend it on additional EA time, they could spend it I mean it can go anywhere as long as it stays within um the rolled up function level, which is 1,000, 2,000, 3,000. So, this is
053a plan that completely transparently is already out of date because uh things change every day as we adjust to what the needs are. Okay. Uh that I think that answers my Periodicals is has nothing budgeted. So, um Yeah. What are the periodicals that we are now not budgeting for? I think again that was just um a sort of a rollover for some subscriptions and everything is moved to like online based um and so it's all those licensing and so sometimes that people will budget that as software and sometimes they'll budget it as the we don't have a lot of newspapers still in circulation or magazines or things of that nature. It's usually the um uh subscription fees online. Thank you. Other questions? Sonya. Thank you. Thank you, Lauren and Maria for all of your just
054incredible work and thoughtfulness in putting this together and all the work that went into aligning with the newer board goals over this last year in the budget, too. Um I actually have a couple of questions on the same page that Therese pulled up on page 67. Up in the top section under requirements, I noticed that the substitutes on the license line is staying pretty steady, a little bit of an increase, but there's a huge drop in substitutes um classified from 18,000 last year to 500 noted this year. And then I also noticed in the line below that an increase in additional salary. So I'm just wondering how about both the increase in additional salary as well as that drop to such a low number for classified substitutes and how how we can understand that. >>
055So we um contract out most of our substitutes with Edustaff and so you'll actually see that down below um in the purchase services 390. That's where our um substitutes are that we that we um get through Edustaff. So when you look up above at the 121 substitutes license and 122 substitutes classified we very rarely hire an internal substitute for classified because we just don't have like that long-term need and we we shift all of that over to Edustaff so that they can handle um all of the requirements for hiring there. We do have more of a need for long-term substitutes for a certified just because it's a little bit different of a structure. So for example, if we have uh a staff member who goes out on maternity leave, we're going to hire a long-term
056sub for them but they don't actually have a permanent position and it's in depending on the amount of days that they're in the role. They're uh a certified or they're a substitute. If it goes past a certain amount then they become a temporary staff and that's all contract language. But the ones that you're looking at the 121 and the 122 have to do with internal like CSD hired employees but the majority of all of our substitutes is actually under uh 390 which is the what's contracted out through Edustaff. So because it's a service that we're receiving from Edustaff, it's under the purchase service category versus a salary because they are not our employee. Does that clarify? >> sense. Yes. Thank you. I have a couple of similar type questions about a couple of line items.
057Like I looked to Lou instinctively, but I'll look at Jesse. Should I ask a couple of those and then maybe pause on my other question or I can pause there and then let others ask. >> closely related, yeah, go ahead. Okay. So, in my closely related questions, on page 74, it's just another couple of line item questions. >> Yep. Um I noted that middle school extracurriculars are dropping a little bit and I'm curious if that's because of the shift to junior high model and so maybe some of that support is going to K6 or just declining enrollment or if we're seeing that in another in another space. All of the above. Um we also have um how we code things has shifted a little bit differently because sixth grade is funny. I mentioned the PBAM
058earlier, which is the program budgeting accounting manual that tells us how we are to code things. Um It allowed It says, "You can put sixth grade wherever you want." So, you put sixth grade with an elementary school or you can put sixth grade with a middle school. And since we have our sixth graders now in the K5, just alignment-wise, it makes sense to code them as elementary now, but that also creates sort of a anomaly in the budget for the year that you make that shift. So, that's part of it. Um we also have the different athletics for which is that's largely what that is is the middle school athletics. Um and so there's one school now, so one team. So, we will probably have We have one head coach instead of two head coaches
059and more assistant coaches and how that all balances out. And it's also how um largely the one one two twos and the three twos are all in um the special revenues funds and so those are just based on what those balances are in those accounts because those roll over year over year. So, they've spent down their balance a little bit, so they're probably going to spend less cuz they have less to spend. Thank you. Last one on this page and then I'll stop. Um I noticed some just some shifts downward, but also some shifts upward among a number of instruction items and then also under support services where it looks like some of the programs for disabilities um 1220, 1250 are both going down. I was curious around if that also was tied to enrollment
060numbers um or or an actual decrease in services. And then I also noticed that there are some maybe some parallel or related services going up under support services like speech pathology G, audiology services, psychological services, and and health services as well where we're seeing some increases. So, I'm just wondering if you can speak to some of those general Yeah. shifts that we're seeing both downward and upward in trends. So, I'd say a lot of those like minor shifts that you see in the budget have to do with coding. Um there's a lot of times where we look at something and we go, "Why are we coding it that way?" And we we consult the manual and then there's it's not very clear. Um and so we go with our best judgment and I can say
061for the 1220 and 1250, the programs for students with disabilities, um we had some coding in that function that actually really belonged in alternative education um 1280, which is just a uh few lines down. Um and so there was some shifts there. We're also um restructure not I wouldn't say restructuring, but shifting like those programs a little bit of like where they're housed, which then creates some changes in staffing. Um we actually have more FTE in the um special education uh function than we did last year. And that's really around um we've talked about this briefly before. I don't think in a budget meeting, but although our student enrollment is going decreasing, our percentage with um students having getting disabilities is actually going up. And so that is a program that is specifically tied to
062student need in that sort of weighted component um of uh a student's enrollment. And so those numbers are are shifting that way. Um I would say in general, this is a very generalized statement, but a lot of um special educations of our special education staff right now is on the um beginning end of the salary schedule, so there's changes there um based on where they're placed because of their just their experience of who's retiring and who's coming into the system. All of those components um we do have what's called maintenance of effort, which is a requirement for special education to make sure that you are either funding special education at the same per pupil amount or the program as a whole by more than you did in the prior year. So every year you have
063to continue to meet that um spending, which we do without um any sort of problems. So um it's really just a a shift of what actuals are looking like and then where we're we're looking at for budget. So there's no programmatic changes or ratio changes or anything like that. Thank you, and I'll save my other questions. Anyone else who hasn't asked any questions yet? I've got a question. Okay, go ahead. I'm looking at page 67 line uh 310, instructional services under purchase services. Just curious about the uh increase um for this proposed budget. Um so I can answer that question. So if you actually look at the actuals of 23, 24, and 24, 25, that amount more aligns with what we've actually spent. Um and that 310, it reflects um our outdoor school fees to
064OMSI. We put it under instructional services as well as um LBCC and some GED fees. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. Any others that haven't asked anything yet? All right, we'll go back to Lou. Um There was on page um 59 on revenue, had a question I thought was It's not a huge um increase in the grand scheme of the district budget, of course. I'm trying to get to the page, sorry. I wasn't ready to be called on. Okay. Um on the line 1910, that went up by about $225,000, and I was on Is that related to renting the facility to because I thought that was pretty cheap, but what is that about, like the rentals? So it's a combination of things. One, um the operations department has been working to put together a better system for
065outside entities that are using our buildings after hours, so we've seen a small increase in rental income there. We do have rental income for the lease for um Latisha Carson, and then we've also allocated some dollars there um for in if we end up uh leasing out all or a portion of Sheldon. We have interest in that from community as well. Okay. So those are um the best guess for now on potential income on That's what I was going >> Everything's best guess right now. I know. That's true. >> best guess. It was just a big jump for rentals for CSD. That's why I was like, "Wow, that's a interesting jump." >> been it's like two-fold. There's been an effort to try to capture more of um that use that's happening on our facilities after
066hours and then as well as those um more space to rent, you know, connected to that. Um and then on page 74 um You can see where my brain goes. I'm like, "Oh, revenue, risk management." Um on line 2528 the um that went up uh about 6 million. Is that right? About that? Um that seemed like a larger increase than I would have um based on the trends. So, >> Yeah, what is that estimate for? Um so, part of it has to do with our um property and liability premiums increasing. Um so, there's about a 10% increase on the renewal of that, but then we also had an 18% increase in um What's the word I'm thinking of? Assessed value. It's not coming to me. The value of what we own has increased um about
06718% when we went through the last uh evaluation process. So, that coupled with the 10% is a portion of that. Um in addition, I think we mentioned and then this is really complicated and I struggle to explain it, um but in our internal services funds where those we have three separate funds. So, I mentioned that we we talk about funds in a rolled up major fund category, but we have three in there. We have the 601, which is like a general risk. It used to It used to fund our self-funded insurance programs. We have a 603 and a 605. Those are One of those is for what we call the CEA reserve funds for our certified group reserve, and then we have one that's OSEA, um our classified union reserve fund. So, and we have
068contractual language where we transfer dollars to them, and then they tell us how they want to spend it is essentially how that works. Um they are physically our funds that live within our accounting structure and our bank accounts, but the um designated members of those groups decide how those funds are applied year over year. They're usually used to buy down insurance premiums for their members, so members receive um or experience a less a lower out-of-pocket cost for those. In the past, we have [clears throat] budgeted those to say that they will reserve X amount of funds every year, and then it becomes restricted as a planned revenue code. Therefore, we cannot tap into it without board approval. As we were discussing it, we're like, I don't know if that really makes sense because it's not
069up to us to dictate how those funds are used. So, we're going to push out the full appropriation of what is available in those funds, and they can tell us if they want to use it or not. Um but the budget allows us to be able to do what they tell us to do with those funds. Um we also have been since we ended the self-funded programs in uh 2022, um we have we there was a balance left in those funds. In the 601, not I'm not talking about the reserve funds for our union groups. Those are separate. But in the in there was a amount left in the self-funded account. And so, as we moved away from those programs, we're no longer self-funded, um we said, "What do we do with that balance? So,
070in consulting with our auditors, um as well as GAAP and GFOA, which is the sort of standard who defines governmental accounting, we looked at those and said, "Well, if it fits within the original intention of why the fund was created, we could use it for those purposes." So, in the past, the some things we have used it for is to offset the rising cost of PERS, because that's an employee benefit. We've used it to pay for our premiums on property and liability. Um we've used it to pay This is sort of hard to explain, but we've used it to pay for insurance premiums on the non-unionized groups employees, because that sort of offset the general fund and then allowed us more cash there that was unrestricted and could be used for any purpose. So, it's
071sort of um it's a complicated intertwined thing, and we want to get rid of that 601 fund, because we don't have the the need or the purpose for it anymore. We could have used it all within 1 year, which I think at that point was probably like $8 million around in two in 2022. Um which would have then created again another funding cliff like that we have talked about with like the SR funds. If we would have had this influx and offset general fund by $8 million in 1 year and didn't make any adjustments to our deficit, that would have it just compounds the problem year over year. So, instead what we did is we took that money and we said, "Look, we have these functions that are similar to that original use of that
072fund, and so we can slowly buy down that balance over multiple years and smooth the impact of that and still benefit our general fund." and so that was what we did. Okay. >> We could have done something different. That was our strategy and I say our because at the time our previous finance director Olivia Myers Book was here and I was in Maria's role and that was just something like that we had made a plan for and I continued that after she left. Thanks. That's helpful. Quick comment is that the numbers on the schools that I was really unexpected just because of the what we've heard about Lincoln's enrollment being lower than normal is that it was nice to see projected increase there and the same with Mountain View since those two schools have been
073discussed as seen lower enrollment and they actually are projected to increase so that was positive and my last question had to do with the title one decrease the 13.5% that was mentioned is our projected decreases because of the impacts of snap and Medicaid factored into the budget or is that um too unknown at this time? If it's too unknown it's fine but I was just wondering. It's not um factored into the budget because it isn't known at this time and the title allocation is separate of that although I would say obviously the climate of what we see happening in those programs is it the impact will be similar across all of them. The only reason I asked is because those projected impacts are next academic year. We just don't know what they are yet so
074just because we've been discussing I thought it'd be important for the community to know like and the budget committee that we can't estimate those yet but we could with this one. Thank you. That was all my questions. Great job with the stuff. Okay, let's see. Let's go Sammy. And I want to recognize that red light is on us so chair I understand if If want to cut it short on time. But I have very quick two questions. Page 67. And then 76. So let's start with 67. Okay. Uh Line 330 student transportation services were contracted. And there's flat fund almost flat commitment of $6.5 million. Uh My question is this our best estimate? I know it's not in your job description to have a geopolitical forecast, but with the gas prices are we foreseeing any
075potential risk given that we're contracting and also we have separate transportation fund from the state. How does that look like? Yes, so I think that goes back to Seth asked a question and I submitted responded online, but we do outsource our transportation and there's a lot of benefits to doing that. Um one of those I think is what you're speaking to now and the volatility of the fuel prices in the market. So we have a multi-year contract with our service provider for transportation. So as yes, we're all going to the gas pump and it's costing you more money. Um that we pay a flat flat fee to them that is negotiated was negotiated three, four years ago maybe two, three I don't know. Somewhere within the range of five. We renewed that contract. >> Probably.
076Um and so we aren't experiencing price increases because of that. There's a small portion of the agreement that does have a CPI component, so I'm sure as we look at rates for individual trips, that will change, but that's a small portion of our transportation. So there's a there's definitely a benefit in multi-year contracts in in in regards to transportation. Also, um the state reimburses us for transportation. So, the way that they reimburse is based on the number of miles that uh district travels in order to pick up all the kids for school. Um and so, the districts who travel the most miles relative to um their enrollment, they receive the highest level of reimbursement, which is 90% for the transportation. Um and so, it's tiered. So, it's 90 and then down to 70 is the
077lowest amount that you're reimbursed. And so, we're in that lowest category, which makes sense. Like, Corvallis square miles um is not very large um and and we have um a lot of uh students that are within the boundary that are going here. So, we're not going to get the highest level of reimbursement. That being said, I'm very thankful that we received 70% reimbursement um for our expenses on transportation. And so, yes, that market is volatile and it's not impacting us as significantly as it probably feels for households. Thank you. If I may ask another one, 1,400 summer school programs, are we expecting 160,000 uh from the foundation or the state? Uh how is that looking for this summer? Yeah. The foundation again has um generously raised funds to support credit recovery for high school and
078a few other small programs. Um I would say our summer school programs this year are really focused on um those metrics in the board goals. One of those being um the on track to graduate um and the the four-year graduation rate and supporting the credit recovery portion of summer school. There's going to be less um uh extra programs for summer school this year and that's largely just related to district capacity of moving I don't remember how many total moves that we have but it's quite a bit of staff members moving across the district and so focusing those programs a little bit so that we can have schools ready and and there's a lot that's happening this summer a lot of movement that is happening and so that's why but yes that money's coming from the
079foundation not the state unfortunately it would be great if we had a way to support kids throughout the summer and we are super lucky that we have a foundation that brings in that a dollar amount that allows us to run that program. Thank you. All right since we are past our time we have to decide if we want to extend time or if someone would like to make a motion. I chair I would I wonder if you would entertain a motion to extend our time by 15 minutes. I I feel like we might I think we're pretty close to getting questions answered so would you consider a motion? I would consider a motion yes. I move that we extend our discussion time by 15 minutes. Second. Do we have um and uh consensus yes okay
080then we will extend by 15 more minutes. Um all right Chris. So sorry I've got a couple of questions as follow-ups from what I've heard in to start with on special education you mentioned that there's no programmatic programmatic changes and I just want to clarify so from some of the meetings I've heard from the Corvallis Promise it sounds like middle school is moving away from having like a sped program and more of an integrated sped into every pod and then and I don't know details on this but it sounds like maybe in K through 6 that life skills is kind kind being I won't say dissolved but kind of pushed away and it's going to full integration. And that's why there were so many people from KJH that moved, and that's why And And the
081reason I ask is cuz in the middle school meeting, there was a parent at the end who asked like, my special education student my um gets like a special period during the day. And the district staff's response was like, oh, we'll look into that, but well, I'm not sure and then no promises here. And that's literally how the whole like meeting ended and it just felt so like, gosh, we're just not really giving the care and and the the appropriate you know, I don't I just don't think we're listening and and hearing those folks. And if there are those kinds of big changes for those students especially, it could have a pretty big impact I think on our community. And so I'm just curious if if there's really no programmatic changes, that's great, but it
082I guess how do how do I square the circle of what I'm hearing and what you're saying? Well, we've operated an integrated model for a quite some time. And actually what the I mean, I can't speak to this as much as I Sure. So, um since I've been here, I've been asked several times a year, are we closing life skills? And I continue to say that's not the case. I shared that with that parent that evening. So, that's not the case. At the middle school, I think that the case managers being being with multiple case managers being assigned to each house is still a provider assigned to a group of students who are receiving services primarily in reading, math, and those sorts of services, but having a life skills program in the building, those things
083are continuing. So, there isn't a change of service. So, those students will have isolated classrooms and not be fully integrated. It It depends on what the the IEP team who develops the plan for the student that includes the parent decides. Got you. But no changes from last year. The biggest change would be having four houses and having a a life a special ed teacher assigned to each one. That's >> Okay, there's no major changes. No. There'll be more staff there because there'll be more kids there. Yeah. Okay. I'm glad you asked me that one. All right, Shana. So, I have a question around it's on page 174 on the basic school support allocation. And when we were talking about back at page 74 and some of the things I had noted around seeing some increases
084in psychological services or other student support services in the school support allocation for elementary schools, there is one counselor allotted for each elementary school. And one of my worries, and so I'm just curious about how this will be addressed, is that the number of students ranges from 310 up to 520, which feels like a really big difference in the number of students as one person would be supporting in terms of that counseling role. And when things shift up into the middle school and high school, then we're shifting to one to every 300 students or one counselor for every 300 students or one counselor for every 100 students in the alternative high school program and the SEG or social emotional growth program. And so I'm wondering about what other supports are in place, particularly in elementary
085schools with higher numbers, that will help wrap around and provide those mental health and counseling support services for students if we only have one counselor at each school. Yeah. So, we use a >> [clears throat] >> ratio and and a flat funding base depending on level. So, that's accurate what what you're how you're like interpreting the table just to clarify that. Um and so what we look at is really a more scaffolded approach to how we can support our students. So, our student system our student support system is very layered. Um and so, and that's by design. So, yes, school counselors are a large portion of that. We also have social workers um that fill in a similar role. So, those are the the primary line of support in in managing that access for our
086kids. We also have mental health therapists that then layer over on top of that. We have family advocates, so you're not seeing that allocation here within this document, which this is a new table to the budget document, by the way. Um and we have not fully built it out for the supplementary school support. Um the only thing you're seeing under there right now is special education. That doesn't mean we haven't allocated the staff. It's just that putting it in this structure is still sort of in draft form, but we wanted to provide you with the basis of what we had. Um and so, what you're not seeing is that on some of those schools, they have um more time for family advocate time. So, they work um with our families to navigate a whole um
087scope of of different things that they may be experiencing. We also have health navigators that we add on um to that time that directly help families get access to health care. Um and so, all of those different layers support the students in a school. So, it's not just one singular position. So, you can't just look at what is the allocation for a counselor. Um I would also say that our counselors do different work at an elementary school versus um at the secondary level, where the um where it's more credit-based, and you're looking at um different metrics in order to get a student to graduation, and then for their plan after graduation. So, it looks a bit different there, and the need is different um for that counselor work. So, it's specifically to address your question
088about um our larger elementary schools and we've heard this in relation to Bessie Coleman for next year. So, instead of allocating an additional counselor, what we did instead was allocate an additional 1.0 of Dean of Students, which is also a certified position, but their duties are a little more broad than a counselor maybe in a elementary school and so that position is better designed to to address the specific needs of that school that may look different than a than a a different school. And so, that is how that process goes and then if we as far as like using a flat or a percentage ratio based allocation, we adjust our staffing allocation models every year. It's one of the first things we do and say like is this actually working? Does this methodology make sense?
089We look at what other schools are doing and how they have allocated their staff, like what are some creative way things that people are doing and so we make adjustments to this every year. And this is where we're at for now. That's really helpful. Thank you. >> can I add to that? So, I think we are extremely lucky and fortunate to have school counselors, to have mental health therapists that no other districts have the sort of relationship where where they're hiring their own in Oregon that we have family support liaisons, that we have health navigators, that we have a relationship with the county where we're paying 50% and they're paying 50% and then the Deans of Students. So, when you think about the services that we're able to provide in Corvallis, it's extremely unique in
090the level of support we're able to provide there compared to districts around us, districts throughout our state. And so, while I know that it's an area that there's always greater need in, the ability for us to have that level of wrap around service is truly unique in the state. Thank you. Okay, let's go to the Cassandra next. So, adjust in follow up to this question. What you're saying is the staffing allocation model 2026 and the basic school support allocation. These models you readdress every year? Correct. >> Okay, I just wanted for the community to understand that cuz that's that's really important. >> Yeah. So, the in the classroom FTE model, we have like for just to highlight something that changed this year. We did look at it by those aligned to those grade bands that
091we've been talking about through the innovation teamwork in the Corvallis promise. And so, the class size targets, the 22 24 27, those didn't change, but looking at the grade bands, that was a little bit of a shift there. So, like we start and this really would mean when we allocate your staffing, the very first thing we do is look at classroom FTE. Then we go on to enrichment, then we go on to basic school support. Then we check our numbers. Do we like sometimes it's truly like does this meet the student need? And there also are times to say like we can't afford this and we're going to have to there may be a lever that we have to pull in order to make the budget balance and we didn't have to make any changes
092to those ratios this year, which was amazing. Okay. So, following up on the basic school support allocation, and I think I understood what you were saying. I guess my initial question would be one, I don't see any kind of waiting based on demographic analysis. Correct. >> So, some of these schools have more need and might actually be entitled to more funding based on our own weighted numbers, but we're not we're not addressing that in the FTE side, which I think the data would say might be a good way to go. Just just just a comment. The other thing is if we're not doing a dynamic listing on things like MTSS counseling support, we can't possibly claim that we're providing students with equitable access and opportunities. Garfield, I think most people in this room were here
093for that when the Garfield parents and the Garfield staff and the Garfield Dean of Students came and explained that we're going to be at like double the counselor recommended counselor ratio at a school with extremely high needs title one school. And I think there's another part in this budget parameters that said sometimes you don't have to give equal stuff to equal children if the needs are different. I just don't know that we're given these formulas it seems like Bessie Coleman might get an extra Dean of Students but Garfield might get nothing. I and the counseling seems like it's just locked down and I understand there's some like back end like oh wait we threw one here we threw one here. I feel like we should go ahead and and put it into codified language that
094it's dynamic based on need period so that it aligns with our budget parameters and our board goals. So you're not taking into consideration the difference between like I said basic school support which is the base allocation that we give all of our schools. When you flip to supplementary school support now we start looking at our weighted models for our students and as I mentioned it right now it only it only outlines our formulas for special education and the ratios but that doesn't mean that we're not supporting those schools with other positions. So what you're missing out on in generalizing that example is that for at Garfield we also have more mental health therapist time, we have more health navigators, we have more family support liaisons, we have title one funding that is all layered on
095top of that that is addressing the weighted student need of that school. So basic school support our classroom FTE and basic school support is what we determine is the standard for all of our schools. Then we look at what are the needs of the schools and how do we allocate additional and layer that on top of there? So, this portion of the of the budget is new. We added it this year. This has been something that has just been internal information. We are trying to be more transparent with how this is happening, and I have not fully outlined all of the components and formulas and factors that go into the supplemental school support because, to be completely honest, we ran out of time to make that into the document. That doesn't mean it's not happening,
096and the staffing is not going there. These formulas are much more complicated, and also, there's a portion of this that includes student data, and to maintain privacy and respect for for our students and some of our populations in smaller schools and programs, I'm not going to outline and say, "Out of the 15 kids at Bridges, there's 10 that have that are have this designation of weight." Like, that's just not a kind thing to do, and I'm not I'm not going to do it in that way. So, if we're going to publish something, I'm going to make sure first of all, that it's accurate, and that we have a a way to explain that that is digestible for people. So, just because you don't see it listed here, doesn't mean it's not happening. Um and there
097are many supports that are that are at Garfield that are are not getting, I think, recognized by that generalization. >> And just to answer your question, am I am I Yes, I am I'm not cool with this even as a generalization because this is the baseline. And so, you're creating a baseline where Bessie Coleman's at almost double the need, and so, you have to you need to use supplementary to fill in for the Title 1 schools, and I think this may be how we got to like a couple years ago, LaTisha Carson had larger school sizes than Bessie Coleman, even though it was a Title 1 school, and had supposedly more funding. I think some of this baselining is where we're getting trouble and we should use the baseline to make sure we're making And
098so like Okay, for example, Title I. It can't It can't be It has to be supplementary. It can't It can't help like bridge the gap. Everything has to be equal and then Title I has to go on top. That's how the federal law is written. I believe SA is similar. And so this to me creates inequities that we then have to like band-aid later. I would rather the basic allocation be whatever kids needs and then the extra is where those kids need weight. If that makes sense. It's like That's what I'm saying we're doing. Well, in here, right, in this baselining, Bessie Coleman gets more services. And Garfield, who I think needs more counselors, is going to be at a higher proportion of counselors than say Lincoln or Adams. So I The fact that some
099of these aren't Okay, some of these aren't dynamic. So MTS >> Chair, I rise to a point of order. Sure. Uh to limit the discussion to the the discussion that is currently occurring to the purpose of the agenda item would would be to ask staff questions about the contents of the budget proposed. I can do that. Why are some of these dynamic? So, for example, educational assistants with the student-facing, one per 100 students. And why are some of them flat when they still affect students possibly in the same way like counseling? Can I read a point of order? I think that that question already got answered. >> Yeah, I I think what we have is a discussion when we go to a motion, that would be a discussion item to bring up in the motion
100once the motion is on the table for approval, rather than information collection in order to decide if we're ready to go to a motion. I think that's where we That's what I'm seeing I think is happening. Is that And I wanted to do a point of like order as well that this information Is that okay if I do a point of order, please? Yes. That this information is not under the purview of the budget committee. It's supplemental information for us to understand the larger buckets because we can't make a decision based on allocations of staffing per school that's outside of the purview of the budget committee. I just wanted to remind us of that as a point of order as well. Um I also want to add that I see on here that um student
101behavior support Title 1 schools get an additional 0.8575 um FTE. Correct. Title 1 schools are also getting a 1.0 math intervention is just to work with those students. They get additional educational assistance supported. Um so I you can disagree with it if you would like, that's fine. Um this is operational and this is something that as district leaders we get to decide. The board doesn't have purview of this either and if we determine that this is how we are working towards meeting our goals um and the data is is representative of that, then I would say uh we're on the right track. Okay. Other other comments we're back to red again. So is there a motion? Sure, I would like to entertain I'd like to ask to you to entertain a motion for um approval
102of the budget. Okay. Uh um I move that the Corvallis School District budget for 2026-2027 in the aggregate amount of $192,745,302 for all funds be approved. Seconded. Okay. I need your script. Yes. Okay. Yeah. All right. >> [laughter] >> All right. There's a second. Yeah. Let's see. All right now. >> Okay. Got it. Move by Therese and seconded by Cassandra. Is there any discussion? Um Sammy. Thank you, chair. I This is my 10th year uh being on a budget committee. And the budget documents and presentation continues year after year to be the most transparent documents and presentation that uh I ever seen. So, want to give credit Maria, Lauren, and frankly all those to who have worked uh uh alongside you and with you in the buildings and and the district office to make sure
103that uh we have the access to this information. Uh personally, I believe this budget documents will help us keep moving the needle uh toward achieving the school board goals and the Corvallis promise. Uh the data is clear. Uh Corvallis public schools are the best uh place for our children in this community to have the best education. And uh now the numbers are clear. The dollars are where the our values are. And I think that's the bottom line where I have to vote on uh this motion or not based on are we aligned with our values and our goals or not? And my uh analysis of it is that we are. Uh in years before, I I don't know if I want to say I dramatized it and said mayday, mayday. You did. I did. And
104uh I remember that. Yes. And uh this year, it's not mayday. Uh this year we have restored programs. We have added uh services that's are critical for the students and uh that's is only possible by being really judicious and and aligning where uh the need is for the students and uh thinking really critically where the students students need the help. That's being said, May Day is approaching near in the years to come if we don't really think courageously on how funding education in Oregon and the nation uh should be and test all the assumptions from Measure 5, Measure 50, honoring the promises of IDEA uh and beyond these assumptions that we have been operating for years. It's outside the purview of this budget committee uh to for this motion, but it is definitely within the
105purview of us as citizens and community members uh and budget committee members when we go back to the community after we pass this budget and I urge my colleagues to do that is we continue to advocate and remind our legislators that May Day is approaching if we don't revise uh how we fund education for the years to come. Uh we can't be uh one financial crisis away from uh not sustaining funding for our education and we are uh thankfully we this district in a very good resilience place to continue providing the services for the students and continuing to provide them with better graduation opportunities and education opportunities than uh ever ever happened uh to be uh for Corvallis children. So, with that, I am in favor of the motion, Chair, and I'll be voting yes.
106Okay. So, go ahead. I swear it's really short, too. I just wanted to point out that um across Oregon that there were we're seeing thousands of educators being lost in schools across Oregon. Um and it makes me feel really good that we're not in that situation in our budget conversation right now. Um it's really heartbreaking to see the impacts of the budgets in public education. Um and I just wanted to share that. Um Mhm. Okay. Are we ready to take a vote? Can we take a vote? Okay. Um All in favor? Or do we do each person? Okay. >> [snorts] >> Sammy? I. Carla? I. Therese? I. Chris? No. Shawna? I. Cassandra? I. Bernie? I. I. Kevin? Lou? I. Chris? I. Judah? I. And I vote I. Oh. Seth and Seth? I. Okay. And I
107also vote I. Um Motion passes. Now do I sign? Yes. Where do we set this? Like that. Okay. I need my place. Oh, it's the Is it >> We do need a second motion to approve the tax rates and levy amount. Will the chair entertain a motion? Yes. I move that the permanent tax rate of 4 .4614 dollars per 1,000 of assessed value be levied for operating purposes, that a local option levy tax rate of 1.5 dollars per 1,000 dollars of assessed value be levied in support of the general fund, and that a tax amount of Hold on, let's see. 17,564,965 dollars be levied for the service of bonded debt obligations. Seconded. >> [laughter] >> Okay. That was motion by Teresa and seconded by um Judah. I do have a question for this or a
108request actually if it would be okay for folks that are still listening, thank you. Um could you take 1 second to just explain what these numbers are that we're about to vote on cuz I don't know if everybody knows really what it means to have a a bonded No, a um levied uh assessed value amount and would it Could you in 30 seconds or less or minute? The permanent tax rate is a permanent tax rate that was set um by measure 5 50. One of those. They're They're coordinated. Uh same purposes. And so, we don't choose that. It's permanent rate. Um the local option tax rate of 1.5 is what was approved by a vote by voters for the local option levy. Um and the the tax amount and why it's a dollar amount versus
109a rate, I don't know. That's what they require us to do. Um but of 17.5 million dollars will then um is for the general obligation bond that that levy debt and so that will come in we'll use that to pay the debt service next year. That amount is calculated based on a bunch of tax rates. Thank you. Okay. Let's do a roll call votes. Sammy. I. Carla. I. Therese. I. Chris. I. Shawna. I. Cassandra. I. Bernie. I. Kevin. I. Lou. I. I vote I. Um Chris. I. Judah. I. Uh Seth. I. Okay, motion passes. Um with no other business, we adjourn >> have to adopt the Oh. We need sorry. Uh uh yeah, motion on consolidated action plan. Okay. Sorry. Do we have another motion? Chair, would you entertain a motion? [laughter] Uh I move
110that uh the items under consolidated action be adopted as proposed. Second. Okay. Um motion by Judah and seconded by Sammy. Okay. It's hard to tell with the microphone sometimes. Okay. Um can we take a vote? Um I believe we have to ask if there's any items on >> any any discussion? All right. Let's go ahead and vote. Sammy. I. Carla. I. Therese. I. Chris. I. Shawna. I. Cassandra. I. Bernie. I. Kevin. I. Lou. I. I vote I. Chris. I. Judah. I. Seth. I. Okay. Motion passes unanimously. Um with no other business, we adjourn at 9:02. Before we all walk away, can we just thank our chair and vice chair for their service this evening? >> [applause] >> It's an odd role because you walk in and then suddenly you're in charge of the meeting, and
111so much gratitude for your willingness to step in and facilitate the conversation tonight. And Lauren and Maria for an amazing job. >> too. And you, too. Thank you. And Ryan. And the rest of you guys.