001December. Yeah, I'm thinking >> December 27. >> Good evening, loyal Oral board member fans. Uh, I know there's a lot going on tonight, but welcome. >> All right. Good then. >> You're good. >> All right. We will call to the order of our 2025 2026 annual meeting and budget hearing today on October 13th at 7 p.m. So does it have a role on there? I don't think so. Okay. Our first item then would be election of chairperson. So look for someone to nominate >> chairperson. money flows into the general fund, but it's kind of outside the main revenue limit calculation we just talked about. >> That's the key point. It gives them flexibility. In a system where the state caps your main revenue sources, successfully attracting students through open enrollment is a major financial strategy.
002>> Looking at the historical data in the presentation, this net revenue from open enrollment has been growing steadily year after year. It's clearly a success story for them. >> Almost $2 billion in extra flexibility within that tight state controlled system. That's significant. >> It absolutely is. Okay, now we need to pivot to another mechanism that affects the local taxpayer but maybe isn't always obvious on the surface. The Wisconsin private choice program, the school voucher program. The sources seem to highlight something specific about how this is funded locally. >> Yes, and this is uh potentially quite surprising for many taxpayers. The sources state very clearly that the cost of private school vouchers is treated as a direct cost to the public school district. And here's the critical part. The mechanism requires district to levy an additional
003local property tax to cover those voucher costs. >> So, let me get this straight. The local public school district has to add an amount to the property tax levy specifically to pay for students attending private schools via the voucher program. >> That's how the system described in the sources works. The funds are levied locally through the public district's taxing authority. >> But does the average homeowner see this specific charge on their tax bill? Is there a line item for private school voucher cost? >> That's the catch. According to the presentation, this specific levy amount for vouchers is not itemized on local property tax bills. It's embedded within the total school levy. >> So, it's a required cost paid by local taxpayers, but it's essentially hidden from direct view on the bill. >> That's what the
004sources indicate. Yes, lack of itemization means lack of easy transparency on that specific cost. >> And this cost isn't small change, is it? The numbers show pretty dramatic growth. quite dramatic. Between the 22 23 school year and the estimate for 2526, the total voucher cost levied by the district is projected to jump by 147.53%. >> Wow. What does that look like in actual dollars? >> It goes from around $224,000 up to an estimated $554,527. So yeah, over half a million levy locally for this purpose in the upcoming budget. >> Half a million dollars levied locally but not broken out on the tax statement. >> Right. And to really see the impact, the sources use the mill rate. That's the tax rate per thousand dollar of property value, the number that really determines your bill. >>
005Okay, so what's the comparison? Mill rate with the voucher cost versus without. >> The calculation presented shows the estimated total mill rate, including the voucher levy, is $7.36. But if you were to theoretically remove that legally required voucher cost from the levy calculation, the mill rate would drop to $6.77. So that's a difference of 59 cents per thousand dollar of property value. That's a direct impact the voucher program cost on the local tax rate according to these figures. >> Exactly. That comparison makes the otherwise unitemized cost visible in terms of the tax rate itself. >> That's a really stark comparison. Okay. So pulling all these threads together, the state limits, the open enrollment gains, these mandated voucher costs, what's the final tax levy picture look like for property owners? The total schoolbased tax levy for
0062025 2026 is projected at 6,854,200 or so dollars. This leads to that 7.36 bill rate we just discussed and it includes a small board approved over levy amount >> and this total levy covers a few different pots of money. Right. >> Correct. It's broken down. You have the main operational part which is fund 10 general fund and fund 38 n those are mostly governed by the revenue limit. Then you have fund 39 which is the referendum debt levy. That's money voters specifically approved for long-term borrowing like for building projects. >> And the third piece is fund 80, the community service levy. This one always seems interesting because it funds things beyond the standard school day. >> Yes, fund 80 is specifically for activities that are uh sort of outside the regular curriculum or extracurriculars, but
007are open to the broader community. For 2025 2026, the budget for fund 80 is $267,829 and it's funding for specific things. Let's list those out. Where is that specific community money going? >> According to the presentation, it covers $65,370 for middle school sports programs, $30,000 for a mental health navigator position, $103,459 for the oral zone, which sounds like a community youth program, and $69,000 for the police liaison officer in the schools. >> Okay. So, those are very specific community investments funded entirely by that portion of the local levy. >> That's right. They represent local priorities funded outside the state controlled operational budget. Got it. And looking broadly at the main operating budget, fund 10, where does the bulk of that 16 plus million dollars actually go? >> If you slice it by function, instruction is
008the biggest piece at 43%. Then support services thing, administration, transportation, maintenance, guidance, counselors, etc. That's about 35%. The final 22% is categorized as non-program. And importantly, this slice includes transfers like for special education, but it also includes those private school voucher costs we discussed. And if you slice it by what they're buying, the object, >> it's mostly people. Salaries make up 38.56% of Fund 10 spending and fringe benefits add another 21.09%. So personnel is clearly the largest cost driver. >> So wrapping this all up, despite the state limits and these mandated costs like vouchers, the overall financial picture presented for 2025 2026 actually looks pretty positive. >> It does. Based on these projections, they're anticipating a net operational surplus of around $574,000. And perhaps most notably for taxpayers, the projected mill rate is actually set
009to decrease from $8.15 in the current year down to that $7.36 estimate for next year. >> That suggests they've managed the constraints effectively, likely helped significantly by that strong open enrollment revenue. It points to yeah navigating a complex financial landscape pretty successfully using the levers they do control like attracting students. >> Wow. Okay. Quite the journey through school finance. We've touched on the real limits of public power at the annual meeting, the huge role of state revenue caps, but also how things like open enrollment can be a gamecher locally. I think the key takeaways for you, the listener, are understanding that advisory versus decision-making power, recognizing how much the state formula drives things at 75% figure is huge, and seeing that local student enrollment, the FTE count, is really the district's primary tool for financial
010stability and growth. >> Definitely. And as we finish, let's circle back one last time to that voucher funding mechanism we explored. Given that the sources show it's a rapidly growing cost over half a million dollars now levied locally but not itemized on tax bills. It makes you think, doesn't it? We have to leave you with this question. What does it mean for transparency and democratic oversight when a significant legally required local tax expenditure grows rapidly but remains essentially invisible on the bill sent to taxpayers? >> It certainly raises questions about financial clarity for the average citizen. Something worth considering as these funding discussions evolve. Absolutely. Food for thought. Thank you for joining us on this deep dive into the North Fondulac school finances. We hope this breakdown helps you stay informed and engaged. Welcome to
011the deep dive. Today we're jumping right in. >> Let me just state like to get to that level of AI. Maria had to rerun it about 15 16 times and there's still obviously some hallucinations in it. But the fact that she went about that and like programmed it as best she possibly could with this document as well as other things, it's pretty amazing where you can get to in a very short period of time. So, she did a lot of work in that area. But, um, I don't know if we want to recap and go through some of these other areas that might not have been >> before that I skipped something before I could come back to because we have to make a motion for our, uh, treasures report. Oh, >> for the Yeah,
012I missed it on there. Okay. So, I want to make sure we do that before and then we'll jump into it. Um, so it's for the 2024 2025 fund 10 receipts uh expenditures in balance on hand. So our our revenues were 22,592,698 and this is as of June 30th 2025. our expenditures uh the same time period was $21,733,62083 which then allotted us cash on hand or balance on hand of 4,961,394,32. So we actually have to make a motion to approve those. Uh so I'll look for a motion for for those items. >> I'll make the motion >> and I'll second. Oh, go ahead. Then all in favor say I. I all in against say nay. All right. Sorry about that. That was my fault. >> That's fine. That's fine. What did you guys think? >>
013Yeah, I think that was pretty uh informative, right? Like it it goes through it in a interesting way and yeah, it was a nice way to present it. The only thing I wasn't a big fan of was the emphasis on the mill rate because that's a fake number really and by itself means not the I mean the mill rate when I went back to like 2019 make sure I say this right the mill rate was $1021 >> and last year was $8.15 and my taxes were $400 higher. >> Yeah. So it's all driven by that value, right? That >> compared to look across the state >> at like medium fair market housing prices and there's just a huge disparity. So when you know I think Mike said the average was 706 or something like that
014in the state, but that's a meaningless number because you don't know >> you have to have that other number to to >> right. I mean, if you're living in Shorewood where the average house is 700,000 compared to here where it's maybe 180,000, >> you're going to get wildly different numbers based on those mill rates. >> And you don't know, you also don't know where they're at in their journey, their referendum journey, too. Their referendum could cause that mill rate to go really high and the neighboring districts might not have needed any referendum. So yeah, there's definitely it's not a perfect number for sure. Um I did I wanted to just note on page 22 of your of your presentation, I did add um a line that shows if we went to $755. There was a
015lot of discussion at our last board meeting on the mill rate. So I just wanted to put another option out there. Um, and that's that $755. Um, and that would be an over levy of just over 300,000. So, >> because I think on that page 22, that 170,000, >> am I on the right page? Is >> that 170,000 over levy? That's really 140,000. >> Yep. >> Yeah. 140,000 is what it says. Yeah. So, by going from 736 to 755, we pick up roughly 185,000. And I looked at like John's taxes and my taxes. And I assumed an 8% increase in the fair market value, just a little number, and going to 755, our taxes would be within a dollar of what they were last year. So the the taxes would be flat would get inund
016another $185,000 which I think helps with not yielding the taxes and sets us in a better position I think down the line when we have to go to a referendum we'll have kept it up to where it is instead of driving it down >> is that >> yeah I was just going to maybe uh mention that 180,000 though it can only go into certain funds though, right? >> Only service the debt forever, >> right? >> So still I mean it reduces our long-term debt, right? But then in my mind the key point is it keeps the taxes level so that when we go say we dropped it down and now in two years we have to go to a referendum that gap is going to be a lot bigger. >> So we just went over
017levy when we got to the referendum. That would give us 185,000 towards the referendum for no cost, >> but not operational. >> Correct. >> Won't go towards operation, but it'll affect the long-term debt and it'll decrease the it'll seem like the referendum ask is less than. So, but I guess my point is it can only defer referendum against another capital related referendum, >> right? >> Because if we get 185,000 in two years when we go to ask for more funds, >> we won't >> that 185,000 can't help that. Aside from it'll go away potentially. >> It would go away. So the overall ask would be the overall tax levy would be less. Even though you're using it for debt, it still kind of impacts fund 10 because you're not going to have that over levy
018when you go to the referendum. Right. Chances are. So your overall levy is going to be down by 185,000. >> Correct. >> Right. >> But only in Right. But the overall >> the over levy can only be in fund 39 in the debt, >> right? >> Yeah. >> So, we're not using the money in fund 10, but it's going to impact the referendum down the line if we put it in there because when you're looking at the the tax levy, it's the whole levy. It's operational and all the other funds, right? So, that bottom line number will decrease by 185. >> Yeah. The the point is if we need to ask for an operational, we would then at that time choose to decrease the over levy and then have to ask for potentially less in
019that >> the >> without affecting the taxes. Right. >> An operational an operational um right >> referendum is not 1039 though. >> No, I I understand. I think the what he's trying to uh point out is we would then it's really relative to how the taxpayer reviews how much they're paying in taxes, right? Not so much that we can take that money and put it into the fund. It's just >> right >> level setting the the tax ask. Right. >> Right. You you won't have such a big increase. If you didn't do this, you wouldn't have you'd have a bigger increase at the time of the referendum than if you keep this up there. >> And that was our that's been our philosophy. That's why it's been at $8.15 because we we could foresee that
020we were going to need at least two referendums. So, it's it's definitely a strategy that we have used. >> So, Maria, can you clarify if we if we put that 185,000, can that ever be deployed for I know it has to go to service the debt, >> but can that somehow support Capital projects >> only referendum >> only ref. Okay. >> Yeah. >> When you mentioned the tax being roughly within a dollar. You're talking about just the school portion tax. >> Um yeah. All right. But then equalizes values can change though from year to year, right? Which could make that not just a dollar. It could be. >> Well, that's why I said it will not be 8% over last year. >> Okay. >> So, it could be more if that percent isn't eight. >>
021It could get you >> could be less. >> That's Yeah. Could be. >> Yeah. I mean, I think it's I mean, based on the result from a referendum, it's important that we manage the tax piece so that there is no increase like that. Like, you know what I mean? remaining stain. >> So I'm using 8%. >> Yeah. >> So I mean if it goes higher than that >> less >> but the whole point is to try to maintain a lower ask if we had to go back. >> Yeah. >> So it would be such a burden on the the taxpayers at that time. >> Is that correct? >> What you're saying >> it lowers our right because we would make that payment for >> $185,000 to the debt. So our debt outstanding would be lowered
022as well which >> right well your ask is le that much less >> correct. >> Okay. >> So the taxpayers will still pay the same amount no matter what. It's just smoothing the >> up and downs. >> Well it's timing >> well. Right. >> Yeah. over time pay >> whether we overlay here or not. But >> and Maria, do we have to determine that tonight? Is that something that should be decided upon? I'm >> We should We should decide it. It's not something that we were we're going to vote on. That's the next meeting, but we should decide so that those documents then can be generated and ready to go in two weeks. So it's it's a decision um you know how likely are we and what is the timing of the next capital or
023the next yeah the next capital referendum if and when there is one. >> There is a fund balance in there already. Um, >> we would still motion though for whatever that result is tonight >> because we have the adoption of the budget and tax levy which would then carry over to a vote next time. >> Right. I mean, we're going to adopt what you're presenting whether it's the 6,854,24 or if it goes to 755, it's 7,29 204. Okay. >> Yep. All right. because I well I guess we can finish this. I've got some other questions but I guess it kind of relates in a way. So the way I understand it we've got 714,000 and that fun 49 >> which is for capital projects that we can use. Correct. Right. Yep. And if I'm figuring
024it right, after the with this proposed budget with the 500 thou roughly 500,000 surplus and in fund 10 >> if we were that's going to leave us at 25%. >> Yep. >> And our policy says 20%. So >> well, the way I calculated we have almost $1.2 2 million of surplus in the fund 10 balance over the 20% >> off policy. Yeah, >> over the 20% policy. So between the 1.2 and the 714, we've got 1.9 million in surplus. Mhm. >> See, and that's why I think Rick, it's more important to focus on that than than overving by more. Well, I'd like I think we I would like to see us talk about I'd like to see us do the over levy, but then we you know heard last time about teacher shorter class sizes
025and we're sitting on $1.9 million here that would fund three teachers for several years. But if we were to if that was to be we wouldn't move it to fund 49 then. >> Right. Because we would leave it in fund 10 and then the headcount would be increased and that's where it would pull out of. >> Got right. >> But the I mean this that's the operational plan for this year is already kind of established. Right. >> So head count, >> right? Yeah. >> So, >> it's more like maybe next year we don't move as much into >> Well, I guess my question is is if we wanted to get like an interventionist midway through the year, that's something you could do >> if we're we're plus, you know, and so you could look at
026that, but then it's again, how much are you going to maintain to put into a 46 at the end potentially? Obviously, you can add those option and you're saying already we're above the fund uh our fund balance so we can drop from there. You're saying to decrease back down to 20%. Is that right? >> I'm saying it's a discussion. >> Yeah. >> I think it plays too into what we were working on with like a five or three year or five year plan. >> Yeah. on knowing I know none of those numbers are 100% by any means but it's I think it's a good guard rail because >> if we're able to see you know a surplus of 500,000 this year on what we have and we can look at next year and it's looking
027like two 300,000 well then what you do with this year's 500,000 changes because you you already you know know the next year's >> still in the positive so >> and we'll know that soon. Um, as soon as we have the aid number, which is in two days, we'll have our general aid number. Those are all the pieces that Baird needs and I'll send this to B and then we'll have a fiveyear >> okay >> projection. >> And I know that doesn't necessarily impact as much the what we have to do tonight other than making sure that we have that in place moving forward when we want to as a make decision on what's appropriate, >> right? What's the need at that time? Yeah. >> Yeah. such as if it's an interventionist, it's a coach, it's
028a another staff member. I mean, those things all have to be looked at very closely with what we have. >> And I have until July, not me. >> Uh, we have until July to decide on what gets moved. Correct. 46. So, we'll wait until after audit, >> but we'll have a good look at that five-year plan in a month. Less than a month. Well, it'll go to Baird and then B will get it back to us probably mid November. >> Okay. >> So, we can look at at the November meeting as well and just >> Yeah, I think that's important just as we >> decide, you know, what's the best you and then I know you're working on a capital plan, five-year plan, too, like layering that on top of it as well. I think
029that way we don't have to go back for capital referendum if we need a million dollars worth of roof. >> Yep. >> You know what I mean? We can plan accordingly for that. And >> yeah, I just didn't realize we had 1.9 million surplus that keeps us at the 20%. >> Just for what it's worth in my experience that fund equity has always been sacred. You know, you districts try to build that as best they can. Try not to use it for especially for recurring expenses for things that popped up. And we when we purchased land, we took it from that money and you know certain things where we just had to do it. But it's pretty rare that we would dip into that, right? We just try to maintain. >> Which one is that?
030>> The fund balance. Oh, okay. But would that come from capital or does the purchase of land come from fund balance? >> It could come from either. >> Either but like capital improvements have to come from 49. >> They don't have to. Okay. >> There are districts that don't even have that fund set up, but we set it up for that money in there. >> So it stays in the >> grow to make sure that you're covered for the future. Right. that and it gets aided if it's in that versus if it stays in fund 10. We don't get any aid on it. There's the districts that have been really hurting who have to go into that every year and >> slowly bring that down and then they're really hurting and that you know so
031that's why it's always >> been you know and we don't have to necessarily be over what our policy rates but it doesn't really hurt us I think to to build it as best we can because there may be a day where we might have to take a chunk out of there just to get through the But I mean I think that this 5year thing will tell us a lot but I mean being this far over the 20% and having class sizes of 42 43 kids that doesn't but we also got to understand that that's got to be if we're going to make that change it's got to be a consistent one from year to year to year with those staff members. So whereas like we're we're talking about the reoccurring cost and we just have
032to acknowledge that within it because the fund balance is gone after we spend it for that one year. >> I'm not saying you spend it all in one year but if you got three teachers you're talking 350,000 >> that last four years I don't know anybody can see >> that gets you four years of limited class size. >> Yeah. Right. >> Well that's also I think where the five-year plan comes in. That's assuming we're not adding more to it those years. You know what I mean? Like where if we were to add that thought to this year for this year, we'd still be plus 150,000 extra at the end if we had three more, right? You know what I mean? So like that, who knows what next year is where we're adding back into the
033fund. >> Yeah. I mean, I get your point too, Steve. Like I get the fact of wanting to have, you know, I think it's a balance, right? The 20% I think is just a guardrail for us to hold oursel accountable to. But I also think if we go over, what else are we impacting that that money could be spent on that would help the district overall too. >> And you have to keep in mind too as the budget grows each year that 20% number changes. Yeah. Get bigger. 20% of a larger number. Right. >> One other thing to keep in mind is our enrollment. Yeah. >> We're starting to decline. Um hopefully it's just a little blip, but it we took quite a hit this year. Um the one thing that is helping us is
034there's a there's kind of a safe haven for us. Um so we didn't lose any money this year on the number of kids, but um it's a declining enrollment exemption that we got from from the state and that'sund for us $188,000 came in. Now they'll use our new base next year. So we're we are declining which is in less. >> Was that the the threeear >> average? Okay. >> Yep. So next year >> we'll have firmly in there. >> Well, it it's just going to keep >> Well, and this is another question too is this is I get a email out to Nick Leonard just to say like where are we at the village? Like what are we doing in terms of adding more housing? Do we have other things in the place that we
035have to be mindful of because again we had a blip this year and I hope it was just a blip for that time because ever since we've been gaining uh students >> so you know that's something that you know keep in mind too. It's not that we don't say it could potentially happen again but I'd be curious to see exactly what and where the village is in terms of any growth as well in the future from what they see. Well, there's another basement being dug out on the northwest corner and you know I think Robert's plan is to keep continuing all through that area. So hopefully that would bring in you never know if it's you know >> right >> elderly or new newly married or families with kids in school. There's a lot of
036what if and then it's just like okay so just doing the best we can with what we know and I again I come back to the five years so we can have a little bit better idea before making you know bigger decisions but we we're in a good spot to be able be able to look at it all a little bit more too and say okay but we we made some significant losses within that too remember we lost you know 13 staff members on this too I mean and we didn't know what was going to happen with the state and Now we're in a spot where we've got a little bit better foothold, but we also want to don't just throw it all in there when there's going to be more expenses as we move
037along here. And how do we maintain that? We don't know what the federal government's going to do in the, you know, the next upcoming years like special ed funding that could be cut drastically to a point where that could hurt us. Food service, I mean, from the federal government, that could hurt us too in terms of like we have to put more money into things like that that we're not even aware of right now at this moment. But those are all things that are out there looming right now and until we get a better grasp. I mean, we just got to really look at the whole pot and see what makes the most sense for our kids. >> So, if the declining enrollment didn't cost us any state aid, what was the Wasn't it like
038500,000 between the first and second run? >> Yeah. Yeah. The original estimate Yeah. was 500,000 too high according to B. Um it there's a lot of factors. It's enrollment. It's spending. It's um you know what the districts around us are doing that are dipping into that pot as well. >> That's just one little piece of it. So, do we know how much that increase in special ed from the state gave us? >> Um, the projection is for well 42% of last year's um last year's expenditures. I don't have the exact No, I don't have the exact number, but >> Oh, well, it be like 12 12%. >> You're getting 12% more. Yeah. give or take two, I think, if you're really going to be more like the 10% and then the following year have another
0393% ad according to what the the ruling was. >> I budgeted 40% instead of the 42. >> Mhm. >> Because that it's never the full amount. >> Um, but it was a significant increase which then helped that transfer decrease >> and the open enrollment dollars went up significantly. And we are we're actually more open enroll than we were last year by four. I mean it's not significant but and our you know out is about you know a good balance size right now but that also has helped us big time within our budget. >> So when you pull that threeyear average does that include the most recent result? >> Yeah the 30. Okay. So really it's looking at 23 24 25 and now 25 26. >> Correct. >> Okay. So if next year if it flatlines
040or goes anywhere up we're pretty much because two years ago or three years ago it would be with 1351. >> Yeah. We're starting to not be able to use those higher numbers. >> Correct. That's why I'm just trying to Yep. I mean ultimately when you look for the last six years it's up a little bit but pretty flat >> when does that we used to get that >> class size projection sheet >> is that part of what >> yeah we'll get that back [Music] >> and if you notice partially the if you look at the numbers really closely in terms of why we declined this year. Uh, one was our pre-K numbers were smaller than normal. Um, which we really have no rationale for that. But, you know, historically, even though if those are lower,
041we usually gain it all back in that kindergarten year anyway in terms of getting up towards that 100 mark. Um, and I see that potentially happening too because you can go anywhere for 4K. You can be and that comes within daycare systems. So if I'm working in Finalac and my daycare is in Finalac, it's easier for me to go get my child at that. I'm going to send them to that 4K versus our own. So we could have people from North Finalac doing that right now until they can actually be school age where they can come here. Um, one of the things we are looking at is looking at how we've got our 4K system over at ELC. How maybe the impact of bringing it over to FLC in terms of having the space that
042we have could help out and assist with some of that for some of our families as well. Not to say that they can't go back and go to arts for kids for the remainder of the day, but it just offers a different option for them as well. Um, so that was a big chunk of it. The other big chunk is obviously as you all know we closed exploration. Um we lost a series of number of those open enrollments and not necessarily like the high school students but incoming like eighth graders who were excuse me incoming nth graders who were going to be coming from Trefford. They made the option to choose go back to their home school or to be homeschooled for that matter u within their frame. So there's a significant number in those
043two pockets that really tipped it to more of that. And then you've got just gradual small decreases in some of the other grades. Nothing >> Yeah. >> drastic. >> I mean, 16 students. So, when you start to break it down that way, it could be four here, four there, and pretty soon you're >> Yeah. You're there. >> You're right there. >> Mhm. >> I had a different question, a completely different topic. So, the community service fund piece. >> Yes. >> It goes from 128,000 starting to 10,000 this for ending balance. What? And I see two years ago it did the same and the opposite year it goes up a ton. Can you >> Yeah. So there was a pretty significant fund balance in fund 80. So I'm I'm just trying to equalize that, get that
044down as close to zero as possible so that we're using all those tax dollars. That's why you saw in the presentation that the expenditures were over 200,000. >> Yeah. But I'm only levying 150,000 because I'm trying to use up some of that fund balance. >> Does that help? >> It does. Yeah, I just jumped out. So, >> you have two questions. >> Um, another reminder, I still have 10% budgeted in for health insurance. Um, Alex, oh, Alex is not going to be here in two weeks, but >> Brianna will be here in two weeks from USI and she'll have the final numbers for health insurance. So, that could change, too. It's not going to be higher than 10%. >> But, um, it could be lower. >> What does a percent if it's nine? Do we
045know like about impact dollar-wise that makes? >> I don't I don't yet. >> Will we have that at least? >> We'll have that. Yep. In two weeks. All right. Okay. >> And our health insurance is looking good. We just got another in place today and it was really good. >> Drastically different than it has been for the last three years. And that's such a I mean this is another thing that just >> fit into place at the right time right now. So we're very fortunate. >> That's a lot of work that went into that. So >> yeah, it's good to see. Anything I can anything else I can clarify or >> you know what I was wondering if you could find a number on is on that voucher program. >> Are we I know we
046say like4omes on stop busing springs kids. Do we know what busing and wid is costing us or are we busing? It's probably the same, but we are busting because they're within the the radius of the five. So, you're talking almost like $50,000 that we're probably putting toward I don't know that 100%. >> It's a road. >> Yeah. >> 56,000 for the year. I think if you want to make a note, I know you won't be here for next year's slides, but it'd be interesting to put that, you know, the full cost of this program, which is that busing is part of this cost of this program as well. >> Okay. Yep. >> I think that's just important to point out to everyone just of what we do provide to all the private people. I have
047no clue. >> Yeah. >> Although some of our title one dollars go to private schools. Some of our special ed dollars go to private school. I mean it's it's we definitely and you know the average person doesn't know that that we're supporting the amount that we are supporting. Um we're running bus routes on days that we don't have school because the private school calendar is different than our calendar. So, um, yeah, >> I do want to continue to look in transparency, just for transparency purposes as a good, you know, citizen. Like, I'd love to go and talk to the village and just say, "Hey, have we ever thought about this?" Uh, Green Bay, Wisconsin, uh, just passed, and it's all city based, it's all local. So, they would have the determination whether or not it
048could be on a tax bill. So just breaking that down, showing the 500 plus thousand that actually goes to that the voucher system so people are just aware. It's not to point fingers or anything, but I think it's important that people know that. I think they have many people have no idea that that's actually happening right now. >> I think that's an excellent idea. >> Yeah. It's not going anywhere. We know that vouchers are here to stay, but Right. Yeah. It's >> going up significantly. Yeah. Any other questions or slide 35 there's a couple typos or I think >> this one right here. >> Yeah, -16 at the top. I think that'sative8637 on the top the revenue limit >> right here >> at negative >> I think that'sative8 I think >> okay >> and then
049down that.37% right >> right here >> that can't be a negative number because it went [Music] Well, the expenditures went down, >> right? So, the >> No, the expenditures went up. >> Oh, shoot. I went the opposite direction. Yeah, that might be what happened. >> I think >> Yep. There you go. And just the next one. There's an extra two on that 2278. It should just be 278, not some extra there. Good finds to hire you as my >> This is what my life's come down to. So, I guess we have to because if we're going to make a motion for Lee um for the school tax piece, the decisions between the 755 and 736 examples. So, we >> or anything in between. >> So, I so I can make we have to have a
050number though. We can't put a range when we make this motion. >> I would. Yes. Otherwise, we're going to have this discussion. >> I just Yeah. I just want to make sure >> trying to get back. >> I don't know if anyone else has any. I'm I'm I'm in favor of what Rick is explaining when it comes to levying out the mill rate at the 755 and the strategy that's involved in there, especially with knowing that we're going to have some look at a five-year plan coming up. I think that's going to position us a little bit better when and if we ever have to go back for referendum in the future that it's not an significant change for a community member >> would be my suggestion. But >> I'm I'm more in favor of
051the 736. >> Can you tell me more? I'm just curious like >> Yeah. I mean, I I feel like uh so the referendum didn't pass, >> right? And it I think that the community told us that they would prefer to see us have their tax impact go down, right, through that effort. So, or at least not go up. I know I understand that the 755 is kind of designed to keep it stable, but uh because of the limitations and where you can apply those funds anyway, I I think you know levying I I forget this 140,000 is the actual number, right? >> I think that is a good intermediate step. I I don't know. I mean, I guess that's kind of where I stand on it. >> The other just a piece of information like
052on the taxes, should I say this, right? Like I'm not just picking John, but I just use my house. So it would be roughly $60 difference between the 736 and total on the school tax. But no again not oversimplified but that extra money then between the two would only be for capital building which do we have any plans in the near future that we would capital building for pay down ref >> which is the message I heard from the community was >> we got too much responsibility we have too much debt so I >> and that's what I I mean I heard also right impact on taxes and that's why with this most likely not increasing taxes. Obviously, there's some variables in there. I get that. But the other message I heard was we need
053to lower our debt and we need to be more fiscally responsible. And I think part of being fiscally responsible is carrying less debt, especially on especially when we have the opportunity to pay it off because there's actually cost on top of that. If we if we make another payment 180,000 whatever it is, there's less interest, there's le you know what I mean? that it's more than 180,000 over the term of that loan. So that's where my kind of second part came in is like it's to me it's it's a good balance between what we we're listening to the community on keep our taxes we don't want to raise them but also be fiscally fiscally responsible and part of that is I think less debt. When will the community see that effect though? In 17 or
05418 years at the end of the debt of the current referendum debt that we have. >> Well, you can you can defeze um and that's that's something that you would work with with Bar. We did that a couple years ago before we were going to referendum. Um, >> well, I guess I'm just thinking along the lines of people who pay extra on their mortgage payment each month so that it doesn't end in 20 years, it'll end in 18 and 12 years. So, is that affect that if we start doing that now going to be a delayed effect that people won't realize that we're helping out by, you know, because it's so far down the road. I hope I'm quite understanding it correctly. But >> to me, the biggest thing is when we go to a
055referendum, it won't be as much sticker shock. It'll be less. >> Yeah, that would I could see that as about the only current um benefit that we would get. But then where how does that balance with what like Mike Clark said from Beard that um maybe people need to see that we're we made some efforts to give them a break. Now, you know, compared to um what we were projecting that would go up. >> Like I said, I mean, I think the tax will stay the same or close to it, but I just I think when people saw the sticker shock on the last referendum, I'm trying to figure out ways to dampen that effect down the line because I don't think that'll be I don't know when it'll be. I guess we have to
056wait to see the 5year plan. >> Yeah. and and to be as close as zero or anything on any ask is really essential right now because as we all found out like even what we had shared which wasn't I would say super significant on that individual yes it was a cost but I mean we're still fairly low I mean the lower we can have it the closer we can have it the better we're going to have an opportunity to and again we don't know how long that will be and how much we're going to continue to get from the state or fally or all these things there's a lot of whatifs But I want to position ourselves in a way that we're, you know, financially stable too and fiscally responsible at the same time. So
057I can see the the rationale for this too. 721 is if we do nothing, if we just levy the normal whatever we need to put it in perspective. So, >> okay. Would you any >> I'm on the same thought process as Rick and John. Still learning all this, but I think if we can basically John's second point of this referendum community wanted us to >> keep taxes low. Well, and I think the other on top of like Steve, you make a great point like you know like when you pay something like you don't feel the effect after. But I think that's part about being a good steward of the community too. You know what I mean? Like and I know you know that like I'm not saying that to you but like in general is
058do better for who's next, you know? And part of that I think is to be able to prepare this community to continue to grow at the rate it's growing and have great schools and have great teachers and all of that. eventually that debt plays into it and the quicker you can get rid of that debt, I think we can position ourselves long term in a better situation as well. So, yes, I may I may I'm a community member. I'm paying the tax. I may not feel it today, but I'm going to be excited not to see my taxes go up either, but also be able to pay some off uh within the community. It's just my opinion, but you know, so so I I guess I mean we've all got opinions. So I think the
059best thing to do is um I'm going to start with a motion for the higher amount and look for a motion. And if if we get majority, that's what we're going to have to do unless there's more dialogue that wants to happen. If we don't, then I'll go to that lower mo amount and we'll make a motion for that. Hey, so you know the one, did you hear that? Higher amount. >> Yep. It's 7 million. >> Oh, that number right there. >> Yeah, right here. >> Can you see it? Okay. A little bigger. >> Oops. >> Now, this this will likely change once we get our aid number. This total levy amount will change. I can aim it. I mean, we can still keep it at 755 mil rate, but the the actual levy amount
060will change based on what our aid is. >> So, should we make the motion for the mill rate or for the dollar amount? >> Um, you can you can do the dollar amount and then we'll vote on the final. You'll vote on the final. >> Is there I don't want to cut anyone off, but before we do that, is there anyone else want to share any thoughts? Okay. So, the first one is consider a motion uh for the school tax. >> I think it's not the but it's an annual meeting. So, we do voice vote. So, I don't know. I guess we could ask for a polling of the community in which we're the only ones here from the community. Maybe that would I don't know. I guess because you know any citizen again I
061don't want to get repetitive but any citizen that would be sitting here would be voting on this also and that's that's why we would do the voice vote but >> so with the voice >> there were six people in here besides us that said they didn't want to pass any budget they could do that. >> Yeah. We're just one of the citizens that are attending the annual meeting. >> That's not I mean I don't know the law but that's not what that podcast thing said. >> It would just become advisory for our next meeting. >> Right. Right. The actual that's when we would officially vote for it >> October meeting. So, Steve, are you are you concerned that we're not going to have clear numbers to be able to discern if we do the voice
062vote? Well, I'm just with the voice vote. I'm just saying we're going to have to decipher which what yes or or no on the motion. >> Okay. >> Um, you know, I guess we can kind of figure that out. >> Yeah. I would just I was going to go off the majority. Wouldn't that be similar to what we do with this? >> Sure. Sure. >> So that's in that's who's present in the room is going to vote, right? I mean, no different than any other annual meeting. So >> So I'm gonna I'm gonna move forward. >> I'm going to move forward. Yeah. and consider a motion for the school tax rate of um a total of 7 million uh 29,24 for the 25 excuse me yep 2526 school year. So all in favor say I.
063>> I. >> All against a motion for that or not? I think we had a motion in there. >> We didn't have key motion, but there wasn't a second. >> Yeah, then we need that. But one quick thing, as a chairperson, it's up to you to decide which one vote and then if you can't determine it, I'm going by the delegate assembly rules. Um, then you can call for a polling type of thing. So, so if you're listening closely, you should be able to figure out. So I'll I'll make I'll look for a motion for when I the 7 million 29,24. >> I'll make the motion. >> Okay. >> And then once you're then all in favor of the 7,29,24 say I. >> I. All not in favor say nay. >> Nay. >> So from
0643 to two um it passes into next meeting. All right. >> Is there any discussion at that time then too when or is it whatever we have locked in at right now is that's kind of what it's going to be. I mean we talked a little bit about this before. I just want the rest of the room to hear that a little bit too. >> Yeah. If there is if there's no change to the mill rate then typically there is no discussion. It's all been hashed out here. If there were if there was a change to the mill rate then yes then I would say there could be discussion at the next meeting >> but I don't anticipate there being any change to that mill rate. [Music] >> All right. Next item is set salaries
065for schoolboard member um members. The salaries at state uh president is $1,800 annually. Board members are $1,600 annually. And then if you're a part of a committee member, which we only have our policy committee, it's an additional $250 annually. So I'll look for a motion to approve. Oh, before I make a motion, any comments? >> So on here, it's three separate things, but are we doing it in one for all positions? >> Well, we can do if it's labeled three separate, we'll do separate. >> You have three lines on there. president board member and committee member. >> So, first any commentary or questions before we look for a motion. >> Okay. Motion to approve president salary of $1,800. >> So move. >> Then look for a second. >> Second. >> And then all in favor
066of that, please say I. I. and uh motion for board member pay of $1,600. I'll look for a motion. >> Hang on. Catch up. >> Yep. >> All right. I'll make that motion for the board member $1,600 pay. And then second. >> Okay. And then all in favor say I. >> I'll pause, Rick. I know you got to type all of it. >> Okay. >> All right. And then the last item is committee member of $250 annually for our policy committee seats. Look for a motion for that. >> Second. >> Great. And then all in favor say I. >> I. >> All righty. And then our next item is reimbursement of school board members for actual or necessary expenses when traveling in performance of their duties. Um, this is a requirement that's necessary for us
067to pass each annual meeting. So, look for a motion to approve. >> So, move >> and I'll second. And then, uh, all in favor say I. >> I. I. >> I. >> Good. Okay. I'm just making sure. >> And then the next item is allow the district through schoolboard action to purchase land and property throughout the year. This really allows us as a board of education the ability to purchase property or land throughout the year by majority vote without the need of a special meeting. Uh so look for a motion to approve that. >> So move. >> Second. >> All right. And then all in favor of that motion say I. >> I. >> All right. Then next item is uh direct the school board to uh furnish school meals to pupils of the district.
068uh yearly resolution to continue our food service program here within the district of North. So when ready, I'll look for a motion to approve that. >> So move. >> I'll second. And then all in favor, please say I. >> I. >> And our last item is new business. So um it is first is to schedule our annual meeting for 2627. Uh so any questions or any recommendations for that? have a calendar. Yeah, >> look at a calendar. Everyone look at your phone. >> It's typic No, it's typically been a week before and then we have more numbers we >> later like so third week of the month. >> So October 19th it would be 2026. >> October 19th. Okay. Yep. Works for me. >> October 19th. >> Mhm. We need a separate vote of just
069the budget itself. >> Oh, did we do that? >> I think we just did the tax levy, right? >> Well, what was that? >> So, October 19th, 2026 for the annual business meeting uh from for 20627. So look for a motion to uh approve that date. >> So second. >> All right. And then all in favor please say I. >> I. >> Special guest Maria puts her going back. >> Yeah. Special guest. >> Yeah. Right. >> And then our next item is discussion and possible action change uh regularly scheduled board meeting times. So any the question is we always have them at seven. if we still want to continue that at 7 PM or if you think there's value in moving it forward or back based on community involvement in you know the right time.
070So look for any feedback on that. >> I I would move it later of course. >> Sure. >> Right. That gets be too much. Have we heard any complaints or anybody saying I wish you could do it earlier? >> Yeah, I mean the only the only recommendation would from my side would be to move it if we moved it up to 6 PM. Um that allows us enough time to get here. Um and also I wouldn't move it any earlier than that. Um because of if we have close session prior, right? I want to make sure that everyone has the appropriate time, right? So that would be like in my opinion on that when we go through that would be our only look at uh if we wanted to make an adjustment to move it
071up. >> So, and and also we have a lot more participation from the district as well, which I know it's their responsibility to be here, but also thinking of, you know, community members still having the opportunity to go to work, go home, have dinner with their family, and still come at 6 would be appropriate, I think. And also then our principles that are joining us every quarter, >> our kids, our families, >> families, all that. Just sometimes our meetings get late and some of those folks don't start till 8 8:30 and >> right >> then you know could be could be an issue. So wanted to put it out there see if there's any thought or any feedback on that. >> Six works for me. >> Yeah. I mean I think I'd be good with
072that. >> Yeah. I I see the point and you know I guess only recommendation would be to make sure that it's um you know it's put out there >> communicated. Yeah. >> And when would it start like right away? >> Yeah. I mean I think Yeah. I think we would start it um I mean depending on when we can communicate it. I I don't think it needs to be its own post but maybe we just highlight it when we do put our next posting out for our meeting that we'd move it to to six >> and we will have families come to the next one as well as our principal. I know it's BAMS that evening. So that's coming up here in two weeks. >> And like I said, we'll we can revisit at our
073next annual meeting, too, if we find that it's not working, you know, >> and we may have to do closed after, for example, if we're returning. >> Yeah. >> Where I'm at. So >> if we can before they um the policy only says the fourth Monday doesn't give a time, right? So yeah, then >> we're fine. We don't have to change that. >> So, I'll look for a motion if anyone would like to move it to 6 pm starting effect of the October 2025 meeting. >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second. >> Okay. Then all in favor say I. >> I. >> And that was everyone. So, I'm not going to say the nay piece. All right. And that is done. I'll make a motion though. We have to adjourn the meeting on this
074one. So look for a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. Second. >> All right. And all in favor of adjourning the meeting, say I. >> I. All right. We're journing at 8:13 p.m. Motion. >> Okay. Good night everyone. Be well.