All right, you're good to go, Kathy. Okay, >> good afternoon everyone. Today is the April 7th meeting of the finance committee and our focus at this meeting is the school budgets. Um, elementary
school, regional school, and conservation and development. Um, after I call the meeting to order, um, I will be doing that by making sure the members of the committee can hear and behold. If we have a quorum of the council as well
as the finance committee, Mandy Joe Hani will call the council to order. Right now, I don't see a quorum. Um, so I am going to call on people as I see them on my screen and just indicate whether you can hear and we can hear you. Lynn
>> present. >> Sam >> present. >> Jill >> present. >> Kathleen >> present. >> Anna >> present. >> And I don't think I missed anyone. And so
Mandy, right now I don't see um a seventh counselor. >> There is not. Um I'll keep monitoring it. In the meantime, I'll turn off my video so that it's clear that it's not a council meeting yet. But if we get another counselor, I will I'll I'll raise my hand.
>> Okay. Thank you. So, for starters, I I want to um thank the school team for a very thorough response to the questions we sent in advance. Um so, rather than going
through all the questions, we'll um I'll open it up for clarifying questions, but I first would welcome you giving an overview of the situation as you see it. And I see we have with us uh Dr. Z, uh,
the superintendent, the, uh, director of finance, and, uh, TA, you have to give me your title. I'll get it wrong, but >> director of curriculum, >> and Deb Leonard, who is chair of the
school committee, uh, the elementary school committee, the district committee, and, uh, we we will be turning to region after we do elementary. So, Dr. Dr. Z, I'll open up the floor. And by the way, public comment will be at the end of the
meeting today to make sure we have time for um a discussion. And for anyone who's listening and for everyone who's in the meeting, we are not making any decisions today. We are doing our best to gather information to funnel into the
final meetings of the finance committee where we will uh deliberate on our recommendation to the council. So any information that would be useful to us that we didn't already ask for, we'll try to identify. But as we do this, we
we did the schools early. This is the first week we're doing budget reviews. So there'll be time if we didn't ask some questions that we should have asked. So I'm turning it over to you, Dr. Z, for um just to uh make opening
comments. And we didn't tell you in advance. we would ask you to do that but it's the floor is yours. >> I mean I think it the assumption for me is to always be ready to speak. So um I first of all good afternoon to the wonderful Ammeris community and I would
like to thank the um town council fin and the town council members um Paul our town manager and Sean for your support in this process and for just having the opportunity to come before you and speak about our wonderful school system and the budgetary situation that we are in.
I know that you indicated Kathy that you wanted to start with the um elementary, but I wanted to ask if it would be possible for us to start with the region first. >> We can we can do that. I see Sarah Bess has joined us. I was I didn't see her initially and Sarah Bess you can
>> um Sarah Bess uh Kenny is with us and she is chair of the regional school committee. uh >> um to the community today. I just wanted to start off by saying how um we know that there is wide um a wide cast net of
support around our schools and educating our students. Um the nuances that go into educating a singular child is not one that's often well explained. Um it's not one that we can easily delve into because every child deserves something different and our system has to eb and flow to meet the needs of our students.
It's really critical in this conversation that we not just tie our programming to funding, but we also talk about the deeper and and I I was very appreciative of the questions um from the town council around really trying to
dive into the wise and the hows. It wasn't just about what. It was about the wise and how. So that there was an actual understanding of what it is that we do each and every day when our educators walk into the the the rooms when we walk into our offices to make sure we can educate children. Um so
today myself, Shannon and Tanya um accompanied by our chairs and I'm truly grateful to our school committees are here to um speak on behalf of our students and our children and to advocate for funding to make sure that
we can adequately educate them. >> And and you said you'd like to start with the region. >> Yes. Um, so I thought that I would just go through a very brief short overview of the budget and then turn it over for questions.
>> No questions. >> Okay. >> Um, so I will just share my screen and this information was in the um document that we sent. I just pulled out um a few of the pictures for this. Um so right now we are requesting a total budget for
FY27 at the region of 38.8 8 million. We have utilized 850,000 of school choice in this budget. Um, and we've also already applied IDA funds and circuit breaker. This budget right here already
incorporates the reductions that we stated we were going to make um, and other shifts and additions that we had to the budget. So, we had an increase within salaries and that's partly because of the salary um, the steps and colas for staff. um we've had an
increase in our substitutes and if we look at the prior year history our substitutes has been much higher so we did a an average for that. Um our special education um expenses non-payroll lines is has an increase and
we are in anticipating three potential residential placements. Um we also had an increase for our out of district placements and um for van transportation. Van transportation for those district place out of district placements are just as much as the
program cost itself. Um we have an increase within our other programs which is our charter choice and vogue. There was an influx of ninth graders in FY26 for Voke um schooling. So we accounted for that in the next fiscal year and
obviously the increase to charter and choice. Um we've had an increase within our special or within central administration and we made an uh an average um amount or looking at the what we've paid for attorney fees over the
past few years and increase based on that average. We also had an increase for our software costs and some of our audit costs have been higher. So that's really the driving force behind here. And we did go through every budget line thoroughly. So you'll see some um
smaller decreases within other areas um such as it um and we were able to reduce some of those expenses. Facilities there is a larger increase here. Uh it's we actually had um were able to decrease
some areas, but for the unfilled trade positions that have been sitting within the salary line for a few years, we took that out of the salary and moved it into the expense lines. Um because we're already paying for the contracting. So the money was there, it's just in a different part of the budget. So it's
not necessarily an ad here. We took it from the salaries. Um and then we're entering year two of our transportation contract. So there was an increase for that. Um and then of course as you all know the health insurance increases that
are here and we did a deep dive into our um insurance of how many people do we have on which plan and and to make sure that that was as most accurate as possible given how high those percent increases um cost the ultimate budget.
So on the next sheet, this is our revenue page that you've seen. This was the same thing that was presented at the four the last four towns meeting. So there was no change. We had an initial operating budget of just under 40 million. After 1.1
um million dollar reduction, we're down to the operating budget of 38.8 million, which was on the prior page. Um we've made assumptions for uh chapter 70, transportation reimbursement, Medicaid charter. We've increased our interest revenue given the past few year trends.
We've added um we've gotten a small amount for homeless and foster care reimbursement. So we added that within our revenue as well and then an increase to um from our END on here. Um and then it comes down to the assessments for the
towns. So right here where it says assessment required would be what is needed from Amherst Pal and Lever and Shootsbury to support this $ 38.8 um million budget. And the these assessments percentage increase are right here. Um because we had an overage
of over 5% from when our END was certified at the end of FY25, the overage of 151,000 could be used to reduce the FY26 um assessments or could be voted to be used for to offset the FY27 assessments.
And so um after discussion with the school committee, we voted to reduce the FY27 assessments um for that year only. However, the this amount here in this blue column is the base going forward for FY28, but you're paying slightly
less because that money will come out of E and D and ultimately reduce us back down to where we need to be. Um, so that was no changes from four towns. And then this is a summarized version of what we presented at um for towns and to the
school committee of the changes that we made to make this budget happen. So, um there's we we're utilizing many different funding sources in the budget adjustments. This section right here is not um reductions in um people. It's
just a change in um funding sources for certain positions and then applying our best estimate for rural school aid. Um using some of our revolving funds to support the summit teachers, some of our grant funded funds, etc. And then we
have our budget additions with looking at the current needs of FY27, what we will um anticipate needing for um additional staffing to support those specific needs. Then we come down here and we have our actual reductions of um
POS positions that we would reduce. But like we've we've mentioned before, there are no actual people um losing a position within these reductions. Um Janet, can I ask you just to pause for just a second because another
counselor's joined us. So, we're now um a quorum of the town council is here and Mandy can call it to order as well. >> Thank Thank you, Kathy. Um seeing a presence of a quorum of the town council, I'll call the count town council portion, the joint portion of
the meeting to order at 3:13 p.m. and I'll just go through I can hear and be heard. Councelor Kel Martin, can you hear and be heard? >> Yes, I can. Thank you. >> Okay. Sorry to interrupt you, Shannon. >> I I thought counselor Lord was here as
well. Maybe she dropped off, but I did. Is there I I'm I'm not seeing the full screen, Anna. So, there's >> here. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. I missed you. Sorry, Councelor Lord. >> Oh, thank you. >> Okay. >> Thanks. >> Um
Okay. Um so that brings us down to meeting the required reduction of 1.14 to um uh that you saw on this previous reduction um or revenue page right here. Uh so then just a really quick thing for
capital um nothing has changed in our capital request. I wanted to just uh bring forth what the FY27 projects were that we would be asking funding for and it's the same thing that we have already presented and then our um
capital budget the the debt assessments for each one. So it is higher this year and that's mainly caused by our uh debt assessment for the middle school roof and the track and field project. Um and then had we not had those projects, it
would have only been the 318,000 here. Um but with those two larger projects, it has increased um the debt assessment for each town. So Ammerst is at 761,000. You'll notice Palums is much lower and
that's because uh Pelum decided to use cash to support the middle school roof project instead of participating in borrowing. So, an intermunicipal agreement um was signed by all four towns and and voted and approved by the
regional school committee. Um so, with that, that was just a very brief overview and I'm happy to take questions with Dr. Z and Tanya. >> So, um Kathy, we're here um councelor. >> Yeah, >> Andy Joe. I was like I was like one
person is too. Um, we're here to answer questions on the region. Um, as well with support of our chair. Her camera is not working well, but she is. Um, >> I am here. >> She is here. >> Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Excellent. I apologize for the camera
situation. I don't I don't know what's going on. >> So, Kathy, we're ready for you. One of you. >> Okay. Um, so, as as people saw in the packet, we just had a few questions of the region. Um um the first um and
clearly this is a next year decision for us but uh we would normally whatever we're paying this year in the FY27 budget that would be the base the starting base for FY28. So whatever is being asked for FY28
would be off that base. And I think you've been assuming that it would be the higher base m because of the use of um the excess END this year. So as you saw, you know, I we've we've never quite
been in a situation like this and I think one of the questions we asked um you don't know yet know the final chapter 70 money. you don't know the status of rural aid which was the uncertainty last year that helped you get over the 5%. So I think it's
uncertain what the base what what next year will end but but but it was more to let you know that in our budgeting that would this year actual would be the base for next year. Um, so it was partly a statement and realizing that I think
that's not quite how you're carrying it. So that was one question. And then the other I think I saw it just answered um in the elementary school but at C Chestnut Academy it shows um some of the
staff would be a shared staff where the elementary side is picking up a share and I had asked I uh when we wrote the questions we asked revenue to the region but it's you're showing it that that is a$1797,000
reduction for you which is would be the right way you know that elementary is picking that up in their budget. Is that correct that you've already accounted for what is showing in the Chestnut Academy? >> Yep. Um that was already accounted for
in meeting the 1.1 um reduction. So it's under budget adjustments on that sheet that I had up where it's not reduction in staff, it's just a different funding source. So they're being that those pieces are being funded out of the Amherst budget.
>> Yeah. No, I I I had missed that that 197 when we asked it. Um then the other question was the um Dr. Z, sorry. >> I don't want us to get too far from the base conversation because I feel like this was a conversation that
conversation should have taken place with all four towns present because that would actually adjust the assessment method. And so I think that in in essence you truly need to we truly need to have that clear understanding that
the 20,555,1 is actually that suspect for Ammerst. Um the END it all depends on what you do with it. If you pay us minus the END U reimbursement and you keep it or you or we reimburse you the base for next year
based on the current assessments um and that's and Shannon has been saying that from from every one of the four towns meetings. Um that is actually a base 20,555,1 Mandy. >> Yeah. Um just a clarification on that
though. Um it's my understanding that the town has no option as to whether to receive that excess END in cash and utilize it any way we want that that it it is something that you are the region is using to
reduce our assessment without us being able to say actually cut us a check and we'll pay the full assessment. Um, that's that's my question number one that that I I want to clarify what you just said because it almost sounded like you were saying, "Well, we're choosing
to reduce our assessment by the excess, but it's not the town's choice." It was the region saying that that's how they were going to do it. And number two, I just wanted to clarify. I believe both Ammerst and at least one other town at a
four towns meeting did question what the base would be when this END use was done at a four towns meeting. So I just want to say I know I at least said that Ammerst would consider the lower number the base at a four towns meeting. Um and
I just think that needs to be said here. >> Yeah. So, but between DESIE and the Department of Revenue, there's a um formal memo that's written and posted on their website that if the school district is in excess of END over the 5% threshold, there are only two options.
you take the current year and you um like for instance for the town of Amherst the $120,000 we could have said um on our last quarterly bill for the assessment and reduced 120,000 from that and you would have only paid um whatever the current
assessment is minus um 120 in that last quarterly payment or we could then take FY27 um and this is your base this is what we're reducing it by because we're in excess. So, when we were to fill out our
END certification at in uh at the end of the fiscal year, we have to put in the budgeted amounts for assessments and that assessment amount would be 20,555,000 and change. And then when you only pay
20,434,000, that's how it gets hit against the END. the difference between those two numbers showing that we did in essence give money back to the towns. Um so I personally think if that if we were
going to further discuss this that that wasn't the base that we should have had that conversation with all four towns present because I do believe that question was asked and I had stated that was the base but there was no other further questions about that at that time. We also had that conversation at
um and I recently had that conversation at leverage and talked about the base would remain for next year. So even it so it goes back into the financial planning of the town and knowing that it would either be a larger jump or percentage. I see my chair has her hand
up so >> yep >> I think Dr. Z we are um saying saying the same thing. Uh I was also at the annual Lever Town meeting last weekend. Uh and they we had an they were
the other town that questioned about the how to use the excess END. Um, and when they voted for their regional assessment, they voted their
assessment number, their 1,941,652. So my suggestion is we move off of this because there there's clearly you know we we will have to resolve this including with our our finance director and it doesn't affect it doesn't affect
FY27 is the other point. Um um so I I have one uh Lynn this is not on that issue. This is um since uh we all met for the four towns meeting, I believe there's been a
supplemental and or uh a vote that includes money for various parts of school funding in the millionaire's tax which was part of the supplemental. It I assume that you have not incorporated that into this next year's budget, but
at some point will. I believe once it comes to us and we're notified we can, but we have not received any official notification as yet. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. So, and I think Lynn's point is it's potentially additional revenue um
that's not not yet been budgeted. So, my question is the outyear um debt uh on the middle school roof and I you answered most of it. the middle school roof bids came quite in quite a bit lower than initially anticipated that
were built into the debt. And so at what point will you know how much because I think you had a supplemental um for some other equipment and will that show up in FY27 or is it not till FY28 when that is
when you know finally what what the cost is? >> So it's it's a timing question. Yeah. >> Yeah. We won't know the full cost of the project until the project is completed. Um what that final number will be the the amounts that regional school
committee voted um I don't remember the date that was for the base award but they don't need to vote the sub award. So I think it for silk town it was a little over 5 million that is not the cost of the roof that's just the cost of
the base bed. Okay. And then I guess my final question, and we didn't ask it because um we hadn't seen the amended regional agreement language that uh Sarah spoke briefly to.
Uh the the $100 a year per room wording has been removed in the revised language. Um, is there going to be new language that says how a rent will be determined or is it going to be a case-byase basic? What is
the plan? Um, and and the immediate issue is going to be whatever is being negotiated or discussed around the Chestnut Hill Academy. >> Chestnut Street. So, >> Chestnut Chestnut Street, right? >> So, in terms of the language um and
what's happening currently with the lease, I'll I'll answer both. Um the lease that's being drafted right now is being drafted under the current regional agreement language. Um and so that is under what we currently have. The
regional agreement language um that is being edited is more than just $100 per classroom. Um that language or that singular clause is being brought into compliance with the law giving the regional school committee the authority
as per the law to enter leases. um enter into leasing whether it's to be the lease or the lease. Also note that in the current regional agreement that is gravely outdated, one of the four towns also has approval has approval. And if
this is a four town regional agreement, it should be really in the hands of the regional school committee. Um and so what we were tasked with or looking at was bringing that language um into alignment and up to date and um the
discussion for opening the whole regional agreement to bring it up to date. Um we attempted to and I'm sure the the conversation was to bring it bring portions of it up to date with this singular amendment also to make sure the current government structure of
Amoris um was reflected. there was some breakdown in communication um between the attorneys. However, with the opening of the full regional agreement, I'm sure all of that will be covered because there are various parts of our agreement. I've been told by Desessie that is out of compliance with the law.
It is outdated. So, it's not just about the government structure. It is also about us being in compliance with the current law as as a whole. >> Mandy. >> Yeah. are are we allowed to do the my questions on the proposed regional
school agreement and I didn't know if that was something that we were asking questions on now. >> Uh yes, you know I I I know I opened it up on it a lack of clarity on what does this actually mean and it appeared to open up the you know delete one one
line. I I realized the other there's more than just that wording but there wasn't anything on on what basis rents would be determined. So go ahead, Mandy. >> But if you're okay with asking questions about that, I'll I'll go ahead then. Um I have two questions actually. Um the first one is it sounds like the new
lease for the Chestnut Street Academy does not require a change in the regional agreement from what you just said, Dr. Z. Um so if that is the case, um why is this modification to this section being pursued now as a standalone modification instead of as a
part of a opening up of the full agreement? So that's question number one. And number two is, is there anything preventing the town of Ammerst from waiting to address this agreement uh this amendment request until the full
agreement is opened up and proposed to be updated so that we have all the rest of the amendments in front of us too? >> Sure. My first um when I brought this forward in reviewing this and working with um our partners to develop the lease or to review our regional
agreement, I would tell you what the concern was for me. The concern was for me is not just the is not just the cost of the $100 for classroom, but is the fact that the approval set sits in one town um versus all four towns. And in actuality, it should be a the regional
the regional body sits as its own municipality. And so the lease, the school committee, I asked the school committee to allow me to craft the current lease for Chesnut Street under the language while we work to amend the singular portion to bring it within
compliance in terms of the approvers. Um, in this current situation, what you would be facing is where Ammeris would be approving a lease that is entering into on its own with the regional school committee as per the current language. Um, that to me serves as somewhat of a conflict. Um, and so we wanted to clear
clear that up and moving forward. But I in regards to your second question, I can't tell Amoris what to do. Um, so if you choose with all the information we put before you, looking at what's in front of you in terms of the fact that this is a a facility or there facilities
that are actually under four towns that you've trusted a regional school committee to make the best decision for in the interest of the children and of those four towns. um but you still feel like the language should be halted then that's your choice in this matter. My recommendation would be to to move
forward. We've already um had the conversation with Desi. We've already said that we will be reopening the regional agreement. It is actually on the agenda for the 12th at the region um to discuss how the regional school committee would like to approach this whether they're going to do a
subcommittee whatever they're going to do. Um, I think that this is a long-standing conversation that needs to happen amongst the four towns and more so amongst the the regional school committee in terms of the language. Um, but I don't see
I just don't see the equity or equality in having one town being an approver. So I I understand we get to decide what we want to do and and you've got your own position, but I was more asking on that second question that there is no legal to your knowledge once say three
towns vote an amendment a time frame for within which all four towns must adopt it for it to be adoptable that if if event you know if the school committee I'll give you an example if the school committee voted whenever they did March 31st to make this change and sent it to
the towns there's not a legal time limit where if it's not adopted by the towns within say a year, it would need to go through the whole process again to your knowledge such that we could choose to wait as long as we want maybe for the purpose of waiting for to see what the
rest of the changes are and voting all the changes together without without jeopardizing the votes of the other three towns to your knowledge. So, so the one thing that I do know, I'm going to say one thing that I do know. What I do know is it has to happen within an annual town meeting. Um, the town of
Ammeris does not have annual town meetings anymore. You have your council meetings. Um, in terms of the time frame and extent for the language, I would I I cannot tell you legal frame because of all things I don't do. So, I can say that I will refer to our legal counsel and ask that question and be and share
it back with you whether through the chair or not. And I see Sarah has her hands up. Sarah Beth, >> I I thank you. I uh just I'm sure there is a time frame. I don't think it's like 30 days, but I'm sure there is an
expiration date on those motions and votes to have it come back together. I think like Dr. Z said, we can confer with legal counsel and DESIE to see what that time frame is, but I don't think it's a forever. So why don't we say
that's a question that we'll get an answer to Mandy before before Amoris has to make a decision. We have time. Is that okay? Yeah. Okay. I think at this point unless anyone has any other questions on the regional agreement um we're turning to
the elementary school. I'm not seeing any hands. Lynn, >> my question is not about the elementary school or even the schools, but I wonder if we should just acknowledge now that we are not going to get to concert
planning conservation today and make sure that the people who are sitting here waiting for that um stay tuned for when we will meet with him. >> Uh Sean, do you want to confer with them offline just um since we haven't started
uh elementary yet? Yeah, I mean I guess we spent a half hour on the region. Do we anticipate the elementary is going to be an hour and a half? >> It could be. It could be. I'm just say I mean right now we're on pace where we could get to conservation and
development um at the rate we're going. But if we think the elementary schools are going to >> take an hour and a half, then we could let them know when they can come back. There's not an obvious time for them to come back. We're pretty packed with our meeting schedule, but >> So, I'm seeing we have at least three
people there waiting. So, so let's let's table that for right now, Lynn. Um because let's see whether we can be efficient. Um >> maybe we make the call at like 410 if it doesn't seem if it seems like we're >> deep in it.
>> Anna, thanks. And I I don't I hope my question isn't too like tiny here. Um, one of the responses in the document was about staffing uh and and tracking staffing levels and I was trying to understand the response in that uh in
that document that said it's a manual process and I understand that that has caused a lot of challenge in terms of getting those numbers. We also got comments that those numbers were not accurate um or weren't true to the experience of the folks in those
positions. And I know that what you said is because it's a snapshot at any given point of time, it's kind of hard to line those up. But what I didn't see was what the plan was for moving forward there so that accurate information could be presented. You had mentioned that other
districts utilized software to track this um but that there wasn't a plan for us to do that. I think it seems pretty important that everyone's on the same page in terms of the numbers and the staffing counts of for FTEES. I'm just curious what the plan is moving forward.
It wasn't clear to me from that response. >> And Anna, can I Anna, can I ask, are you talking about the elementary school or >> Yes. >> Yes. Yeah. You're talk We're We've switched elementary. Okay. >> I thought we had. Did we not? >> Yeah. No, we have. Go ahead. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thank Thank you for clarifying, Kathy. I
just wanted to to pause because I wasn't sure if we're still on the region. Um, but I also didn't know if we wanted to have Shannon walk through the elementary budget portion before. >> That would be great. Kathy said no hands were up and I panicked and put my hand up and cuz I was like, wait, no, don't
end this. But it would be great to get an overview first and then I'm happy to re ask my question later. >> All right, awesome. So, I'm going to hand it over to Shannon to ask the question and um we can delve into a lot of our processes and how we're we're trying to work to update those.
Shannon, you're muted. >> Sorry. Um, I only have two pages for the Amherst budget. This, um, summary page looks a little bit different from what you might, um, be used to looking at. We have adopted new cost centers for the Amherst public school district. So, it's
a little bit more detailed within the payroll and expense account lines. Um, so this budget, uh, we've obviously had increases in salaries for our SEPs and colas. Um, we've had a significant increase within special education for,
um, out of district placements and contracted services that we can't do inhouse. Um, and transportation costs for out of district placements. Um, we had a a big decrease within the facilities line. Uh, and that's partly
because Fort River and Wildwood would be coming offline, although there are some utility costs left for the summer months of Wildwood since our summer programming will be happening there. This negative number would actually be more, but like in the region budget, we had moved some
trade positions that have gone unfilled into the expense lines um which increases facilities, but it's not an increase to their to the overall budget per se because it was just a movement from payroll um to those lines. We've had the increase in health insurance and
like I said at the region we did a deep dive into um what plans staff currently have and just trying to make sure those projections were as um tight as possible. Um so that's just very brief overview.
This budget uh is an increase of 5.87 over the FY26 budget. Um and with that the the reductions that would need to be made are within this sheet. So at the top again we have budget adjustments. These are not um
this intensive needs admin for ILC is not a reduction in um in a position losing or or being lost. Um actually this person is shifting to a little bit more of a region role. So it's on a different budget and then we're going to
utilize a little bit more of our school choice funds. And then we have additions to the budget which some of these support Chestnut Street Academy. Not all of these are for Chestnut Street Academy. I noticed that in one of the memos. Um and then some of them are just
ads to what we see the students special education needs would be that we had to make um some adjustments for. Down here are the actual budget reductions. Um so we did reduce some lines within um committee or within the superintendence
expense lines. We have a reduction of classroom teachers and nonse non-program SE teachers a reduction within custodial and psychologists um and a a slight reduction in the ESL
teacher. And so that um brings us to a total budget of 29.9 million. And Shannon, I would just point out that the the manager's budget, as you you and Dr. She pointed out in your overview,
there's another 69,000. So instead of it being uh 572,000 above, it's 53,000. You know, there's there's more in the town target at this point. Um in the
because the town well what the town manager did. So, it's it's a nuance, but it's it's almost $70,000 worth. And the budget, just I think everyone knows the budget that she just quickly went through is what was uh known uh
when it was voted on as option two, correct? >> Yes. >> Yes. The school committee voted budget, >> Sean. Um I apologize if you said this Shannon and I and I should know this, but are all the collective bargaining agreements settled? Um in terms of are
you able to project salaries based on a on a accepted contract or is there still is it still being negotiated? >> There's one that has not been um finalized and ratified. So >> Okay. >> Is that unit A or unit B?
>> Unit B. Okay. Thank you. Welcome. I think we wanted to um Kathy, I don't know want to go back to um counselor Gatier's question, Delin Gatier's question around the FTEEs, especially in Essie and our plan moving forward.
We wanted to give her an opportunity to repeat her question so we can make sure we add it. >> I'm happy to try to repeat it. It wasn't necessarily framed perfectly. I when I hit multiple postits is when you know it's going to not be perfectly aligned. >> I think your question was around we presented one FTE number in terms of our
budget. However, you've later heard from individuals that that like the case load and numbers may have changed and we talked about it being a manual I have some some bullet points manual process but you want to make sure that we're talking about what our actual numbers are and how do we shift that process
moving forward. Right. It was actually uh sort of yes and it was also it was actually based on the answer to the question that was in the packet about FTEES um where you explained how uh sorry I'm trying to the number of documents you
explained that because you use a manual process it is it's very labor intensive and so there hasn't been a great way to get an accurate count of FTEEs in any given area and then you cited that other districts I think you said either Lello or Palmer uses is uh software for this
task or for this responsibility. Um but that I think you I believe you said there wasn't a plan for us to to do that at this point. And I was just curious if that's not the plan kind of what is the plan so that we can make sure that we're getting the most accurate FTE counts
that we can without without a huge labor that it has been. >> Yeah, it so you are correct. It is a snapshot in time of when depending on when the information is, you know, reviewed. Um I would like uh we're actually implementing a new payroll
software that will integrate within Munis and we're moving away from Frontline and having um Red Rover instead. And I can't remember the name of it. It's we build and there's one other word um that integrates with Red
Rover that would provide that FTE data at any point in time whenever we do need to pull it and as we use it throughout the years. It'll start holding that historical data in a much accurate way. Um so that's something that Dr. Z and I have talked about that we would like to
begin implementing. We're hoping um for this upcoming fiscal year that we'll have the Red Rover operational and once that happens then we can move on to the next phase. >> I I see Joanne Smith's hand is up. Is
that she also speaking to this issue? Um I don't know. I think we answered um got to your question >> because we g because I think her question was if we're not doing it now how we plan to move forward so we fix that problem and so we're in the process
of working with the new vendors to transition our system and then to make sure that this is something that we're able to address because it's come up in our in our past two years. It's come up repeatedly around making sure we have that accurate picture at different snapshots in time. So we actually are building that in. Can I ask a followup
if that's okay? Yeah, >> if you want to go on, you can. It's it's related to this. >> And I see there are three hands up on this um as well. Uh uh councelor Conor Martin, councelor Brebeck. >> Wait, sorry. Can I ask a follow-up or no?
>> Sure. Absolutely. I said yes, you can. >> Oh, I apologize. I didn't hear that part. So, um I'm glad to know that we're moving forward on kind of solving it for where we are now. what is the accurate number where and how can we get to that because it's I mean that impacts case
load it impacts all of the kind of numbers that depend on the FTEES so how do how can we know kind of what the most accurate information is in this budget >> so I think this this specific issue points directly to our SE numbers because I think that's the one one
specific um cohort that's been the most affected um Joanne can speak to to her processes and what we've done but we have pulled the most recent numbers and rerun them so we do have a different ratio um moving forward. John, you want
to kind of speak to your process? >> Yes. >> Yes. Thank you. Uh Kathy, is it okay if I go ahead? >> Sure. >> Um so just to to share with you all what ends up happening is by the nature of special education and services that
students need, um services are determined on an individual basis. And when an IEP is written to reflect the agreements with the team, that is done within our database. We use a program within P school that allows us to have
real- time data on services as reflected in accepted IEP from a family. And so what we do is actually pull the data directly out of the system. So we have accurate running data um 95% of the time unless we have a movein student that
hasn't made it into the database. And so when the data was originally pulled, the average case load for the nond district program students was seven to eight. Um and then I understood there was concern expressed about an increase in numbers
and I believe there was some communication shared um maybe perhaps with this group about numbers being upwards of 15 or better. And then I reran the numbers again and as Dr. Herman uh indicated the numbers had shifted a little which is not
unanticipated. Um the average range right now is about 9 to 10 students per nond district program special ed teacher at Amethyst Brook. Um that number is not atypical because the nature of special education is is that it's evolves and
that it's not a stagnant when one point of the year it's an ongoing process as needs are identified. And in terms of the the 15 plus per um staff member, when I looked at the data and I met with
the staff and I I I believe what happened is they didn't interpret a full comprehensive set of the data because they wouldn't have full access. I think perhaps they may have have accessed a number of students with IEPs, but not all students with IEPs have academic
services requiring a special education teacher to provide those. And so the 9 to 10 is the consistent average um projected at this point. >> Thank you, John.
>> And I see Amber, Dr. Lynn. and let's try to be as brief as possible so and if it's an unanswered question we can get more later. >> Yes. Um so my question is and um thanks Joanne for explaining that because um
the council did receive um communication from some of the interventionist teachers as well as some of the special education teachers and we've been trying to get to the bottom of what the case load will look like. So, um I I appreciate that you know that you're saying that it will still be 9 to 10 for
special education. Um I guess my question is for for uh Dr. Z and for the school committee. Um do you feel that in the budget um the scenario two that you passed that we will have enough funding to keep the case loads for special education from 9 to 10 and the case
loads for the interventionists? Um they said the best practice is four per group per for reading and six per group maximum for math. So do you feel that passing this scenario 2 budget will allow for that level of staffing that the teachers are recommending?
>> So passing the scenario 2 budget that the school committee passed at 5.87% yes um the priority restorations and we did include that in terms of our response to the council. Um, as a district, we looked at our numbers and our current
our current numbers. We reran our numbers um when the concerns came forth and in rerunning our numbers, we actually see that we should prioritize a regular ed or an SE um teacher in our restorations. And so with that, we
actually would say that the 5.87 87 would allow us to meet the needs and keep our our ratios low as long as we're able to restore those positions beyond what is currently um projected of the extra 16 70 approximately $70,000. That's only one position. Um but if we
are able to get the position of this the percentage of the school committee voted, we can keep our ratios low. >> Jill, >> thank you so much. Um, I just had it's a maybe a little more of a process question or just trying to wrap my head
around the timeline as it relates to reductions as there are several reductions relevant to um to this budget and knowing where we're at in the budget process and then seeing in your answers Dr. Z about the fact that reductions
have to be notified or noticed by 4:15. Can someone just speak to how that fits in with the budget timeline because it feels like you're having to notifi notice reductions while we're still in the midst of making decisions on the
budget. So, thank you. >> Sure. Um, contractually, as per the the collective bargaining agreement, we have until April 15 to notify of any possible reduction in forces, any rifts to to positions. Um that's unit A and I
believe unit C. What we did in in our budget development process is we developed our budget. Um as you know we developed one based on town guidance. The school committee voted one 5.87. We weren't sure where we would land in
terms of percentages. So we looked at the full range and we issued reduction in force notices um within the timeline. We also include the included the language that this is contingent upon budgetary as well as district needs. So
in in that language that was that was issued on each notice, we let them know that depending on what is voting and what the needs of the district are that there's a possibility that positions may be restored. Our contractual um agreement does not align with the budgetary process of the town. So we
have to include that language and that's language I included last year and and we included this year. A part of that is one, we want to give individuals an opportunity to amply find themselves, sustain um employment in case we can't. Um and two, to make sure that we're
adequately planning for the upcoming school year. June when I mean ideally the town you passed the budget the last year, I think we were notified in June. June does not give us enough time to to actually plan for a school district in upcoming school
year. So that unfortunately we did have to issue notices based on a range of positions between a 3.5 and a 5.87 but we did include the language that this is contingent upon budgetary approval and the needs of the district >> Lynn and then Sam.
>> Thank you um first of all to all of you and Dr. Z and um Shannon, I would I just want to thank you for all the work you've done to bring this budget forward to us and for the unbelievable lengthy response to all of our
questions. Uh that is not small, it's huge. And um on >> you Lyn, you you muted yourself. >> On the regional budget, you came in on the mark. on the reele budget attempted to come in on the mark and I I'll get to
some of those questions later. Um I want to go back to the issue of the software that you were talking about um Shannon and I want to know whether or not it will allow you to go back in previous years so that we can get a
comparable look at positions over time no matter how you look at them. I mean, you can look at FTEES any way you want and there's any number of ways to look at them. What would be most helpful for
the lay people, I include myself in that on, you know, groups like the finance committee, is to be able to look at them the way other u municipalities look at them and to look at them over time, even retro.
>> That's my first question. So the software if we were to get that that integrates with red rover it would not be able to go backwards. That would be the beginning for moving forwards. I I think the most that the best thing to do is to look at the um budget books
historically where those staffing trends are and generally those snapshots in time should be close um because that's when the budget is being developed. That's um the best starting point per se. And so Shannon, would that be FY27
is a new starting point? Is that is that the situation we'd be in? What Lynn is saying? So up until then, we're looking at those five-year tables that you've had. >> Yeah. Like so whatever software, if we do go with the software FY27, yes, would
be the first year with that implemented. >> All right. Um I'm actually going to pause with that. Thank you. Sam. >> Uh, thank you, Kathy. And I'd like to also thank Dr. Z and the the team that
uh put together the responses. Uh, uh, I read all of them and they were very helpful in explaining uh some of the challenges. Uh and I acknowledge uh that there really are great challenges
for uh the system. We have a new uh school chestnut uh as well and uh on top of that budgetary problems and uh although you know we're asking questions from our
own perspective uh it seems to me that uh we're doing it at a relatively surface level without actually feeling directly the impact of uh that it is with the school system. Um I gathered from all
the different responses aside from the finances that the specials and all the discussions to date that the specialists and special needs are really driving a lot of the uh discussions uh and challenges. Uh I so thank you. Uh
question I have that's particular is on page 26 of the Amoris public schools there's the budget. I put an asterisk next to special education just I noted the variances in expenses from 2023 to
2024 to 2025. I'm curious uh is is that a typical do fluctuations such as that typically occur? It went from like 641 in 23 to 383 and 24 for some reason there was a
big drop and then 795 in 25. And I'm wondering is is there something systemic in that particular category uh in terms of how it's allocated? >> You're looking at the budget which
>> on expense account Shannon under expenses um for special educa on regular education special education from FY23 to actual. >> Yeah. So it it does fluctuate circuit what we receive in circuit breaker every year is different but we do know what that number is um that we're using for
the budget ahead of time. Um and then ID how much IDA funds that we have um which is also we we actually don't know how much IDA funds we'll have for FY27 until probably October already into FY27. So we make an estimate that supports the
budget. Um and then special education is fluid. we get move in students throughout the year where um they might come in with really high needs and we have to spend a certain amount of dollars or they have to go out to a a program because we can't keep them in house for some reason. Um so yeah it
special education will always be a volatile factor of whether it goes up or down all dependent on the students needs that is can be very unpredictable. >> Uh thank you. Yeah, it seems that it requires reactivity and uh I gathered
that from many of the responses that the school system has mandates to meet the needs and uh the challenge being what are the budgets going to be and how do you respond to those incoming needs.
that also I the other asterisk I put down was a smaller figure but it was the comment regarding the 3 to 5year-olds uh preschool that uh there's a need to meet those and um that it's increased this
year. I saw it in the questions uh and I'm curious was and you responded that it was primarily an increase in special needs. Is that a percentage of special needs or are we actually getting higher number of three to five year olds in our system? I'm wondering if it's a a
long-term trend. >> Um I want to ask John, can you expand on that question? >> Yes, thank you. I think that's a really important question. And what we are seeing is is it's trending up for the number of students who are three and uh
four year olds who have been identified with special needs and an IEP. Our preschool program is primarily at its core designed to meet those students and we include uh non uh peers without IEPs. So we have an integrated program to meet
state requirements and yes it is an upward trend. Um and relative to our ability to project I think based upon our numbers that have been slowly creeping I think we would look at this as a as a steady um where it would stay up at this number for a while.
>> I hope that answers your question. It >> it does. I I'm wondering if might it be uh just by chance or are we perceived to be particularly effective at addressing the needs of uh special needs in that age group? Well, let me just say first of all, I really appreciate that
observation um because I think we have amazing programming, but I would say to you relative to the students are the students that live in our community. And so I don't believe it's a moving in in order to access our preschool program. Um what we're seeing the trends
especially postcoid that the complex profiles of of young people um young students, young children um is very much growing. Um part of our larger systemic questions um have to do is what are the
other options? Um and some of the movement around IDA the federal funds I don't know if you follow any of that but some of that really does speak to um where there's at the federal government guidance to put more of the funds that
are existed through the different parts into uh early intervention and less into uh 3 to 5year-olds. So, we're going to be realizing some realistic tension about how the federal government is leading some of the the funding and
thoughts around it as well. >> Thank you very much. >> Okay, I see Sean's hand is up, Mandy. So, can is it all right if I call him before I come to you? >> Thank you, Kathy. I just I wanted to go back a second and clarify one thing. Um,
Dr. Z, you had said if the 5.87% 87% increase was approved that there was a prioritized list of things that might be restored but and and I could be wrong on this. My understanding was that budget that was approved by the school committee specifically restored specials like art and m um our
PE and intervention positions. Um am I am I not understanding that correctly? >> So the intent of the school committee at the time was to uh restore those positions. Um however since then we've
had conversations around um restoration scenarios and additionally the school committee along with the administration is about serving the needs of students and so if we're able to show them the accurate data and have the conversation around shifts that need
to happen in the correct uh centers I'm very confident that the school committee will ensure that the students who have the greatest needs have what they need. >> Thank you. Mandy. >> So, I I guess I've now got two questions. Um, the one is in response to
Dr. Z's answer just now to Sean's question, which is if you've got a prioritized list of potential restorations, and that is is it not the same as what the school committees was, and if so, can we see the prioritized list? Um, that's question number one. And question number two goes to the
preschool program. Um, are the non high need students that are enrolled in preschool, i.e. the ones that are not required to be served by the school district. Um, is the tuition they are paying covering
the full cost of their preschool costs? So, is the school district charging tuition to the non-mandated I I'm not sure how to word this correctly. the kids that are not that the school is not required to provide
preschool services. >> Can I help you? Are you just the tuition they're charging for those students covering the full cost of their preschool education? >> Sha, who do we basically who do who do we charge tuition? >> So, we charge nonspecial education
students. So, if they're there for special needs, those students are not charged. We take in approximately 30 35,000 a year for preschool tuition. That probably covers one parah.
Um but there but we also have to pay um teachers and paras that are dealing with the special education students and they're in the same classroom. So >> no I I I guess I I understand you have to pay for the students that that are
not the special education. Well, the the there are costs associated with the special education students that are fully covered by the school district. I'm curious whether the non-special education students tuition covers the cost it costs the district to
educate them in the preschool. So, is is the non-special education preschoolers tuition and attendance cost neutral or is it still an added cost to the school district to include those students? I would say um without doing a formal
analysis um which it seems like perhaps um that's something that might be asked of us but I would say no it's not covering at all um but then the question becomes if we cannot keep theseu have our preschool program and do these
services in house is it going to cost for us to contract to send those students elsewhere or to pay for a tuition program at another school district and Is that the tradeoff that is why we keep the our preschool open and and complete those services?
>> I I think Mandy is trying to get at if you could charge a higher fee for the nonIEP um it because it what if you just take 30 to 35,000 that's uh that's not uh that's when you look at other preschool
programs people pay a lot for preschool programs. So, do we do we have a sliding scale for the nonie um based on their income? I know it's a lottery to get in. Yeah. >> J, you want to um I'll have Joan just give some context and then you jump in
just so we could pass the ball around. >> Go ahead, John. >> Uh yes. Um so, it is a sliding fee scale um for the students. And one of the pieces I think it's important to understand is with the sliding fee scale, we firmly believe in early intervening and intervention so that
when we have students come in that we're giving timely tier one, tier 2 from a Massachusetts tiered support approach with our preschoolers. Um and then the other piece for us is is to maintain what we would consider competitive um
hourly rates or fees for the year because we are mandated to have um what we consider uh peers without IEPs in our programs to ensure that we're in compliance with the state requirements. Um, the other mitigating factor that
Elizabeth Burns as a preschool administrator also takes into consideration is that our programming unlike some other programs um may run longer hours to meet uh what the other families may need. So, it is a continual
evolving conversation about how do you balance meeting our regulatory requirements with also meeting what our community needs with also covering the costs. Um Kathy, I didn't want to go too far from um councelor Mandy Joe's first
question around the restoration. Um and then I wanted to to kind of tag teen that that respond between myself and the chair. Um so on page 11 of our packet, we actually submitted the same restoration priority list that we
submitted to the school committee. Um so if you look at page 11, there is a there is a chart. Um note that when the school committee votes um they vote by cost centers and so they are able to they are able to appropriate by cost centers in
those specific cost centers with the additional funding we are able to adequately as you can see because it's by cost center um determine what the needs of the district are and resone those positions. So the idea is that the school committee
votes the overarching budget by carenders and says hey this is where we would like to have things appropriated when it comes back down to the specific how it looks within the district that's where the superintendent and the district team would look and say hey what are our current needs sitting in
front of us and as long as we are not c crossing cost centers we're able to implement new positions. So, for example, if there's a higher amount in regular ed regular education or regular instruction, um, and I noticed that we're switching back and forth between terminology cuz we were cutting and
pasting and working on this document, so we apologize for the mixup, but they're the same categories. Um, we are able to determine that if we actually need a gen a general classroom teacher to teach um, fifth or sixth grade, then we are able
to hire that over restoring. we're able to restore that position over restoring a spec specific specialist position. So that's where my explanation earlier was around if there is a need for us to then ask the school committee to switch cost centers. I am sure if we come back to
them and say hey we actually need to hire an SE like two SE teachers to make sure that our students have services we need to change or we need to um increase a cost center then I'm sure the school committee would do such it's been a collaborative conversation around the
needs of students Deb you want to add to that >> um yeah I mean I think that's right I think when um ch needs change um when the school year starts or in the middle of the school year. Uh we need to adjust
staffing appropriately and I think we've done that pretty successfully. Not optimal. You should be able to know um who's going to be in your classrooms day one. Um but we don't have that kind of um
contingency built in. Um, I see Amber. Counselor Conor Martin. >> Kathy, can I can I quickly let um Rob and Jeff go? I think I was going to see if Dave and Stephanie want to hang on because I think they would they'll be quicker. Um, but planning and
inspections will take longer. So, we'll bring them back at a future meeting. >> Jeeoff and Rob, you can sign off and I'll connect with you on another time. >> And Sean, if they could come on next Tuesday, I think we can make general services. >> Yeah, I agree. Yep.
>> Okay, Amber. >> Yeah. Um, I just wanted to see if if somebody could clarify um what are the positions that will be lost in if we um pass the town manager's budget as opposed to the school committee budget, approved budget.
>> That's that is the list in here, Amber. Um >> Okay. So if I can clarify, so on the sheet that I presented where it said budget consolidation reductions at the bottom, it would be those positions plus the
>> page 27. >> Yep. It would be those if we did not receive the additional 572. Um the I I guess the idea was that the specials and the interventionistants
would um be restored. So those positions would not. However, based on the cost centers, we can restore what is the what is what the students need the most for that 572. Lynn and then Jill, Mandy, Deb.
>> So, I'm gonna stay with this just because I don't want to keep jumping back between early childhood and um the elementary budget, but I still had questions on the early childhood. Um but on this so what you're saying is
that you you are already saying that if the council ultimately does not increase the school budget that you are committed to these would be the positions that you would eliminate from the budget that you actually presented us which is the
budget the school committee voted and the reason I say that is because technically you're not bound bound by that. Technically, we pass a number and you decide how to do that >> and how to use that money. >> We are sort of bound by it at this point
because we have um contract um requirements that require us to reduce enforce um send those notifications out by April 15th. So, if we were to change the plan now, we would be out of compliance with our contracts.
>> Okay? And at the same time, what you're telling us because the superintendent did present the initial budget that was within the guidelines of the um financial guidelines that the council passed and gave to the town manager that these positions have already been given
notice. >> They've been not being given notice with a a a statement that talks about its pending budget approval as well as the needs of the district. >> Thank you. I I just want to be very clear which positions we're talking about and the amount
>> at least at least one of them at least one of them was retirement Lynn. So you know some of them Yeah. >> Okay. I'll come back to my other question on early childhood. I'm I just find it unfortunate for the superintendent and the staff that we
keep jumping back and forth. Chill. I have a question back to closer to Ambers. Does anyone but I'm happy to turn it over to anyone who wants to continue on this line of conversation. >> So I I think I had a clarifying of what
Lynn was trying to do if that's okay. Councelor Bevik. So I I'm going to ask Lynn's question a different way. you referred us to page 11 of what I believe is the document that's like ASC answers
to finance committee or something like that in the title um finance committee ASC that you said page 11 which has a list of three regular education four special education two regular instruction a support services
and then another regular instruction specials list for an FTE total of somewhere around 14 positions um and over about a million dollars worth of cost. And so am I correct in
saying that those are the positions that have been noticed as an RAIF and that if the town council would vote a budget above the 3.875, 875. Those are amongst the positions that
might be restored, but because the number is well above a half a million dollars. You cannot tell us at this time which of those positions might be restored. So it might not be the regular instruction specials that are restored. It might just be one of the of four and
a half. It might be regular education or special education that are listed above that. Is that correct that it would come from that list, but it might not necessarily be the interventionists, teachers, the last four lines of that list. It might be the first seven lines
of that list. >> You're correct um in in in that assumption, but note that we're saying based on student needs. So, we are a public school district. We are needs and change. One of the earlier questions that I believe counselor Develin Gatier
asked was about the ratio, right? When we first ran that ratio when you initially started this process, it was much lower. When we when everything came back up, we reran the ratio, it was now about nine, right? So, our needs shift and change. Students are being assessed
every day. Students are being reassessed every day. So even today what our needs may be may not be what's projected here in terms of our priority priority restoration list. So for us um also noting that some of these positions may
be due to attrition like we may have lost someone due to retirement or whatever and we would if you ask me what the ideal is you you said if you tell me if you have a blank check what would it be here is what I put so it wouldn't it would even exceed the amount does even exceed whatever it is that the school
committee put forth because it's like if I had to restore this is what I would restore. Um so don't send me shopping I I'll do well I'll do well shopping. What I also would say is that yes, the restoration even on this list may shift and change because what do our children
need and so our numbers are shifting. Um we in and just for your um edification and that of the community, we work with our school leaders. Um we listen. We we we heard the voices of our teachers. We went back. We checked. We saw where the
shift was. We're willing to make that change in the restorations. And that's what we need to do to make sure our children have what they need. >> Thank you. I just wanted to clarify that it we can't know now what would actually be restored if we increase the budget from what the manager proposed. That
would be we don't this is not for you. This is for the rest of the council. We don't control that restoration. And just because some members of the community are saying one thing, that is not actually possibly what would actually happen. it it would be up to you to make
that decision based on whatever funding is available. >> And I would say that what you can what I can guarantee you is that what I would restore is what the what the children need in that time. Um and also noting like our school year started with one set of needs, right? We had everyone moved and placed at the accurate
positions at the start of the school year. Quickly as the school year took off, um we had individuals move into the community. We had individuals move out of the community. We had to move individuals from one building to the next so we didn't have to hire. Then we still had to hire three or four additional individuals. Like we are a
public school system. We cannot say no. Our doors are forever open. So what I can say is that with the funding that we need and that that is at the higher end, we're able to make sure that we can provide for our children. >> Thank you.
So, Deb, um I have grabbed Ed and Lynn. Yeah. >> One one observation about early childhood um that I think might be helpful um when we come back to that. Um I just had a couple of points. It is not uncommon in my experience that riff
notices get issued um when somebody ultimately does not end up losing their position simply because they need to be issued so early in the year and as you know um you know chapter 70 changes all the way up until June. So often times
there are um position a position here and there that gets restored over and over and over again having gone through a May kind of June cycle. So uh just I wanted to point that out. I'd also like to point out um
that I believe your budget is the same councelor Hani you allocate certain amount to a department but within the department that's at the discretion of of the town manager. Um we have worked recently and considered the cost centers
which are more fixed. The superintendent would have to come back to the school committee and require a vote to transfer funds from one cost center to the other. So we have um looked into Dr. Z brought it up in the fall. I brought it up in the spring
about really um examining cost centers more carefully um going forward. But um that that is the state that we're in at the moment. Thank you, >> Chill. And then Lynn. >> Um I just had a sort of a follow-up
question. I and I guess I just I feel like I am committed to trying to help find a way to fund and restore these special ed positions that I think are so important to interventionists. And I have a sort of a a question about what made it into the budget scenario too in
terms of these other special ed non-program special ed positions and if anyone can shed light on why those four positions didn't make it into this budget scenario too and if there is still any route to
ensuring that those positions as they fall into such a critical category of staffing and as Dr. Z you mentioned being dedicated to making sure we're meeting students needs those feel like critical positions. So I guess if just
so that I understand process-wise what happened there why are those positions not in the school committee approved budget scenario too and is there still a route to restoring those positions? Um and I'll I'll pivot it to the chair.
Um just so you understand our process what first of all and I and I kind of bulleted it on page 10 and because I think that that whole scenario was a part of a series of questions um the school committee process or our budgeting processes um throughout early
parts of the year especially at the elementary we have meetings myself and the town manager as well as the finance directors we meet um regularly and we have finance discussions. We were provided guidance. We presented our budget based on the guidance to the school committee. The school committee ultimate this budget ultimately sits
within the scope of the school committee because they set the general educational direction of the districts. Um once they gave us the priorities that they had, we and asked for additional scenarios afterwards, we developed those scenarios. Um the school committee
received feedback from the community around what the community felt were were important things to consider. Um and so they gave us some guidance around what they would like us to develop in terms of restorations and and another budget. That's where the 5.87
um budget came from from the guidance. And so in our follow-up conversations with our chair, what we also did was determine um to present for her in terms of what would be lost, where we would want to make sure there's restorations done.
Um, so everything's a compromise, right? And this year was particularly difficult because not only were we looking at reductions because of costs, not because
of um changing needs. But the consolidation process is complicated. It is time consuming. There's a lot of moving pieces. And as I believe we've witnessed, we don't
have 100% or anywhere close to 100% alignment of the the stakeholders in the conversation of what this looks like going forward. My own point of view is
um that under a consolidation situation, you make change gradually. I mean, we're already going to make large changes. Um, it's not clear the implications to the educators or the administration
um what it's going to take, what time and um additional resources including time to to to kind of figure figure out the process, right? It's not going to it's not going to be a year, might be three years, I don't know. So, I would
be conservative in making any staffing reductions except the very obvious ones, but that wasn't that wasn't the budget scenario that um we were asked to present and it wasn't the budget
scenario that we would have liked to present. Um I think when I say we, I'm obviously speaking for myself because we didn't discuss them. Uh, we did do what was called a level services
budget. Um, I think it got one vote. Um, but it was a it it's a reasonable thing to say. Let's not cut anybody until we really know what we're looking at. There are some obvious consolidation um
savings in consolidation when you bring two small schools together uh exacerbated by the fact that we will still have commonantis within the school. So you you really have a hard time separating getting the kind of uh efficiency that you're looking for when
you have five classes per grade when you have a two class per grade set of of of classrooms. Um, I guess what I'd like to say is even with the level services, quote unquote, level services budget
that could have been brought forward, that wouldn't have made sense because perhaps um staffing just just the building itself doesn't require the same level of custodial staffing. Um, and then you add
on to that this idea that um I lost my train of thought. >> Okay. You know, Lyn, I see your hand is up. >> I know. Sorry. >> You have additions, right? So the additional um >> preschool >> you have the implied reductions for
consolidation. But if you go back to that spreadsheet Kathy that you showed me, there was no um expectation about what the additional staffing for Chestnut Street Academy sixth grade academy would would would cost. So you're increasing and
decreasing and it doesn't mean it's level services because you have an entirely different service situation you're delivering. You have a very small sixth grade academy, a medium-siz school, and a kind of smallalish Crocker. And um I don't even know what
to call that. We're increasing um increasing preschool by a class uh early childhood. That's not a small thing. That has nothing to do with um the consolidation process. that just has to do with the the the demand that um the
needs of the uh the three and four year olds that are living in our town. Thank you. So, I see Lynn's hand is up and I'm also conscious it's 4:27. Um and um we do
have public and we still have uh Stephanie, we have a couple people waiting patiently here. So, Lynn, I I am calling you. just if we can also say if there are some questions that haven't been posed yet given how fantastic your
answers were that have come to us we can if you're willing we can send them to you um post this but Lynn go ahead >> um so I I just want to make sure I understand
um if for example uh the Chesnut Street Academy in the fall ends up at a lower level. One of the decisions you could make is that you have a higher level need elsewhere and
maybe you won't have as many classrooms at Chestnut Street Academy. Of course, on the other hand, you have to honor the fact that you have to have the ratios as provided for the Commonantes program. So that's the kind of decisions you make
based on student needs. So, as we sit here today, we're not necessarily voting this level for one and this level for another, etc. You're going to make decisions based on needs. That's what I think we have all been hearing. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. Second of all, um what I um also am hearing is that with regard to the specials that have been kind of at the center of this back and forth between what level should we fund the
school is you assessed at one level that was I believe seven or eight on the average. other people who are in those actual classrooms saw it in a different way, counting it differently at more like 15. Your reassessment came back at
more like 9 to 10. And so the reason I'm asking that is because it seems to me that somewhere in there is possibly where we're looking for how we could come up with
a compromise. Okay, that's what I'm trying to come to. >> I want to clarify you're speaking what you referenced in your um example or question is actually special education and not special not the specials. >> Okay, the specials are the music art library. Yeah.
>> Yes. >> Yes. No, I meant special education. Yes, I did mean that. Um and thank you. Yes, I did not mean the specials. Okay, that's I just wanted to clarify that those were the different levels that got discussed in here. Um I really would
like to go back to um preschool and perhaps this should be done in questions. Um I know that in Ammerst we also have Head Start. So I'm assuming that none of the Head Start money comes to our preschool. Is that correct?
>> Correct. John or Shannon? Yes, that is correct. >> Okay. Um, which is unfortunate. Um but nevertheless because we also don't have universal preschool. But what I am hearing is that as an obligation to do
preschool supported by the state program, you even though you have a certain number of slots for special needs students, you have to still balance out the classroom to have it look and feel like an average
population. And that's a terrible way of saying it, but so that the slots that you're looking to fill by lottery are slots that are not necessarily special needs. >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> They are not special needs. Yes.
>> Thank you. Uh I think I've asked all my questions. Thank you so much. and and just I think everyone saw but in their budget this is the preschool piece is adding almost $200,000 um because of the the growth in the IEP
match by the other group which is I think why Mandy was saying is there some revenue offsetting that when we have to increase the non-special needs parts of it. Um, >> let me let me add on to that though because one of my biggest concerns is
as we go down this road uh based on this threat of potentially having the income in income tax reduced, how much of that money for our preschool is in fact state money and will that we don't know. But that's the
kind of thing that it could end up being in jeopardy if this state stupidly votes for a 1% decrease in income tax. >> China, do you have those exact figures or do we need to get that back to the to the council? I I feel like we need to
get back to them with that. Exactly. >> Yeah, you don't have to. You know, any we'll I'm I'm taking notes. There haven't been that many unanswered questions. They're just a few. Um, Deb, >> hey Lynn, tell us how you really feel. Um,
>> you know, you know, >> early childhood is an interesting situation. As you, as you know, um, the cost of an additional classroom is, uh, 180 something thousand. So, I wanted to
go back to Mandy Counselor Heni's question about um whether or not students are uh who are not in those SE seats, whether or not they're build to cover their costs. It's um we do have a sliding scale, but it's like having a
school a mandated school choice position. So whether or not you have um whether or not you have those nonse students, you still have to provide the program.
So that's that's one way of looking about at how the costs do or do not cover um the costs of the nonse students in those programs. >> We but I think we I think we have tended
to fill up those slots. Deb I know in some schools Yeah. Yeah. Councelor Hani asked if >> those the fees that those students pay cover the costs of >> and it's not a >> it's not a system for which that is
inherently possible. I mean you could do it mathematically but the the way the system is built it would have we would have to offer those seats whether or not anybody paid anything for them by stamp
state mandate. Um so that that's sort of one one nuance to the the uh early childhood. And the other is um if you actually look at the um one of the the updates that we've
gotten, it's not I don't think it's in the packet. The total ads for early childhood is more than three. It's 5.6. So when you're looking at the budget, you know, there's the net minus 10.35, but like I said before, you increase and
you increase and then you decrease. So when you're looking at net dollars, when you're looking at net FTEEs, it's a really much more nuanced conversation about distribution of resources amongst
the groups. So that's what I wanted to say. >> Well, I'm I'm not seeing any other hands up right now and I I you've given incredibly graciously of your time, Dr. Z, and your team where originally you
said maybe an hour. So, so, so thank you. Um, what I'm going to suggest is, um, we only we only got a chance to get the, uh, the massive amount of response you got. Um, mo many people didn't see it till this morning. and we have people
who work so they didn't necessarily um focus uh able to absorb it. So um we will um I will collect from people if there were unanswered questions um that had occurred to them you know and I have
one but I don't need to have it it wasn't one we had posed um just to get more clarity um and um I think unless I see any objections we could close this part of the meeting is that all right with everyone
>> I think I'd just like to say thank you to you and the town council um for the opportunity to sit and engage in this great discussion. Um I think that the one thing that I would take away from this and I hope that everyone takes away from this is that we actually we're actually aiming this year even in the in
in how we presented our budget book and documents that we had in making sure that what drives us is that programs drive funding and student needs drive programs. And we wanted to make sure that that was very clear across everything that we do. And so um thank
you all. if there's any further questions. You know, it's the and it's also the end of the school year, so there's a lot happening. Um, we're opening a we're opening a new building. We have a roof project. There's a lot moving forward. So, give us some time.
But also note that in this whole conversation that that we had, there's data pieces that for example, when the SE numbers came forward, there data pieces that the teachers don't have access to that we have access to that prompts our numbers. We understand it is iterative. We understand that it's a
public school and so even though we plan and have the best intentions, things happen each and every day that may shift where we have to put our funding and who we have to have in front of our students. Um, and so as long as student needs and we center around student count students for me, that's that's the work that we're going to continue to do. So,
thank you and I'll await your email. So, I want to thank the whole team who came and Sarah Bess who's been sitting there patiently um saying, "Boy, I'm glad we brought in a regional school budget exactly on target."
>> I do want to say a huge thank you to Dr. Z and Shannon and their team for creating um especially at the region this year. It was a really thoughtful budget. they took a lot of feedback from last year and um conversations during the whole year when presenting this
budget and so I just want to again appreciate how much work went into this. So thank you. >> Well, thank you all and so you can stay for the next part of your our meeting if you would like but you will
>> to say goodbye. And uh Sean um I want to make sure we have time for public comments too because we do have a fair number of public and now we have Dave and Stephanie here. >> Sure. Let me turn it over to Dave quickly again. He u he's not going to be around later in the month and that's one
of the reasons why I wanted to make sure that we got to them uh tonight. So Dave, do you want to give an overview and then again we can just maybe scratch the surface of conservation? >> Yeah, thanks. Can everybody hear me? >> Yep. Thank you everybody. Yeah, I'm
actually around next week, Sean. So, as as I was listening and looking at the time, you know, there's there's some continuity and connectivity between all of this between, you know, planning, particularly on the planning side. So, I
guess I'd prefer to hold most of it until Tuesday. We can start. Stephanie is here >> and we can we can knock off a few of the questions up front, but >> make a day to focus on conservation and sustainability and and then yeah, planning and inspections we would do
next week. >> Sure. Sure. Um again just for for the finance committee and anybody listening you know we we we have a functional area conservation and and development which includes planning inspection services
sustainability uh zoning and we all work together. We work also very closely with facilities although that's in a different part of the budget. Um, obviously right now one of the biggest issues and one of the biggest projects we're working on is
Hampshire College and the future of of Hampshire College, working with the town manager with our with uh with our planning and economic development director Jeff Bag who will join you next Tuesday. And then of course, you know, zoning is also a big topic and we'll
talk more about that on Tuesday. All the while that these projects are happening, we're also liaoning and supporting committees and boards across across the uh the spectrum of Ammerst from the CRC to the planning
board to the concom and the list goes on. So all of that work is integrated all of it is collaborative. Um, so why don't we start um just there was really only one question. Uh, well, why don't I start with grant applications? Is
staffing adequate to secure grants? So, we'll just rattle through a couple of these early questions. Um, obviously, you know, more staffing would be great. As Sean has probably told you, there really aren't any major substantive changes to the functional area in terms
of our operating budget. So, we're not expecting any more staff. So, we're going to do the best we can with the staff we have. I will say that through the years, we've been extremely successful in getting grants. not only grants in conservation, in planning, in
sustainability, but across the spectrum of of Ammerst. We work very closely with DPW on things like mass works grants, grants for uh roundabouts, grants for open space, obviously for sustainability, and the list goes on. Um
we're taking a major hit this year, as you know. We just lost Nate Mallaloy, who was our senior planner for 18 years. Um, I will say that in Nate's 18 years, Nate's keyboard was instrumental in and his knowledge, uh, was instrumental in
probably bringing in between 15 and 20 million in grants. Did he do those all by himself? No, he did not. He did those collaboratively with lots of other staff, but that is a major loss for the town. We are advertising that position
as assistant director of planning and economic development right now. So that'll be a a really important uh new hire for Jeff and for the planning department. Do we help the schools when we can? We do help the schools. I know that Stephanie and Stephanie can comment
on this. Stephanie is always available to the schools. She has helped them on a number of projects including some she can talk about in just a minute. Um should we be working more collaboratively together? I think we should. Um you know Sean has mentioned in previous um income uh finance
committee um uh meetings about grants like CPA you know uh we worked very closely on the project at um at Crocker Farm School for the en enhanced playground the preschool playground that was really a collaboration between
Crocker Farm Becky Demling as the the lead person at Crocker at the time and Nate Mallaloy uh worked very closely to do that. So there's there's more opportunity. I think it really comes down to hours in the day, staff time, and how much, you know, our benches are
not terribly deep on either side. So we do what we can. We could do more. Stephanie, do you want to say a little bit about, you know, some of the work you've done with sustainability across school and town? >> Sure. Thanks, Dave. Um yeah, you know,
we've had some historic collaboration uh for things like EV infrastructure, um the charging station, uh the dual EV level two charging station, uh at the middle school was something that we secured, um one of the initial stations
that we installed and we secured that with funding. And then the um electric vehicle, the white Nissan um leaf that the school has is also something that we helped uh the school purchase, but also through a fundraising campaign in
addition to just granting um securing some grant funding. We also had a fundraising campaign for that vehicle. Um, and then there's also been some building projects over time, lighting projects, um, you know, motor retrofits, things that aren't particularly sexy to talk about,
but they're, you know, they're small, but they're significant, um, that we secured through some green fund, uh, communities funding years back historically. So, there has definitely been collaboration. And then there's just, um, ongoing collaboration across departments, um, uh, that happens
regularly for most projects. And for people there were questions submitted. So Dave if we don't have to go through every one of them but if you even if you draft some answers but >> we are thank you Kathy for reminding me I got a little out of my flow because we
thought we were going to start earlier in your meeting um and without Jeff and Rob here. But we we do have written responses. We'll get those to Shawn tomorrow. So, you'll see them end of the day tomorrow and then you'll have them in time to ask us any additional
questions for next Tuesday. Um, maybe I could knock off a few more. Kathy, do you have time? >> Abs. Absolutely. >> Planning staff turnover. I I'll just jump in on this because of course Jeff has only been here a short time. Um, it
says, you know, we have been losing staff to other municipalities. What are the challenges? So in general in the functional area you know planning yes but in the functional area we have been losing and losing staff and we've had
quite a bit of turnover. Um I would say broadly um some of the threats there are retirements. We've been very fortunate to have a number of staff for a long period of time. People like John Thompson. Some of the council members here will remember John Thompson as one
of our long-standing uh inspectors. Uh John retired uh recently and that field uh Rob will will tell you is just not churning out new staff. So it is very very difficult to recruit new staff in
inspection services. We've been a little bit lucky in finding some folks but so recruitment is a challenge. Retirements are coming and there'll be more coming in the in the next two years uh two to three years. um experienced candidates,
even finding planners. 10, 15 years ago, we would have 20 to 30 applications for a planner position, an associate planner, a senior planner. And now, we're just not seeing uh particularly experienced candidates come out of schools. Even though right down the
street we have UMass and the landscape and architect uh uh landscape architect and regional planning department, we're just not seeing them churn out a lot of planners who really fit with what we need. Um I will say the trend in
planning has gone towards sustainability and environmental and other uh specialties and that is not exactly really what what we need here in town. Um I I'll be perfectly honest, salaries
um are not keeping up where they should be. Um we're we've lost a couple of people and we're continuing to see competition in the region um for salaries across the board. Um that are higher honestly. Um I think Rob, if you were here, would tell you that
recruiting inspectors, one of the challenges is we're we're we're losing people to other communities. Awam, West Springfield. um the candidates just don't come our way because our salaries are not high enough and some of the package uh packages like uh take-home
vehicles for instance is fairly common is having a a town or city vehicle to drive home with you and not use your personal vehicle. So retirements uh having uh robust uh candidate pools and the like are really challenging but
we're doing the very best we can. As I said, the um Nate's position is now out uh advertised. So Jeff Bag and his his team, his search committee will be uh recruiting members or excuse me, recruiting candidates and interviewing
people in the coming months. But for the short term, we're going to be down a major position. So there's going to be a little slowdown in in the productivity and what we can do. Um why don't I turn it over to Stephanie for sustainability. I think the focus there was on Stephanie
is a one person one staff department and almost every year since this position was created and sustainability was uh taken out of conservation and it's a standalone department um council members and the public have asked Stephanie how
much can you get done as one person Stephanie does an amazing job but she is just one person so Stephanie maybe you can say a little bit about that and the various grants you are are bringing in and and and chasing out there to uh off
offset and supplement our our capital funds, etc. >> Sure. Um thank you again. Um thank you all. I really appreciate this opportunity to speak to um being a oneperson show. Um but really, you know, it isn't just me and I think as Dave
mentioned earlier referring to work that Nate Mallaloy has done, much of the work is very collaborative. So um you know I may be a driver but I certainly don't do things I'm not siloed to do them only by myself. So um I really do rely on
working with my colleagues on moving sustainability initiatives forward. I do secure uh grant funding fairly regularly from the green communities program. Um we're in the process of applying for some funding right now for weatherization at the north fire
station. I will say that um because we've become a climate leader community, that particular pot of funding was reduced by half um because we're a climate leader community. And when we apply for climate leader community accelerator grant funding, that's a much
bigger pot of funding that we can request. We will be doing that. But um these things take stages. And maybe this is the part of being a oneperson show that um sometimes slows things down a bit because I have to ensure that we secure the funding to get the
engineering and design specifications that we need. And that requires technical assistance funding before we can then apply for the accelerator grant funding which will then allow us to do the implementation of retrofitting
various buildings from fossil fuels to electrification. So um you know it there's a process and that is the that is something that does slow me down a bit. Um but I think you know I will say I think we are achieving a lot of our goals and even though I though I am one
person I feel very um confident that we are meeting the goals that we've had set out for us um in terms of um addressing some of the building projects and the uh transportation infrastructure uh in terms of EV charging stations and
increasing the presence of those throughout the community. So, a lot of what I'm requesting for this ne next budget cycle is to address those two particular sectors. >> Thank you. Thank you, Stephanie. And thank you both for being patiently
waiting. And I see Sean's hand is up. >> I just wanted to quickly um acknowledge Stephanie. She does a great job bringing revenue into the town either through grants. Another thing she does is um she does a lot of the messy stuff that nobody else wants to do. And I'll give you a good example that's going to
realize savings for the town. Um, we have a solar array. We are part of a a program with the state where we get a credit on our electric bills. Um, Stephanie recently helped negotiate and really led the negotiation to essentially increase that credit by 150%
and we're going for like a penny to 2 and a half cents per kilowatt hour credit. Um, and that's for the next, you know, 20 plus years. We'll realize that on our our electric bills. um it you don't see it quantified so much because it's kind of spread through all the different departments and all the
different buildings, but the impact, you know, is in the tens of thousands of dollars each year um that we will see as a a reduction in expenses and it likely would not have happened without Stephanie leading the charge. So, thank you, Stephanie. >> And Stephanie, are you already working to make sure we're in the credit line
for the new school when it opens with its solar array? >> I haven't really been directly involved in that one. So, um >> yeah. No, that's the those are the smart credits, right? >> Well Well, that solar, remember, I believe, will directly power the school is that's different than the solar we
have on like the landfill, which is feeds the grid, but we don't use that solar. The solar at the at the elementary school will actually power the building. >> I think Sean, I think you should double check into it because I think I'm not >> Is that not the >> I'm not sure that's the case. I think >> No, I can clarify. >> I think we might be giving it back to
the grid and getting uh it offset, but double check. >> No. Yeah, I can follow up with Stephanie >> Kathy. Yeah. >> Um, so if I I'd like to pause there. I'm I'm I'm watching the time. Are there any questions on sustainability?
>> I I don't Well, let me see. Sam's hand is up and we're at uh we've got seven minutes left if we're going to try to end at five. Sam, so >> you're muted. >> Thank you, Kathy. And thank you, Dave
and Stephanie. I don't have a question. I just wanted to uh make an observation that, you know, in my time uh of being involved in the town, I'm I'm just very impressed with the town's capacity to bring in grants. Uh I've seen great many
of them through CPA, but there are many others. Uh Stephanie referenced a few. Um and I don't know uh you know how much gets brought. I know staff have to do multiple tasks. Uh the departure of Nate
is act is clearly going to be significant but uh I just wonder we may not have funding is is it despite budgetary concerns is it worth bringing on another staff person for grants if
you know it's a the field is going to dry up with state and federal money. I I know it's going to be a challenging situation. And I I'm just free flowing. But I'm very impressed. Uh the the planning department and all the town
staff work incredibly hard. We've seen that and the council over this past week with new uh activity and uh you know, it's just great uh to see when the grants come in because uh it's just
extra. And so kudos to the staff. >> Thank you, Sam. >> Thank Thank you, Sam. So, so what Dave, I think what we'll do is we'll say you're going to come back. Um, and then, >> uh, Stephanie, you unless there's something else we forgot to ask you, you
you can avoid Tuesday with us. When I see how many meetings you go to and um, and >> Kathy, would you mind if I wrap up on one point and then >> Sure, go ahead. And I'm just Yeah. So, um, this is a good stopping point because as I'm looking at the questions
from Hickory Ridge, South Ammer School, VFW, and the list goes on and on, we will, as I said, we'll submit written um, comments to you all tomorrow so you have them for the weekend and early next week. I think what I want to leave you with is is just that broad range of
projects that we're working on. And as I was thinking about this presentation, I was thinking about the clean energy bylaw, zoning changes that are going to come before the uh council undoubtedly later this year. Downtown design standards, uh Sam mentioned CPA
projects, almost every CPA project comes through this functional area. When an applicant gets approved by you and the funding gets approved by the council, it's not the end of it. We then staff take over working with Shaun's office to shepherd the the contents, the products
through whether it's a an improvement to a historic structure or a new ball field or whatever it might be. We're right there. Hickory Ridge continuing South and the housing component. Hickory Ridge housing component, South Ammer school housing, VFW housing and supportive
housing and sheltering, Wildwood School, and of course the big the big unknown right now is Hampshire College. So that's just seven or eight of the projects that we are going to be working on in the next year or two. And you know there are from time to time I I do get
some concern sometimes. I know there is concern about how many projects we have on the on the tarmac. But we must keep the flow moving because that is part of what creates new growth in some of these categories. So we may have six or seven
projects to you maybe to the public. They may be moving at a slower pace than you would like, but we continue to move those forward. So, next Tuesday, we'll talk with you a little bit about when we think those projects are going to actually move toward construction, new
housing, new new downtown development, whatever it might be. So uh we are working and next week I'll also talk a little bit about Bob Parent's role because Bob Parent has been incredibly instrumental in a number of projects
>> but unfortunately for us he was called away on some of the bigger projects. So these medium-range projects in the last two three years he just hasn't had the bandwidth to to help us with. He worked on the Jones instrumental there, Amethyst School critical there, track
and field critical there. But in fact, when we envisioned that that that uh role, that was not why we brought Bob on. There were these medium-range projects. Um so anyway, he's been an incredible um uh uh boost to all of us,
and we need that position to to remain. So, uh we hope he stays with us for a couple of years to come. So, more later on Tuesday. Thanks. >> Thank you, Dave. And and with that, uh we have very little time. If if if everyone is willing, I would like to uh
we have attendees. I'd like to open it to people who have been patiently waiting for public comments. And uh Sean, um I don't think I have do I have the power to bring people in? >> Um I just brought I think you're co-host, but I just um allowed Ann to speak.
>> An you are with us. Great. You can hear me? >> Yes. >> Great. So, we are members of the intervention teams of the Amoris schools. There are 10 of us who signed this letter and we're concerned about the data that was provided to the finance committee in the response for
Ammeris public schools re information request. The information that the district document offers is incorrect about the reality of Ammerst Elementary current stand staffing and student needs and
math and reading intervention. Here we're providing the committee with current and accurate data to help you to understand how cuts will adversely affect our programs. So, we've attached spreadsheets which you can't see right
now. Highlighted areas of concern include the following. The current case loads are listed inaccurately. Fort River is listed as having between 42 and 49 intervention students. In fact, between reading and math, we have
a total school case load of 108 students. Crocker Farm is listed as having a total of 14 to 17 students. In fact, they have a total school case load of 70. The predicted case loads are also inaccurate.
The district's predicted case load for next year significantly varies from actual case loads based on the current intervention numbers and the district's proposed number of staff. The district has listed Amethyst Brook
as having between 67 and 75 intervention slots, whereas the total slots based on May 2026 data is 195. The district has listed Crocker Farm as having between 14 and 17 intervention slots, whereas the
total number of slots based on current figures will be approximately 70. On page nine in the current column, the total current number of positions listed 11.6 full-time equivalent is also
incorrect. There are 12.5 FTE intervention positions across the three elementary schools. In the proposed uh fiscal year 27 column, the district writes that they aim to cut three positions. Given that the first column
is incorrect, this translates to 3.9 positions, which is a significant change from the 2.5 recommended cuts that were discussed in school committee budget meetings. On page nine, the third column lists a rationale for intervention
reductions. The district writes that they're reducing positions in order to better balance case loads across schools. Research on small groupoup intervention, which is what we do, shows that reading group sizes must be kept between 1 and
four students. Math groups can include up to five. The district's intervention program follows the research for intervention RTI protocols which state that teachers will provide individualized upto-the-minute
scaffolding. The rationale of balancing case loads does not make sense in a program designed explicitly to provide individualized instruction. Thank you so much for your attention. My letter is signed by 10 intervention teachers.
>> Thank you. >> Kathy, I have the letter too and I can put it in the packet. Um, >> okay. That's what I was going to ask this evening or tomorrow. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Are there any other people wishing to speak? Then thank I want to thank the committee
for your patience and for your attention including a a voluminous amount of information that many people seem to have read before the we met which is great. So I am going to make a motion to adjourn. Um is there a second?
>> Second. Second. >> All right. Don't mute yourself when you're seconding. Um uh call for a vote. Sam >> I. >> Kathy say yes. Jill >> yes. >> Anna >> I. >> Kathleen. >> Yes.
>> Lynn >> I. >> Tom. >> Yes. >> And Mandy, you get to adjourn the town council. >> If the finance is adjourned, I move to adjourn the town council. Is there a second? >> Second. Um, thank you. We'll vote. Sam,
>> I. >> Kathy, >> yes. >> Councelor Brevik, >> yes. >> Anna, >> I. >> Lynn, >> I. >> Mandy is an I. Councelor Cano Martin. >> Councelor Ko Martin is an absent at the time. So, we are adjourned with a 6
vote. >> And thank you. Thank you very much for joining us. And again, if people have questions that came up, please get them to me and Sean, and we'll check our notes to feedback to the superintendent. So, thank you all. We are adjourned at
503, which isn't bad considering. >> Thank you, Kathy.