001and I'm going to call this meeting to order. Um, we have nobody participating electronically. Can I get a motion to approve the agenda? >> Motion to approve the agenda. >> Okay, we got all kinds of people talking. >> So, the first thing on the agenda, >> vote. >> Oh, sure. Let's vote on it. All in favor say I. >> I. There we go. I No. Okay, good. >> Um, so the first thing on the agenda is the certification of the SOQ bonus. Um, this is certified by Dr. Smith and uh, we have all of 2027 before we have to appropriate the funds. And as Miss Peely Peely pointed out in the FAPS meeting, the 1.8 million that we need to match is we need to make sure we have that. But there is no harm,
002no foul if we do not get those matching funds and we can just give the money back to the state. >> Okay. >> So I don't unless there's some objections, we do not have to vote on this. >> I think there was some information here that they were >> in case you were not aware of it, Dr. Smith. >> Yeah, happy to share just a little bit of background on this item. So uh this this was approved. Um this was a part of Governor Yncan's outgoing proposal in the budget. This was approved and so it does give you the give school divisions $1,500 per standards of quality position. Um it does require that local match. You know that we have more positions that are just standards of quality position. So when we do spread that
003across across all employees if we were able to do it would be $1,045. Um I I do want to point out it the um this does allow school divisions take advantage in FY26 or FY27. uh we do not have the funds in FY26 to do it. My recommendation is that we that I certify tomorrow accepting the funds and we wait to see the next year to see if we do have that local share if we're able to come up with that or not. Of course, we would bring that back to you. That would be a part your decision there. Uh we'd like to have to go over to the supervisors and get that appropriated as well. Also, if we don't have the funds in FY27, we have confirmed with the Virginia Department of Education, we
004have it in writing that we can uh change the certification and we can just return the funds uh without any penalty or issue. We can't say we don't want it and then ask for it later, but we can say we yes, we'll take it now and we can give it back if we don't have the local share and or do not want do not elect to give it out later. >> And where might we get the local share from in the next year? >> So, there's I mean, it could come a couple different ways. So, we're waiting to see what happens on on the state side. You know, there is uh some on the House side, there's some um one-time funds, some flexible onetime funds. We wouldn't be able to use those funds, but it
005may free up other local dollars. That could be a situation. Uh we could wait till the end of next year and look see what our endofear uh funding is looking like. That's an option as well. Um and I guess there could be other ways, but those are two that come to mind for me. We'll have we have um roughly $900,000 to a million dollars left in our FY25 carryover fund right now. We have not used that. Uh we could see at the end of FY26 there might be some funds that roll over. So maybe between 25 and 26 we have enough even to cover the 1.7. >> Thanks. >> Are there any questions? Madam Chair, I suggest we have a motion that we authorize the superintendent to certify because this is somewhat an unusual situation
006and it's >> a certain extent >> we would do that >> putting forth a commitment, >> right? So would we do that in the special meeting since this is >> I thought you said no action is required. So, I just wanted to make sure that when we get to the meeting, we will >> amend. >> Okay, we can make that motion because it does have to come back to us anyway once we determine where the appropriation is coming from. Any other questions? >> Just a clarification question. We get $3.6 million in total as a lump sum for the >> Okay. >> But we only get it if we spend if we have 1.8 to match it. >> Yeah. Otherwise, it goes away. >> Yeah. The 3.6 Six is state funding in their budget and it
007was in Governor Yunk's budget. We have to have a matching which is the 1.8. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And that is because we choose to share it right among everyone. >> The local well the local share would not Yes. Local share still wouldn't change in terms of >> but but the amount >> right. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. If there are no additional questions, we'll move on to the main event, which is the FY27 budget. >> All right. So, um, you know, we are jumping into the FY27 budget. Excited to to be here and to be talking about this this evening. Uh, do want to start off and, uh, you know, we I was, uh, in attendance with several of our board members and staff last night with the board of supervisors.
008Um, and do want to thank them for their continued commitment to the education of our children here in Stafford schools. uh they have worked collaboratively with our board and we're really appreciative of their continued investment in our schools and our community. Um they've dedicated funding for the construction of three new schools and this budget brings those uh to fruition and so we'll the opportunity to open those three new schools while also taking care of our our staff to make sure we can invest in our staff and infrastructure. So just very grateful and appreciative to our board of supervisors. So, as we get into this, our board of supervisors did adopt the budget uh last evening. We, the school board did request $18.5 million in local dollars. The county transfer was aligned with the county administrator's
009recommendation of a $15.1 million increase is what uh we received from the the board of supervisors. So, that is about $3.4 million short of your ask. Uh but that's where we landed. There's a little bit of additional funding for the public day school. You see 73,000 there uh for the total of 15.2 million is the increase in local dollars year-over-year from the county. The the school board uh did also receive a one-time funding request which was included in your in your budget request of 2.5 million in one-time uh funds uh to be appropriated. So that is has been appropriated. Now, uh we you did include that if you recall in your your funding request that uh does allow you to purchase um some weapons detection systems that was included in there. There was some cyclical
010replacement for technology and um and buses that was included in there, but that was appropriated last night as well. >> But this is this is money that was left over from FY25. >> It's not it's not money that it's not new money they had to find. This is just the >> We had about 3.4 four left. This appropriated the 2.5 and that's the remaining 900,000 what Chris was talking about just a few minutes ago. >> Except it sort of is new money because once the end of the year comes it's not our money anymore. >> Right. But every year we typically have some of this that we're asking can we use this money for a specific >> Yeah. So we're rolling it into the whole budget thing rather than as separate things. >> Yeah. So,
011also wanted to share the the capital update from the supervisor's action last evening. Uh, there wasn't really any change from what the county administrator proposed. Our projects for Drew Middle School, the rebuild there, the rebuild at Hartwood Elementary School, the North Stafford Fine Arts Wing, and the Rodney Toppson critical systems and restoration. All of those projects remain on schedule and on track. No changes to those. the rising star complex and the day school replacement. Um, you know, the school board had it at 2030, supervisors have it at 30, 2032 and it remained on that timeline. Um, elementary school 20, middle school 9, high school 7, we had within our CIP uh in the adopted CIP last night from the supervisors that shifted outside of the the 10-year CIP. On the 3R funding side, we requested
01219.2 million. The county did fund uh 18.2 2 million which was an reduction of 1 million in that cash funding. However, the supervisors did uh say they would allow us to shift any of the some of the construction savings from our our construction our our three new schools over to cover that deficit. And so we think that will really help us that helps us to get to that 192 million.2 million which we're pleased with. So moving on to state funding. Um we do not have a finalized state budget at this time. And so we are using uh the Yncans budget uh the former governor Yncan's budget that was released. Um that's what we're using for this budget. We are hearing that the state budget uh using the House and Senate versions will likely come out
013um in June, but they're still negotiating uh that at this time. And so, uh, Governor Yncan's budget is what we used for the additional for the original budget that we proposed for FY27 that I shared with you and that you adopted. So, it was based on those figures. It is important to note here that the House version of uh the the current budget, the FY27 budget does provide an additional $2.47 million in at risk funding that is recurring year-over-year dollars. The House budget also provides $11 million to Stafford County Stafford schools. um in flexible one-time funding. The Senate version on the other side provides about 4.1 million in recurring year-over-year dollars. You see some of the categories there that includes a 3% raise uh where the House and Yncan's budget was a 2% raise. And
014so that is $2 million there for compensation. You see the additional funding for at risk special education and the sales tax update. So that is recurring dollars about 4.1 million. What we are hearing is that uh really the the floor right now is where the house is, the lower of the two. The ceiling is going to be the Senate. And so we that we're likely to end up somewhere in between the state budget in June is what we we're hearing. >> I have a question. What is a sales tax update? Is that in addition to what we would normally get or is that just an update in their calculation? >> Updating their calculation. They updated their projections. So they're projecting additional sales tax in the Senate budget. It might be tied to around data centers
015or or something else with some repealing of the taxes if they were doing it. >> If the sales tax were updated, then that would be in either budget. Correct. I mean, it would be allocated if it was actually an increase in the sales tax. >> Correct. But this was just a projection. >> Correct. >> So whichever way it is, we're going to we're going to get it. uh >> if >> unless they choose not to update those projections, >> isn't it based on what it actually the sales tax is that comes in? >> Yeah, but they can project going forward. And so the Senate either had more aggressive projections or they were repealing um it might be tied to data center taxes that exemptions that they had on data centers that they were repealing that
016was generating additional funding. So for for the purpose of this budget again we're we're looking at and using uh Ynan's budget but we do anticipate additional state funding uh coming in the future. So our funding gap. So here is our our funding gap. So we do have your your budget has a total revenue of um $525,914,697. Our expenditures um is uh a little bit more than that actually 3.4 4 million uh more than that. So that's our deficit based on what was approved last night by the supervisor. So that is that $3.4 million gap between what you you approved and we sent to the supervisors and what was um appropriated there, the 15.1 million. Additionally, since the time you built a budget, we built a budget, uh we have seen fuel prices go up and
017so this board did ask that we build in more funds for fuel for FY27. Uh specifically, we have 450,000 here that's built into the FY27 budget. So that would adjust our deficit to 3.87 million that we would need to find to close this funding gap for FY27 as we look to close this gap. Uh really looked at the the board's budget priorities. Um so the board adopts are your budget priorities and so those are outlined here on this screen. really focusing on making sure that we could open our three new schools and have safe learning environments for all of our students. Also focusing on a goal four of our strategic plan that we can attract, retain, and invest in our staff to keep our high quality staff while also maintaining the license scale and making
018those adjustments and staying competitive with our surrounding divisions with all of our positions. uh your one of the budget priorities is also around securing resources so our staff have the necessary resources to continue to improve uh student performance and student learning. You've also shared a focus around elementary interventionist uh middle school deans and middle school uh security officers. So that's really the priorities that it's really driving us in this reconciliation. So uh with with your input I appreciate your input around this. The approach has been to focus on opening our new schools. Prioritize salaries. This board has shared that the focus needs to be on making sure that we can prioritize salaries. You you set that that bar at an average of 4.75% with your adopted budget and really wanted to make sure that we
019kept that percentage. So really wanted to focus on that and then really think about what are some items that knowing that we believe state funding is coming, what can we identify as there some items that we could wait on until July, until the fall, until we have some additional state funding. And so looking to make up that $3.8 million gap that we have, but also do that in a way that allows us to continue to move forward while prioritizing salaries and strategically deferring some of the other items. So how do we get here? So, I'm going to outline uh a process and a and a method that we can get there, a path for us to get there. Uh I appreciate it at uh board members that have reached out and we've had conversations around
020those individually around this and so I do want to I do appreciate that. So, first as we talk about uh paraprofessionals and interventionists, if you'll recall, interventionists were funded with all-in funding. This is a grant funded. Um we knew that these were going away. However, we've seen great uh results from the use of our interventionists in our elementary schools. and this board has prioritized that to say we really need interventionists in our elementary schools. Uh given the cuts and given where we are um we're proposing to adjust the staffing model for instructional pair professionals so that we can include the licensed interventionist. And so this would reduce at the elementary level our general education pair of professionals on average of two um per school that would provide the one licensed interventionist per elementary school. Additionally,
021what you'll see uh in this is the recommendation is to to add uh a staffing standard that would be based on student needs. So schools, elementary schools that have 300 uh reading plans, they would receive a 1.0. 0 pair professional to support those plans. If stu if a school has 600, they would 2.0 um FTE for pair professional to support the student needs there. So that would be a new staffing standard uh to support those schools really based on student needs instead of just saying one per school or what that may look like in terms of additional uh in terms of other we'll call reductions here. um recommending to reduce um an FTE position at the central office, a coordinator position here. Uh that would total 140 almost $142,000. We would shift a a position
022that was in uh title funding that we were looking to put into the to the operating fund, shift that back to grant funding. So that's an additional reduction of 153,000. And then what I just shared around the reduction of two general ed pair professionals um at each elementary school that's a total of 38 FTEES uh that's a reduction of 1.7 million. I I do want to highlight here that we have uh worked with human resources and talent development to ensure that we have vacant paraprofessional positions. No one everyone would have a a role and a position. We would not be uh cutting any any individuals uh because of this move. proven that we do have the vacancies for this uh so that those instructional pair professionals can go into similar roles um or other roles
023there >> but we're not necessarily guaranteeing that they can stay at the same school or >> That's correct. So it may be a different school. It may be a little bit different role. We have some different roles that are on that that paraprofessional scale there. Uh whether it's a general ed, we have a little bit higher scale with special education pair of professionals. We also have daily building subs on that all receive benefits. So it would not be a decrease or demotion for any of those folks. >> Would we be having a average of one per school? >> It would be an average of two. >> So So say for example if would they work part-time at one school and part-time at another for a full-time job. >> The way the >> if you have
024500 kids. >> Yeah. So it would it's it's rounded. It's 450. >> Yeah. There is the calculation and is rounding down. So it's at a 1.0. So we don't ask people to travel between schools with our pair of professionals. So if we had 550 kids, we would round down to one. >> So the for the targeted pair of professionals, it's based on the number of reading plans. So if they had, you know, 5 550, I think you're thinking about the number with reading plans. Um if they had 550 reading plans, they would have 1.0. Also, >> yeah, it would be a 1.0. They don't get the 2.0, so they get to >> have 599, it would be rounded down to one or 300. >> Yes, ma'am. But we do work with schools on exceptions and
025based on situations. Um but we do have formulas and they're able to submit a staffing exception if they feel like that's needed. >> So what is it right now then? >> Currently um general ed pair of professionals uh for we have pair professionals in every kindergarten one per kindergarten in grades one through five >> will require that >> in grades one through five we have uh one pair of profession or a pair of professional for every five sections or classrooms. So they take the total number of classrooms you have general ed classrooms in grades one through five and divide that by five and you round down and that's your pair of professionals that you have in elementary school. So those are uh recommendations for reductions there in terms of there's also recommendations here for things
026that you can defer as I mentioned earlier thinking about things that we may be able to defer um until we have a state budget. And so you'll see the your original uh budget that you adopted had middle school SSOs, one at each of our middle schools. And so deferring that until July until we get uh state funds hopefully in June or when we get the state budget uh back there those would qualify for the additional at risk funds and so those are not a licensed position and so it would not be taken from some of our licensed staff already and so there's some um that's what we think this would be a good place here something we can defer also looking at cyclical replacement for some of our bus our transportation and buses and so
027we do need to continue to have that cyclical replacement it's not something that we are going to be purchasing in June. And so it is something that we could defer a day some time to order the buses and get the buses here. And so that is something uh that we uh that we've looked at there. Textbooks and instructional materials, we do have a K12 literacy adoption in the budget for next year. It we usually go through go through that adoption process throughout the year. Uh those actual purchases are usually made in the winter or spring um so we can get them here in time. And so that is something else that we thought that we could uh defer for a state budget. And then about $300,000 in uh department and school reductions looking at where
028the state budget comes in in areas that we would have to uh reduce and defer until we we received a state budget. >> You also ask a question. So with the um the ad positions at Bandy that was in the budget, are all those staying? >> Which ones? There was additions to um finance and operations and I think comm's the new school. >> There were a couple of new >> No, not for the new schools. I thought it was for central office. >> There weren't any of those in other than the new schools and with our expansion in terms of this. There were some central supports positions because of our expansion with the new schools, but other than that there were just tie to think of those central support positions. What were those? Those were
029some that with the new schools with the expansion of the opening the new schools. Those were part of the new schools. Um I don't have those right in front of me but I can pull them up. >> There were some maintenance positions because we're expanding expanding. >> So they will be >> they were part of the new schools with the 10.6 mill. >> So they're still intact. It was four and a half maintenance positions and then various other department positions. I think there's a total of eight. >> Well, and when so when I'm just curious when you say departmental reductions, is that something >> that is not what I've asked department uh cabinet and departments to take a look at in terms of some potential reductions? And so that is in terms of their non-compensation
030lines. So it's non-comp lines that we look at to see where that may be. >> Okay. You also see that I uh what what I mentioned earlier about adding back the targeted pair of professionals there. Um so that is included here again pending state funds. So we we are using the house budget as the floor uh that we well it's not using as the floor here. We're using the ynens budget as the floor. We anticipate uh that the state budget will have uh 2.8 million in additional funding. That is the house budget that we have heard and and are thinking about for new funding coming forward from the state. Um we of course would bring that back to you um so that you could approve that and would need to go across the street to
031get additional appropriations. Here is your license scale. And so one of as you've been clear wanted to keep the raise at the average of 4.75%. Um, and so that the license scale is untouched and we we did keep that. Here you'll see the starting salary has moved up from 50,600 to $54,000 uh there. Um, so that does get us closer to implementing the 2.15 step differential uh between those steps. Up in the upper right hand corner, you will note that Prince William and Spennsylvania have adopted their scales and so we've included those figures there. We have closed the gap uh especially with Spennsylvania and so uh they right now in our current budget um they are higher than us in steps 0 through five in this uh proposal they would be ahead of us in
032steps 0 one and two and then we we catch them in step three. So just a just a recap of where we are and how we balance here. You see the figures here in terms of our revenue um the aduct the reductions to the local transfer on the lefth hand side see the expenditures on the right hand side with the reductions and uh the recommendations for deferred for state funding that does allow us to to balance in terms of the highlights again really focusing on our our staff and making sure we have that average of 4.75 adjusting that teacher scale to $54,000. It does allow us to open our three new schools um which is a monumental um step uh for this board and for our our community. We maintain elementary school interventionist adds the
033middle school deans and but does defer the 1.9 million until the state budget adoption. >> So so the the difference and that that we're trying to correct for is 3.8 million. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. And then what we're proposing is if we get more money, we are only proposing to put the deferred in or what what is the >> it would be the 1.9 one 1.862, I'm sorry. Right here. >> But if we get 4.1 the Senate's budget, then we could fund all of this. >> Yes, ma'am. Would we be doing that or are we treating the reductions and cuts differently than the deferred? >> At this point, we are treating I I would recommend you treat them differently that we you know that the deferred um there's some significant cuts on there that
034really that's going to have some impacts and so that we do reinstate the the things that are deferred and I think we would want to come back and take a look at what our other needs may be with any additional state funding. >> But this is something that has to come back to us for a vote. >> Right. I'm just I'm just saying that that if we got 4.1 that would cover everything here. And I'm just asking if that's what we would be doing or if we're only going to be concerned about the 1.8 and not automatically deal with the 2 million that was reductions and cuts or do we want to revisit? I'm just just trying to >> like what's the order of operation? >> We prioritize the deferred ones at this point. I
035mean, we would love to reinstate those some of those other areas. Um, absolutely. But we also did not want to go above what we interpret the floor of what this house the house budget. And so, um, >> I got you. I'm just But >> yeah, we would love to cautiously optimistic that there's going to be more. And so then I'm like, what's the plan if that happens? So, what I'm hearing is >> ideally what you want to be able to do is if we get more money, the first thing you're going to hit is the deferred. >> Yes, ma'am. But then you will come back to us about anything else. Is that what we're all hearing or is that >> Yeah. >> So the deferred is automatic without another board decision >> and the anything
036else comes again to a board decision. >> Technically, we're going to have to come back to you for the 1.8. >> We're asking at this point if we come back to you that we're going to want to put that back. These are things that we really need. We're just deferring right now. So, they're not typically things we would cut if we expected the state if we expected that we weren't going to get that additional state money. >> Okay. >> We're just going to push it a couple of months until the state money is finalized. >> Right. >> Any other questions? >> Well, I still have a couple more sides if you >> I would like to just make a note on the departmental and school reductions to the extent feasible. I would like to see
037those reductions in departmental rather than school. They are. Yeah. >> Because schools are so tight already, >> I don't want them to think it's just wherever. >> Yep. Yep. >> Agreed. >> So, the first tier would be departmental and then if needed >> schools I don't want to to get into planning for the next school year without being able to do these things. So, we always want to add to the schools and now we're not talking about adding, we're talking about taking away, right? >> Yeah. >> Yes. That's absolutely I appreciate that. >> Is it possible that we could just target deferred um reductions in departmental and then come back to us if you need to extend that to the schools? >> We could do that. It's really small. So yeah, we could we could
038do that especially if we're especially if we're going to defer it and we're going to come back in terms of state funding. That's something we can >> because we have more flexibility in adding back in for departmental versus the schools with that tight turnaround between school ending and school opening >> and the purchases they need to make to >> I think it needs it's going to come back to us anyway once we know what the numbers are from the state. So, we're going to have >> Right. But this is a matter of planning where we're going to get these to eat. Yeah. >> The superintendent is going to have to actually come up with this. He can't just say, "Well, we'll defer it." He's got to have a plan as to exactly where that $32,940
039is going to come from. >> But that is in the deferred pile rather than the reduction cut pile. >> But if it's deferred, we're we're planning on not having it. >> And we may not know until >> me I can do that. I'm comfortable doing the school part out of that for for >> just what's the state June target date? >> Don't you laugh. >> I think June 30th they have to have it in place. >> What is their skill? >> Sorry. Did you hear my eyes >> loudly? >> Um they're coming back into session. I don't know if they've announced yet. They haven't even call them back in a special session. >> And and Lisa, correct me if I'm wrong, but they have to adopt. This is the first year of a benium. So,
040they don't have a budget to rely on. So, they have to adopt and pass something before June 30th or they're kind of in a government shutdown scenario. >> So, we expect it to be mid to late June at the earliest. >> Why Why would Why is it take so long since they're coming back now and working on it? I mean, I would think they'd be under a lot of pressure >> if they came back for >> constituents to get if they're back out. I don't think they're they're still I don't think they're in session right now. >> I don't think we've ever had it that late. We had it early, but I don't remember ever getting >> Yeah, we're not hearing a lot from the conferees that it should be talking and so we are
041here to >> we're just at a few important topics. It's not. >> So, what I'm hearing is that we want to make sure that those um department cuts and schoolbased cuts go in first and then um >> the school base we're going to remove department >> for for these planning focuses. >> Yep. Yep. Not a problem. >> So, here's what you'll see in the you know in the draft resolution here. There's there's two changes from your uh from your adopted budget. you'll see a reduction in 3.4 million uh in the operating line and that is uh the to reflect the county transfer and then there's a $1 million reduction in capital projects. That's the three R money um that once we can have savings in in construction then we can hopefully put it back and
042those other the other numbers remain the same. Just pointing out that the capital projects line is just our 3R and other um smaller numbers. Our major large capital projects are appropriated individually by the board of supervisors. So when you look at that and say, well, wait a minute, we have such big projects going on. Why isn't that number hund00 million? It's just our smaller projects. >> I think that used to be like $2.4 million every year or something. They gave us >> a lot smaller. Ridiculous. We've made a lot of ground. It was like five or six million for several years. And could you clarify the um ATI and Commonwealth Gome and CGS um we are just a fiduciary agent for them and so we manage the books for them. They have their own board
043that authorizes their spend. Uh but we still need those funds appropriated by the board of supervisors. >> But it's not to our discretion or the board of supervisors discretion in terms of what happens with those funds. Yes, ma'am. or whether they can whether we get those funds, >> right? >> Can we just footnote that in this resolution total? I think that would be helpful. It's a good point you're making that these are not local funds and they're pass through fiscal 18 >> I don't want somebody to say, "Oh, wait. You got $5 million here that you didn't tell us." Absolutely. Clarify that. You do have a copy of the draft resolution in your >> Yeah. No, I'm just saying on the on the table on the table because I mean it's going to be part
044of what people look at and it it it explains these are not >> our funds that we really have any >> right. >> Any questions? Questions? So, >> I just want to say great job >> if the board >> I truly do appreciate I think everything >> the board able to adopt tonight. I'll just I just wanted to show this up here that we would be working on contracts uh first thing tomorrow morning. Um and that we would aim to get we have contracts out next Friday um at the latest there to get all contracts out released to staff um giving us a couple weeks before um staff or the end of the school year. I just really appreciate the collective work of the board, you know, putting setting clear boundaries on our priorities and
045sticking to them even with the transition of three new people. But then also, as we were uh Dr. Chase and I were saying earlier too, that your communication with Mr. Ashton has been really helpful to making sure that he's clear on our direction. And then for any of us that have had the chance to speak with either our counterpart or someone else on the um board of supervisors just so that we can make sure they understand what our priorities are because we've been accused before of bringing a budget that didn't represent our priorities. And I think you know even when Shannon and I I'm sorry Miss Fingerboltz and I met with Mr. English and um Mr. digs making sure they understood this is what we're coming with them and that's what we're you know very
046serious about. So, I just feel like this is and you know, even watching the supervisors, I watched the work session. I was at an event last night um for Gates, but um even watching their uh work session, seeing them, it's I think one of the better I mean, nothing is ever pretty when you're trying to like figure stuff out. Um, we make everybody nervous when we're in a room trying to do things and then we figure it out. It just gets messy for a minute. Just just hold your breath. But they also had, I think, a really great meeting of, you know, hashing out, agreeing, disagreeing, compromise. I'm not willing to give this, but if we're going to get So, watching that all take place in their work session. Uh again, uh I think Stafford
047County, I know you may not like where the tax rate is. You may love where the tax rate is, whatever that is. But the work that we're required to do was I think from our side, their side, and you and Bill, you know, doing your dance in the middle. Um we really appreciate it. >> I I have to agree. And even last night watching the supervisors work through and make the resolutions and everybody got an opportunity to voice their opinion. Um they got an opportunity to suggest a lower tax rate and get it in the record. But it was a very calm, rational, reasoned, respectful debate and discussion even if you voted against it or voted for it regardless. And I I thought I was really impressed with the way the supervisors because I've seen
048it get really messy over there. And I appreciate that Bill Ashton I think is he he came to you and he discussed something and that's where it landed and it it gives us the opportunity to really I think plan around that and I really just do appreciate it. >> Everybody hold up your water bottles here. Here >> I thank you. It's been great working with with Bill and I think >> and just for the record happy birthday Chris and thank you very much for being here on your birthday to do this. I know you want to kiss to won't let us sing to you so you're safe. >> Okay. So are we agreed that we can go close this adjourn this and go vote on a budget? >> Yeah. Our staff will be >> Okay.
049We are adjourned and we will go to our special calling. Yes. All right. Thank you. I'm going to call this meeting to order and we are ready to roll. So Missy, if you would do roll call. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Miss Blackwell, >> present. Dr. Chase >> here. >> Miss Davis is here. Miss Fingholds >> here. >> Miss Healey >> here. >> Mr. Crushy >> here. >> Miss Randall >> here. >> Mr. Regan >> here. >> And Dr. Warner >> here. >> Madam Chair, you have a quorum. >> Thank you. >> Um we have no one participating electronically. Motion to approve the agenda. Uh Madam Chair, I proposed uh that we um I I move that we approve the agenda with the amendment to add an item 2.02 2 to authorize the superintendent to certify
050uh requesting the bonus from um the state. >> Thank you. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Please cast your vote. Motion passes unanimously. Okay. Moving on to item 2.01, 1 the adoption of the FY27 budget. >> I move that we adopt the um provisional budget that we discussed um in the work session. >> Second. >> Good for you. Look at you. Good job. Okay. Do I have questions or comments? >> Um I would just like to uh thank staff and Dr. Smith for uh working through this budget process. And I would like to thank our counterparts across the street. Um I particularly want to thank my counterpart, Miss Evans. This was her first budget. She walked into this uh with kind of this deficit of three schools that had to be opened and
051she was not on the board that voted for those three schools, but she did the work to help find uh the funds for those schools. So I thank her as well as uh the other board members. >> Anyone else? Um, I just want to say thanks to Dr. Smith and to the birthday person, Mr. Fulmer. Um, today, um, we had a 101 and that was definitely a big help for me, um, to get through this tonight. Thank you. Right, if we're ready, cast your vote. The budget passes unanimously. Woohoo. Thank you so much. Moving on to item 2.02, the authorization to to um certify the SOQ bonus. >> Motion to approve the um funding to c the certification process the superintendent needs to do for the um bonus money. >> Second. Miss Wet Blackwell won
052that one. All right. Um, any discussion, >> Madam Chair? Not to be the uh, you know, the sad one here, but I just want to make sure that employees understand that we're asking the state for these funds and it is our intention to give a bonus sometime before the end of fiscal year 2027. However, that is contingent on the $1.8 8 million that is required from our local funding becoming available. I don't want people to think that this is going to be automatic. I wish we could say that, but we have to find that money. Um and and then we we're not setting a date. We're just saying sometime before the end of fiscal year 27, right? Which would be June of 26. >> 27. A year from Yeah, that's right. Oh my gosh, time
053is flying. a year a year from this June. >> Thank you, Miss Kelly. That is correct. Um this money was in um Governor Yncan's budget. We do have to come up with a match, but um we have to certify this by May 1st or um Dr. Smith does. So that's that's what we're trying to do tonight to hopefully we can ensure that everybody gets it. Um any questions? Cast your votes. Motion passes unanimously. Um and with that we are adjourned. I would like to remind everybody that the 7th at uh Colonial Forge uh Delegate Stacy Carroll will be meeting with Dominion. Um and our next meeting I think is the 12th. Um and the 30th we are meeting for our legislative debrief. And everybody have a wonderful evening. Look at that. The birthday boy gets
054to go home.