001the chair for the budget and finance committee. Um we're going to go ahead and get started uh today for the budget and finance committee and I'm going to hand it off to Dr. Battle. >> All right. Thank you so much um Vice Chair Naba McKenna. Um I am going to welcome up our chief financial officer um Dr. Jorge Robles. He is going to walk us through our proposed FY26 um budget amendment. As a reminder, this is kind of our annual um process that happens um this time of year almost almost every year. Um and so I will walk it um I will turn it over to um Chief Robles. Um he has a few slides just to ground us um in um some minor um shifts with um the budget that don't require um any
002additional funding, just um aligning to specifics within the budget. So Chief Robas, take it away. >> Thank you, Dr. Battle. Um, budget chair, board members, great to see you today and I'm glad to be here to discuss um, give you an overview of the FY26 budget amendment proposed budget amendment process. See if I can move the slides. Um, just to start to ground us, I mean as as we did in the original budget, uh, we we ground ourselves on the priorities that this budget has set out. I mean, this board has set out for um, the budget amendment. So this is a reminder of of what guide us in in our budgeting process. Um the uh purpose of the budget amendment process is actually very simple. It's really to allow us to represent the adjust
003adjustments um that happen during the fall or leading up to the fall um in our official approved budget. So therefore we have an updated representation of where the uh dollars are allocated, where the resources are allocated, which facilitates our budget management, monitoring and just pro provides more clarity on on our overall financials. As Dr. Battle mentioned, this is a standard process that is done uh almost every year and it's just overall good practice. So, let me um share with you some of the main proposed adjustments uh to our FY26 budget that are included in this amendment um for your approval. First, and as Dr. battle reference in the overall dollar amount. Um the there is no change. The actual budget is balanced to the original allocation um that was in the original budget approved by
004this board of 1.382 billion. Uh so there is no change in that regard. Uh we balance all the changes to meet the original approved amount. There is some movement um between some functions uh that are reflected in the detailed document and those are mainly driven by some of the um adjustment made through the SBB full adjustment process and other small changes that need to be um recorded in the official budget. Um on the positions or FTEES uh we have adjusted that number the proposed adjustment is uh 306.3 positions FTEES I would say 171 of those um are due to um the studentbased budgeting principal budget allocations um you know leading up to and through the full adjustment process where um you know the the um the allocations that principles make in their budget change and
005those uh changes are then now reflected in our official budget um on the positions that they um uh they choose. The second uh change is 99.5 FTEES and these are adjustments in the maintenance and transportation team. This is not new personnel. Uh this is not we're not adding any any people. This is actually to address an issue with the number of FTEEs that were originally reflected on on on the um doc 9. um that you know happened when calculating the budget efficiency. So we're now reflecting those numbers there, but there is no new personnel or new addition to to the budget. And the um last um main change or adjustment uh is 36.8 FTEEs. uh this are adjustment to ensure the continuity of support for our exceptional student education services mainly um solving for a
006decrease on IDA funding approximately um $2.5 million um that we've seen for FY26. Um that decrease essentially a result of um just less funding, less dollars flowing through uh relative to last year. um as well as the you know the calculations on IDA um are in part due to population and part due to poverty level and essentially um the um relative growth on both uh for for the way that it is distributed by the state. Um we even if you see an increase overall um if other districts in the state of Tennessee have grown more on other dimension either population or poverty we might see less funds coming to us. Um and really that is um as Dr. Battle said a pretty straightforward um summary of changes and I'm going to turn it back over
007to budget chair and see if there are any questions. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um I'll turn it over to board members. Uh does anyone have questions? >> Board member Elro. >> Thank you. You just need some clarity on the exceptional ed teachers. The 36.9 FTEES, those are not new positions. Just like they're not new positions in the transportation and maintenance FTEES. That's just a change of going from IDEIDA funding to local funding. Is that correct? >> The majority the 28 are not new. They're moving from 26 28 they're moving from IDA to uh local. Um others are a reflection also of the full adjustment um where we created new positions because they were needed to support to provide supports like positions that are triggered by an IDA or um you know supports that needed
008by the student but the vast majority is moving from IDA funding to local funding. >> Those new positions that are required is that because of an increase of special ed populations within our schools. >> Correct. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, board member El Rod. Anyone else? >> Board member block. >> So, just in thinking about the potential impact of coming federal dollars, and I know we're not there yet, but the special ed shift makes me think of it. This is the type of adjustment we might have to make. If federal dollars get reduced by Congress or you know in sort of allocations that get done then we then we either have to eliminate those positions or we need to as we've done here shift them from federal funding to local funding. Is that are
009we going to be in this position more frequently? Do we have a sense yet? Just thinking forward. Um thank you board member um horlock we don't have a sense yet um but in the event that um some of the federal grants are reduced I think depending on the nature of the grant yes we would have to examine essentially what services are we currently providing um the way we utilize those grants if those are positions or you know contracted services uh resources for schools and then determine what would be the best course of action to mitigate an impact? You know, it could be that you want to cover with local dollars or it could be that maybe there's a different way to provide the support or maybe that support, you know, is no longer critical relative
010to other um needs that we have >> and there may be some of those things where uh we have a we really have options to think about how do we allocate and what do we do and how do we shift in the case of IDA services and related IEP services. Those are things we're going to want to provide, but also those are things we are required by law to provide even if funding is not provided to us. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> Thank you, board member block. Anyone else? Going once. All right. Um, I do have a follow-up question about the IDA funding and federal funding related to that. Have we seen a shift over time of a decrease in funding or is this a one-time thing? What are we what have
011we looked like in the last couple of years around um federal funding for IDA? Um so I I can go as far as uh last year and this year um that we have seen a a decrease um on the overall pool has not this is probably more meaningful than what happened last year if I recall. Um and like I said before it it the way that is allocated is allocated to the state and then distributed based on the formula. So it's it's a it's a relative um it's an impact relative to what is happening on other districts across the state of Tennessee. So you know they applied a a a percentage calculation of if these are the number of of students that qualify and economically disadvantaged that you know would receive that portion of IDA
012you know what is our portion of the entire pie across the state. So we might have grown but maybe grown less than other districts relatively. Um so maybe receiving less than what we had last year when our proportion was larger than um than other districts. This year though um the the pool of money that came to the state was lower than what it has before. So that is definitely a a a change on on from what I've seen before. Follow question. A follow-up question to that is, has the state contributed to offset the cost that we're not receiving from the federal government? >> No. >> Okay. And then my last question is, can you talk me through uh the economically disadvantaged and how that's connected to um IDEIDA funding when that is a federal law
013that we have to comply with regardless of a student's economic status? Is that are we connecting both of those or am I read am I understanding that wrong? >> No, it's two different things. >> It's two different things. >> Okay. Yeah, it's just that within within IDAB specifically, >> the way that the the the pool of fund is distributed um and don't quote me this, but I think it's 75% based on the overall population that qualifies for help. And then 25% is distributed based on those who qualify, you know, also as in poverty. And so those funds are also going there to you know increase support for those who might need more in addition to just the disabilities. >> Thank you for the clarification. If we have no other questions. >> All right, we will
014adjourn the meeting. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. All right, board. We're going to go ahead and move into announcements.