Okay, it is Tuesday, June 23rd, 2026 and I call this business meeting of the Elizabeth School District Board of Education to order at 6:03 p.m. Can I get a roll call?
>> Director Fletcher. >> Here. >> Director Hunt. >> Here. >> Director Olsen. >> Here. >> Director Powell. >> Here. >> Okay, let's stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Okay. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, I move that the board amend this business meeting agenda for June 23rd, 2026
to move consent item 8.3, the superintendent contract, to action items, um, the action items portion of the agenda, and approve the remainder of the agenda as presented. >> Second.
>> Any discussion on that? No? Okay, can I get a roll call? >> Director Fletcher. >> Aye. >> Director Hunt. >> Aye. >> Director Olsen. >> Aye. >> And Director Powell. >> Aye. >> Okay, I move that the board approve the minutes from the Board of Education
special meetings on June 9th, 2026 and June 12th, 2026. Can I get a second? >> Second. >> Nicole? >> Okay. >> Any discussion on those? All right. Can I get a roll call? >> Director Fletcher.
>> Aye. >> Director Hunt. >> Aye. >> Director Olsen. >> Aye. >> And Director Powell. >> Aye. >> Okay, so next up >> we have um board member reports. So, who wants to kick it off? I question. >> I question.
>> I will I will kick it off. Get this elephant out of the room here. So, um I wanted to speak directly to something I know is on people's minds. We've had a lot going on in the district over the last few weeks.
Um we evaluated our memberships and our partnerships and we left the ERBOCES. Um we're pursuing new legal representation and we have um new leadership. So, we've also had executive sessions to
meet with our attorneys regarding the ACLU case. Um And so, I think that logically people are thinking, "Okay, what's going on? Um is next step you're you're dropping your defense of the case?" And I just want to
um make it very clear that no, we're not dropping our defense of um our position in this case. Um One thing that one thing that I think gets overlooked. I think people get
focused on the books, the content in the books, and there's a lot of argument back and forth. Should they be on the shelf? Should they not be on the shelf? And regardless of the position on that, I think the big picture is getting overlooked. And the big picture is a
matter of local control. So, if you take away local control and you start dictating what school boards can do as far as what's granted to them, the the rights that are granted to them in our state constitution, you basically steal the local voice.
You still the voice of the community. So, I I would really like people to understand that this this goes beyond the books. It goes beyond the books. It's it's a matter of people vote to put you in office to do their will. And when you have someone from the outside coming
in and saying, "Well, no, you can't do that." You're basically stealing the voters' voice, the voice of the community. So, that for me is why I remain wholeheartedly committed to the case and I believe that is the board's position as well. So, I just wanted to,
you know, clear the air and and, you know, take the speculation out of it. So, so no, we're not we're not stepping away from the case. Um So, elephant gone. >> Um one elephant. >> [laughter]
>> So, does anybody else have anything they want to add? >> I just want to say well said. Thank you for saying that because it is very true. Um we are still um completely supportive of staying in this case, staying the course.
But it is a twofold battle. It is Obviously, we made the the choices that we made because we felt that the books were age-inappropriate. That is a choice that we as a as a local control board made. And if we allow that to sort of just be
dissipated and we let it go, we are losing the strength of the local control that we do have as our right. So, well said. Thank you for for clarifying that. >> And the only thing I would add is that, you know, all three of us ran on a campaign of continuing to support that
case and what it stands for, including local control, parental rights. And so, I think that that's something our community spoke loud and clear when when we won that election. And so, I think that we need that it's a matter of being faithful to
the call of the people who elected us as well. >> Absolutely. >> So, um got that elephant out of the way, and um something very important tonight, and I want to take a moment. We have several people here with us tonight. Um
and I want to say a very heartfelt thank you, a public thank you on behalf of the board. Um as we know, and we'll be talking about a little bit more tonight, um the district has been working through a series of financial issues. And
I want to be very clear that we would not be in a better place had it not been for people coming out and speaking up and letting us know what we needed to know, and that takes guts. It takes integrity, and I want to let you know
that we really and truly appreciate it and thank you from the bottom of our hearts. >> Yes. >> Um we have some certificates tonight, which is, you know, by no means, um it can't equal what we owe you
um in gratitude, but um we want to say again, thank you. Um and I just want to read one little one little one little snippet here um so people understand what's what's on here. So, um
each of you are getting a certificate uh of appreciation, which reads in part in deep appreciation for your exceptional dedication, your resilience, and outstanding contributions for the focused attention to detail, and commitment that safeguarded this
district, and exemplify exemplified true leadership during a critical time. So, you know, we have people here who came forward. We have, um you know, former former staff members, employees who came forward and they shared their expertise and their
historical knowledge. And we have people that just sat around the table, including you, and um you know, hunkered down and and and helped work through this. So, I do want to say thank you very much. So, >> And you have to come up here and get your picture taken.
>> Come on up or whatever. >> Come on. And I will say um we'll do announcements in a minute, but Fran is um out of town on a well-deserved vacation, but like and so is Jamie as well, but we do have uh the rest of the team here. So, we'll start
with Andrea. And Genie. She got to come over here where we can get your picture taken. >> Here you go. You know. >> Don't run away too quick. >> Maybe. Michelle. Sierra. And Tracy.
And I do have another one here, but I didn't wasn't sure if you wanted to be acknowledged. >> No, that's okay. >> Are you sure? >> I'm fine. >> Okay. >> We're acknowledged. They won't make you walk. >> They have to get their picture taken. >> [laughter] [applause] >> Thank you. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you all. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Just the blessing message from the people who have sent in questions or comments. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> They are all working very hard. Yes. >> Okay, so now we can have a >> Yeah, just a a couple of quick uh reports. Again, thank you to the
business department. I know often times in school districts over the summer, um there is a little bit of a break and people get a you know, find a little more of a work-life balance, but this group here has been working like crazy. We sat in a room last week, I think half the day,
and then they all went back and worked, and they've just continued to keep us updated every day, crunching numbers, looking at spreadsheets. Um So, they've been doing a lot of hard work, and I appreciate them. Our uh maintenance and ops folks have also been working really hard this summer. I think
the district's looking better than it's looked in a while. Um and so, we've got a lot of a lot of people working. Um our literacy coordinator has been doing uh training for our Kelts, for our dyslexia specialist. Um Cindy Conyers, she's been I think we've got three or four teachers
that are going through training. Some summer school things going on at the high school. So, just want to thank all of the staff that continues to work over the summer. Um there is a lot that goes on even in a a smaller world district like ours that I think sometimes gets lost. So, I want to acknowledge everybody for that.
Um I also want to make sure that everybody who's watching at home uh has checked out our Horse's Mouth part of the webpage. Um Jeff, our communications director, has done a great job getting that up and running quickly. Uh there've been a couple questions
about its purpose, and its purpose is to be transparent. Um we live in a world where sometimes people get their news from social media, and it's usually not all of the truth, if any of the truth. It often times just gets us riled up, and so we're trying to help our
community understand if you want the truth, just come to our website, and we will post it there. I've already had a couple uh community members just reach out to me personally and email and ask me questions, and we'll reply back. We're um going to give people the truth.
Uh CORA is, of course there legally if people want it, but people can also just email the horse's mouth, ask us questions. We've had that happen already. We post them. We're getting Cora request posted on that page. So, I just look forward to continuing to give
our community an opportunity to come straight to the horse's mouth, hear what's going on, hear the truth as we rebuild that trust because we haven't always been as transparent as we need to be. So, look forward to just continuing to see how that how that evolves and want to
thank Jeff for his work on that. I'm going to have got a few more comments that I'll keep for when we start the budget. >> All right. Any further comments? >> That is all. >> Okay. All right. So,
next up we have consent. So, I move that the board approve consent to items 8.1 or 8.2 as presented. >> Second. >> And can I get a roll call? >> Director Fletcher? >> Aye. >> Director Hunt?
>> Aye. >> Director Olson? >> Aye. >> Director Powell? >> Aye. >> Okay. So, on to action items. So, first up we have uh Just cops, right? Not C.O.P.S. >> Cops, yes. >> Okay. >> [laughter]
>> SVPP grant approval application. So, um I move that the board approve the application of the cops SVPP grant. Can I get a second? >> Second. >> Okay.
Any discussion? Anyone want to talk? >> Again, if you have questions, yeah, absolutely. >> So, can you just give a brief overview, maybe? >> Yeah. So, currently in the district, we are working with a very old and antiquated PA system.
Um the purpose of this grant is to allow us to make significant upgrades um primarily in areas of emergency notification. Um there are added bonuses to that where our bell schedule, things like that, where it help out operationally or operationally. Um
currently, we actually have the Valcom system in the district, but it's only at the Signal Hills location. Um a good example of this uh where where we desperately need it is one of our newer buildings, being the high school. They're currently operating on a bell
schedule, but anytime we have a a power outage or anything of that nature, um our office manager has to go in there and reenter the entire bell schedule for the day or or even the week. Um so, a lot of work that goes into that, and
we're also uh identifying gaps where the PA system is connected in ways that it shouldn't have been, um the way it's wired, powered, um to where even at the high school in in the gym, there is uh a closet where it says, "Do not power this down because it'll
basically short circuit the like half half, if not more, of the PA system that's in place. So, that in turn kills our uh emergency notification. Um there's a lot of really cool things that we can we can
continue to do with the Valcom system. So, early on, really what we're trying to do is just start to get the rest of the district on. So, it's not a a complete rip and replace. It's nothing like that. It's more of a slow integration into it and then expanding
on it over years. Um how this is being done, uh we're still working on the finer details of that. We can we conducted a walk with Valcom and Convergent who are going to be the two integrators that would help us accomplish this. Um they're working this week to get us
the final numbers to identify what that looks like. Uh financially, the goal with this uh the ceiling is $500,000 with a 25% match. However, um Francisco and myself will be working to apply for the waiver.
Um now, with that being said, if we don't get the waiver, there's a second secondary option. That's the micro grant. The micro grant, if you spend under uh for $100,000 or under on this project, then there's no match requirement. So, we're going to run basically two projects side by side, and
they're not dependent on one another. So, whether we get the full 500 or we're able to get a portion of that 500, depending on what's chosen, we can start to to make improvements in our district where it it's needed. Um
Other cool features that Valcom offers, it's one of the only systems uh in the country that we found that has the standard uh response protocols already built into it. Um not only that, but we have ways that
it can or it can incorporate into our existing system very very easily. So, it's it's again a very seamless process. Um by doing it in the way that we're we're looking to do this, um
we can utilize some of the analog technology that we have and then start to make that transition to an IP-based system, which is ultimately what our tech department would like to to do. Um we're also looking at at what our current infrastructure is for tech, and
if we need to or if we can with that money make upgrades on switches or anything like that, we're also going to consider doing those things, which would really help make improvements for the district's network infrastructure. Um it also helps out with ADA
compliance. So, there are digital uh boards, which I can I can pass this along to you guys, and it'll kind of give you a little bit of a layout. There's digital boards that we can put in the corridors and eventually into the classrooms themselves. And so, if an emergency panic button is hit,
it would then on these boards, it would a light would indicate, and you would also get the digital messaging saying lockdown, lockdown, lockdown. Completely customizable, you can even do it for right normal daily operations that you can use these things to get the messaging across.
For our sped department, you can increase, decrease volume levels for those in our district who might be sensitive to sound or or may need that reduced a little bit so that way it doesn't create uh it doesn't it doesn't trigger or do
anything that we don't want to happen. Escalate them in a sense. Um so, there's a lot of different things that we're looking at. We're trying to build the framework on what our capabilities are based on the current funding. Um This will hopefully be a long-term plan
of we'll we'll come up with our initial project plan for this year, if it's approved, and then going forward, we'll create smaller projects to eventually have a complete system overhaul. Um but, it'll just be taken in chunks. >> So, this is a federal grant?
>> Yes. >> We all know that sometimes federal grants come with strings. Are there any strings that we have to talk >> Not that I have seen. Um the only string that I have found is if you spend $350,000 or above, um
and you choose a single vendor or sole vendor, you have to complete paperwork with that. That's that's as far as I know, that's the only thing that I've been able to find out right now. >> Okay. >> So. >> And then, if if we were able to get a $500,000 grant
with a waiver, so it sounds like there are different pieces to this project and so the 500,000 do we have to spend it within X number of years or something? And we would spend it across however many of these projects that we could fund using that, is that correct?
>> So, the way that it's laid out, the way that cops wants us to spend this is we can spend it over over a period of 3 years or we can take it all at one time. Um so, for those who are seeking out a um a waiver or don't get a waiver, they're
just going to go ahead and complete that match. The way that I best understand it is over 3 years, while it is 25% that 25% would be divided up over the period of 3 years to to kind of lessen that blow on on those districts. Um obviously in our case that's we're
we're going to be applying for the waiver. If we don't get the waiver, then we'll be aiming for the micro grant. So, um we're not interested in having any kind of financial responsibility on the district. This is just we're going to do what we can with the grant and if we don't get it, we're going to continue to apply
um through some more other grants to continue making efforts in this direction. >> So, are there So, then would the approach be like structural with cabling in place and then get everything staged or like full >> Much smaller scale. >> Yeah. I mean just add on to it each
year. >> Yep. Yep. So, at least get the foundation, get the framework and then build onto that over a period of time. >> When will we know? >> Uh so, the first portion of the grant is due August 4th and then the final
deadline is August 11th. I would suspect about a month or two after that we would we would surely know. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah, we're going to work pretty hard over the course of July to to get this in. So, we've We've um with with Convergent and Valcom actually coming out,
it looks like we're in pretty good shape with our existing infrastructure to make some pretty big improvements initially. So, I'm excited about that. >> There's a lot of room to grow. >> Yes, there's a lot of room to grow just which is good here. Any other questions?
Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So, with that can we get a roll call? >> Director Paxton. >> Aye. >> Director Hunt. >> Aye. >> Director Olson. >> Aye. >> Director Powell. >> Aye. >> Okay, so next up we have Chromebook purchase authorization. Do you want to
talk about this a little bit first? >> Yeah, so we put this on the agenda to have a very transparent conversation about not only Chromebooks, but I think just in general where we're going with the technology. This specific resolution is to purchase the Chromebooks for sixth
graders and ninth graders that they would then keep as their one-to-one devices as they go through middle and high school. We've talked over the months, I guess, about the role technology plays in elementary school and trying to move away from
technology in K2 and and 35 maybe just to a cart here or there if if they need it, but not have it be a part of their everyday life. We haven't talked a lot about what that looks like in middle and high outside of the the work that we're doing with the AI group in the
curriculum review council, but this is the time to have that conversation. I mean, we're getting ready to possibly spend $80,000 on a set of Chromebooks for sixth graders and ninth graders in a time when we're in a very severe budget crunch. These
Chromebooks come in at about $277 a piece that basically students use for either three or four years and then it's not that they're useless, but from a value perspective they're useless. We can't sell them and get anything back. Um we're not charging a fee for that.
We're not allowing parents or students to bring their own devices to school. So, we're really locked in and this is not uncommon. Um many districts did this with ARRA funds years ago. Several did it with COVID funds where you get this big infusion of
one-time monies, you go to a one-to-one initiative and then as you find out year after year after year pumping 100 grand into this gets very difficult to do. So, I think this is a great time not only as we're kind of going back to basics, focusing on reading, writing,
arithmetic, but also where we're at with the budget to really talk about what role do we want technology to play in middle school and high school. Do we still want a one-to-one want a one-to-one initiative in middle school? Do we still want a one-to-one initiative
in high school? And if so, do we want it at this cost? Do we want to talk about fees? Do we want to talk about um allowing students to bring their own devices? So, I've talked with Marty. Marty's talked with his team. So, I've got information if you need it, but um
kind of we can open it up to a larger uh transparent discussion so that the community can hear what we believe um what what role we believe technology should play in the education of our K-12 students. >> Well, I know
personally, I would like to get I'd like to get some feedback from students regarding what they want. Um I do like the idea of BYOD because, you know, sitting in on the tech meetings, I've heard some some comments about, you know, for some of the kids it's, you know, a
how can I how can I how can I break this? Or, you know, see if I can take this bezel off and put it back on. Um so, it's maybe it's because of the coursework and they have their own which they prefer to use. And so, this isn't taken seriously,
but um I would I would like some feedback from parents regarding if they have that BYOD option with the understanding that the tech team would not have to support the hardware on the device. Um you know, if if it's a matter of a
student having trouble logging in um to the to the coursework, to the software, then you know, that that's something that could be supported. But, I've also heard that you know, a lot of time is spent you know, struggling to get signed in and you know, it's it's wasting class
time. So, um I think we need to look at at the the benefit of having them. Do they want them? Would they prefer to bring their own? And we still have the firewalls in place. If firewalls are in place and someone tries to do something on their own laptop,
you know, if the firewall should catch it. It should catch it. So, >> But, I I question the value of a computer at all at the in these early grades. Um
I took a physics class in college. They didn't even allow us to use calculators. So, I can do >> [laughter] >> If I can do calculus-based physics without a calculator, I think we need to our children need to expand their minds.
They uh and they can't do that if they are tied to a device. And and with AI, we we need to go back. We've got to go back. >> Um the >> The computer having access to the computer allows them to basically
offload all cognition to a machine. And the more we allow that, we're not teaching them anything. And if we think I would challenge any lesson below
definitely below ninth grade. Any lesson, why or why does that even need a computer? What is its purpose? Yeah, I I mean, I don't even think kids in elementary school should even have a calculator, much less a a computer, right?
The I And I don't even think in middle school you need a calculator. I don't even think you need a calculator until you hit algebra two, maybe trig. Trig, you need a calculator. >> Just because you're so gifted in math, dude. >> Yeah. >> [laughter] >> Let's let's remember who the
>> There were not any slide rules, so the in order you know, it's either a calculator or trig tables, right? Um but uh the if we we can't we want our children to get better at math. We want them to have a reading Like they You can't do that with
a computer. It It is a substitute. For you and me, that's fine. Um we can offload some piece of the thinking to a computer or calculator, whatever.
But we still know how to do it. They don't. The children do not know how to do these things. And the more you allow them to use the technology, the less they will learn. And that There are so many studies at this
point that have proved that have proved my point. Even in college, like as the teach as the professors move away from technology and they get back to a pencil and piece of paper, the kids are they're being more creative, they're learning, they're
they're mastering their subjects. And I just I question the use throughout at this point. That's that's my position. I know that I'm speaking for myself, but I think I have a dearth of of
scholastic proof to show the data to show that these things need to be done. >> I'm very interested in surveying um parents and maybe even students and teachers to see what they all think
about having this one-to-one policy in place. Um I I particularly think 6th, 7th, and 8th grade are years where we probably don't need to be forcing a computer into the kids' laps, um into the classrooms. Maybe there are a couple of classes
where it would be helpful. Maybe we have that cart available to teachers who um who potentially need that for certain times of the year or exercises, but but I just think there's a lot of distraction that can take place, especially with 6th graders and 7th
graders and 8th graders. Distraction on the computer, using the computer, not knowing how to use a computer. Um and I also think there's a lot of parents out there who would also like to see less technology at that middle school age level. Um I think there's probably a case to be made for the high school, but I also
would question whether or not parents would be open or want to do a bring your own device to school. And if that's something that we could do, these kids are going to be able to continue using that computer for much longer than just the period of time that, you know, we loan it to them to use, um and it would
be something their parents could actually help them with, too, right? A computer that their parents know how to use versus a computer that is owned by the school and maybe has different protocols or safeties in place. So, um all in all, I think we should hold off on placing any orders until we can do
some surveys or at least know for certain how we're going to, potentially, you know, if we need a year to kind of figure it out, then maybe we can recycle some of the computers that have been returned to incoming students, but I would like to understand better what our
community thinks is the right approach, particularly because we are facing the financial issues that we are. >> I I agree. First of all, I think we definitely should survey the the parents and and the teachers. Um I think some of them are are probably
would be happy to get rid of devices. I absolutely agree that um I really believe for the whole K through 5 that we should not have technology going on at all. I personally believe K through 12 absolutely. 3 through 5 I believe absolutely also.
Um I uh I believe that middle school is also an area where I think we absolutely need to ratchet it back if not not have it at all. I I have recently spoken to uh a parent who who has a has a student who's very
very bright. Um and when they I guess there are some games or something on these devices that are learning games. But uh they kind of feed the addiction to these kids. Uh they're
devices are an addiction. I mean, we all know that ourselves, you know, we have to look at the phone continuously. We have to see what's going on on the phone. We all know it for ourselves that that can happen to us. Games are are gaming is a is an addiction. Um but this
parent I spoke to, her her student was doing it during class because it was easy for him to keep up. He's very he's very bright. Um and then it was such an addiction that they were finding out at home. He was kind of hiding under the covers and doing some
stuff at home as well. It was becoming an addiction and they caught it luckily and they are dealing with it and kudos to them. But I'm sure that this student was not only one where that is happening. It is absolutely an addiction and we should not be we should not be reinforcing that. If we
could I do I agree with what you said Nicole about I I really do think that we should hold off on ordering any more. This is a huge expense and I I just don't know that it's an appropriate expense at this point particularly but really at any point because
we need to ratchet back on the technology for sure. And high school I think to your point too high school is kind of a different event. I mean we have to prepare them for the real world as they say. And and it's not like they're not going to be using devices at home. So it's not
like going to be oh what is this? I've never seen such a thing before when they get to ninth grade. They're going to know and they're going to have stuff at home. As far as allowing their own devices, I mean I think that's a that's a you know definitely a survey question. I always feel bad for an IT department
when they have to have students who are coming in with who knows what device. We will have a firewall, we will have different things but we've kind of been talking about AI lately. We have to be sure that the AI controls the AI walled garden that we talked about the
other day is in place even if they are using their own devices. And so there's just a lot to consider with regard to allowing students to use their own device. On the other hand it would save a lot of expense for the district. So there's a lot to consider and I think a
survey is definitely a way to to start teachers and students because the teachers would need to shift their mindset if they didn't have the technology. So there's a lot to consider and I know that you know what is that where does that leave our teachers with right now?
Um so we need to get a survey out probably sooner than later. But um we may end up having to start the semester with we're all going to be a little bit less technology for now and we'll we'll
revisit this in, you know, at each quarter or something. >> So, I guess the question is you know, you have teachers, they have lesson plans right now with kids. It's too late to just you know, >> rip it all away. >> Yeah. Yeah. Um that would be too too
traumatic, but this is something that needs to be needs to be planned. So, I guess the question is, do we have enough that we can shuffle around and just buy what we need? >> Yeah, so I in talking with Marty and he got with his team A, we have a decrease
in enrollment, so we have fewer kids next year than we had this year. So, we're going to have some extra devices no matter what. Let's say a sophomore left, that's an extra device. Um and we've got enough shifting around from elementary. We could replenish 6th and
9th to get by one more year while we're studying this without having to go out and buy new Chromebooks. Um so, we could keep the one-to-one in place in middle and high, not spend the money, survey,
see where we're at because yes, if teachers have their whole first semester planned through Google Classroom and everything laid out and then we pull that away, we're we're asking them to build a house and taking their hammer away. Like we've got to get them a different tool first.
>> So, I guess maybe there's a survey two surveys, one of our teachers and one of >> parents >> Yeah, I think we've got to ask our teachers how much you use it, what would you need if this went away, like how much planning do you how much
interaction do you have with with your students on that laptop? Um and then parents, what level of technology do you really want your kids engaged with? >> Cuz I think even if some even if there are a good number of middle-school teachers who are using Google Classroom, I would question maybe we ought not be
using Google Classroom when we're in person with each other. I mean, I know we did that during COVID. You know, there was maybe not here, but I know schools in general did that during COVID, but when we're here at class together, maybe we don't need to be on Google Classroom in order to go over the
material that we're learning at school that day. >> Yeah, and we've already made that decision with like I-Ready, right? Like 15 minutes a day K through 8, I believe it was, spent on literacy and math is we don't want that. We want teachers instructing our kids during that time. We think our teachers are a heck of a
lot better than a computer is at at teaching our students. And so, by that same token, it may be that that we look back and we are doing, as you know, a lot of work on curricular alignment and improving instructional strategies with literacy and math. So, if we do start to
pull that away, we could easily spend the year reinforcing other ways to not use technology and really get back to um I think what most of us were doing before this craze kind of hit, which was just what ways make sense to integrate
technology into the curriculum. Not that technology was the answer, but you know, years ago, right? When you you wrote a rough draft and then you brought in the computer cart to type your your finish, you know, your final draft, so it was polished. Um where does technology make
sense? And there's several different There's the SAMR model. There's models that education has used for years to talk about where technology makes sense. And I can tell you I think you guys know this. You're not the only school board having this conversation. I mean, this
is a wave right now in education of a lot of us think we went way too far. >> Silicon Valley >> is removing >> technology. >> Well, yeah. >> Right? >> Now you can't get the technology. >> Yeah, I was just going to say maybe because they
>> a little bit to the backlash cuz that right when we talked about it being a craze and so people would get this lump sum money and they invest into it. But what are you hearing now from the flip side of it as folks are reconsidering? >> I I think a lot of it is just this we've
we've now seen I'm trying to think of a nice way to put this. We've now seen what happens to people who spent their whole life on computers, right? Whether it's social skills, whether it's a lack of critical thinking because or the you know, the addiction just constantly
needing that. I think as as parents and educators, we've just seen that needle move way too far and you know, we're missing that. When I got into teaching it wasn't necessarily about the curriculum, it was about that teacher-student relationship and I think
even technology has stopped some of that a little bit. Um it's probably, you know, at least some level of causation um if not a correlation that as technology integration has increased, test scores
across this country have decreased. Um I don't think any teacher is good at teaching a content as a teacher. You need that relationship. That's that matters. Teachers need to be able to, you know, judge where a kid's at, use that computer to look at data to make instructional decisions, but not
necessarily teach the kids. So, to me ideally um the educator in me I I like the idea of no technology K-2, right? Kids should be reading and reading and reading and reading and playing. Um and I think 3-5 it might make sense
occasionally to bring it in. We are going to have to have that discussion about what C-MAS looks like. I believe the new rules are you can request, it's not automatic, you can request C-MAS to be pencil and paper for third and fourth, not for fifth. So, I don't want to go so far that our
fifth graders sit down to take a reading and math test in March or April, they not on a computer enough that it doesn't give us the data we need. It doesn't [clears throat] really show us what they know. It shows us that they don't know how to use technology. So, there probably has to be some type of ramp up
as kids get to fifth grade of at least making sure they understand how to use a computer to take C mass. Um I >> That's easily taught. >> Yeah. Yeah, I think we can do that. It's almost more of an awareness. >> Yeah. >> Um you know, we'll take some assessments on the the computer leading up. Um
middle school, I taught middle school and I taught STEM where we had computers and I tell you back in the day the kids enjoyed the non-computer things a lot more than the computer-based projects that we were doing. I think at the middle school and high school level, I really think we
need to ask the kids. I think we might be surprised how much um they don't necessarily value that computer as a learning tool. They use it for a lot of other things. I'm not sure how much they use it to extend their learning, but I I absolutely love the
idea of getting feedback from parents, students, and staff and not spending the money right now, continue kind of where we're going with middle and high, being honest and letting the staff know this is where we're likely to to move to unless we hear
data that's completely different and and we can start working through that and make that decision early enough that if we're going to remove one-to-ones in middle or in middle and high, that we would have the whole spring semester to do some professional development for our
teachers who maybe have become pretty reliant on that technology. >> So, I want to just confirm my understanding at this point then. So, um so, we have already decided and K through 2 at least for sure will have new technology.
>> That's my strong recommendation and I've heard zero pushback from board or staff. I I think most people are in agreement. Yeah. >> And then third, third and fourth are probably dependent on whether we can get the CMAS waiver to do it with pencil paper.
But fifth grade, we would probably have to have something and you've talked about this cart thing. So that's sort of like some ex- some ones that they can bring in, use for a day, and then take them away, and then they can be used by another classroom another day. The same ones. Um and then right now you have
said so the ones that would be have been being used for K through 5, those are the ones that we can kind of redistribute for the sixth grade use this coming year and ninth grade use. >> And ninth, yeah, as well as just some extras for
>> And some extras, yeah. So um so so that would that would take care of our cart situation and that would take care of our sixth and ninth grade situation without buying any more new ones. >> Correct. And it would also hold off not on the discussion but on the implementation of a bring your own
device because that is a big shift. It would give us some time to work with our IT department, to work with parents, to create protocols and practices because we wouldn't need it. And then if we decide that let's say we decide next
spring we only want one-to-one at the high school and we don't want bring your own device, then we need to revisit where we come up with $300 per device. Is that a is that a fee? Um what do what do we do because I I think it's very difficult to continue to
basically lease every middle and high school student a computer that's worth $300 and then they give it back to us and it's worth zero. >> Yeah. >> Um >> And then do we ac- I mean like when a senior graduates, do we actually get that device back? We do? >> and >> And that's what we've been kind of been
taking down to the grade school, right? To the other >> bit but there's no value. >> Those are really the hanger queens. >> Yeah. >> The Those are really the ones that they use to fix the other ones. >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah, they're still parts. >> parts >> Yeah, they're like new screens and all that.
>> Yeah, if we could at that point resell them for $100 or something, they had some use, but there's they have zero value in in in terms of economics. And so, I think that's a discussion we've got to have is do we continue to We're
going to have a lot of those conversations tonight. Do we continue to supplement some of these things through the general fund? Because you are robbing Peter to pay Paul. Um if we continue to do that. >> And I guess I've always wondered how
I think I Correct me if I'm wrong, but did the did the middle schoolers did they actually have it continuously where they take it home or do they leave it at the school? >> So, when it is one-to-one, but it's left at the school where they >> But in high school >> They travel back and >> they travel back and forth. I was
wondering how many really really get back to where they're going, how many are lost in transit, how many are broken, how many throughout the year? I mean, how many do we lose and we have to replace? And we do have this kind of graveyard of parts and pieces, I guess, but but there's that's only going
to go so far. >> Well, in the middle school students, as you can expect, are pretty rough on those devices. >> I can't imagine. I thought middle schoolers were so gentle. >> had their old [laughter] Those are They're They are pretty rough. I if we sent them home, I don't know that they would I don't know that it
When I was a sixth-grade boy, if I'd have brought that thing back in >> No, I don't I don't think I would I'm just surprised any of them ever get back at it ever, personally, but anyway. Well, I I think this is a great way to Don't Yeah, don't Don't buy them now, use the
ones that we have for sixth and ninth, and consider this whole next year a surveying and making a plan for the next year. That's what I like. >> one really quick point is Maine is the first state to do this
one-to-one and state-wide, yet the numbers by any measure do not add up to the money that's being spent to give these kids one one-to-one get a laptop all by any measure
that has been failed. Um the computer will only give you an answer. A teacher will force you to use your mind, which is what we need our kids to do. And the budget is a zero-sum game.
There is the You want to buy computers? Well, that's a teacher the that you don't get to have. So I I just I I put that that's pretty simple in my in my mind. >> Good point.
Okay. So no further discussion, we can do a roll call. >> Director Fletcher? >> I. >> Wait, I'm going to I'm going to ask a question. >> Do we need to verify the motion? >> Yes, because the motion says we approve the purchase. That's what the motion says.
Sorry. >> [laughter] >> We don't get to say nay very often. Sorry. >> [laughter] >> We don't want to say nay very often. >> I thought we were it was the motion to not to not. Yeah, that's right. Unless we want to amend the the motion to the plan or I can just take the plan forward
and we can vote down the motion. Either one's the same. This latter is the easier one. >> Might as well just go for the voting down the motion. >> Just vote this down. >> Yeah, we'll just vote it. >> Okay. Director Fletcher? >> Nay. >> Director Hunt? >> Nay. >> Director Olson? >> Nay. >> Director Pat?
>> Nay. >> My first solid nay. >> [laughter] >> Who seconded that? >> I did. >> Did >> I'm not going to say >> I'm not sure we did a first and second. >> I wish I did. >> Yeah, we >> We did it. >> Yeah, I know I know. >> I think I started.
>> Yeah, I think you did. >> Okay. >> All right. So, I move that the board I move that the board approve the purchase of Chromebooks for the upcoming school year. >> No, I don't want TO SECOND IT. >> [laughter] >> I SECOND IT. >> IT'S ALREADY WRITTEN DOWN.
>> [laughter] >> I second that. >> All right, we'll do this again. Director Fletcher. >> Nay. >> Director Hunt. >> Nay. >> Director Olson. >> Nay. >> Director Bell. >> Nay. >> Look at that, we got it figured out. >> So, we got to do it twice. >> We're parliamentarian. >> [laughter] >> Okay, so next up
>> the 20 inches. >> Yeah, go ahead. >> You ladies are I I don't want y'all to think you're trapped here. If you need to go or whatever you need, you may. >> Thank you. No, thank you. >> They're probably waiting for this discussion. >> [laughter]
>> I just don't want y'all to feel like you're trapped. >> No, we love this stuff. >> [laughter] >> All right, so our 2026-2027 proposed budget and appropriation resolution. Do we want to talk about this first before the motion?
All right, you know what, let's uh go ahead. I move that the board approve the 2026-2027 proposed budget and appropriation resolution. Can I get a second? >> Second. >> And discussion. >> All right, so um
I prepared a a brief statement for everyone. Um so, I I ask you to to bear with me um and I'm reading from my computer a little bit, so I apologize. But, tonight before I present the budget, um I need to say something that is probably not very
becoming of me as a superintendent. Um and that is I'm frustrated. Actually, more than frustrated, I am angry. Um, I'm angry because I do not believe that the situation that we find ourselves in today was inevitable. I believe many of the painful decisions
before us could have been avoided had past leadership been transparent and addressed these concerns sooner. Over the past several months, there were repeated warnings about the district's financial consist uh condition. Multiple staff members raised concerns regarding
our budget, our various spending commitments, the hiring decisions that were being made, and our long-term financial sustainability. These concerns were raised through appropriate channels by people whose responsibilities included understanding the district's finances. Unfortunately,
those warnings were not acted upon by past leadership with the urgency that they deserved. I know members of this board, including our board president, urged caution. There were requests to slow down hiring decisions, delay commitments, and wait
until we had a clearer understanding of the district's financial position before making decisions with long-term consequences. Those concerns were continually met with assurances that the budget was sound and that there was no cause for alarm.
Some may ask whether the board bears any responsibility in this situation, and I think that's a fair question. The board does have oversight responsibilities. The financial advisory committee and the board treasurer had a responsibility to monitor the district's
financial condition and to report any of those concerns back here to the board. However, and this is a big however that I hope this community understands, oversight only works when the information being provided is accurate.
I've seen emails from board members requesting budget information, asking financial questions, seeking clarity regarding where the district was in its financial position. I sat in meetings where that data was requested from the board to past
leadership. Time and again, those requests were not met with complete information, but assurances that everything was fine, and sometimes just flat out lies. The FAC and board treasurer both relied upon information that was provided by
district leadership. The board then relied upon that information um that was provided by district leadership, by the FAC, and the staff and the community relied upon that information that was provided by past leadership.
The problem is that the information that was being provided was not an accurate reflection of our financial reality. I can say this because I personally witnessed board members being told that the budget was sound. I personally witnessed concerns by staff being
minimized, and I personally witnessed requests for financial information being answered with assurances rather than data. Today, we obviously all know that those assurances were wrong. The narrative that the board simply failed to act ignores a critical fact.
Before action can occur, decision makers must have accurate information. When accurate information finally reached the board, the board acted. Once the true extent of the financial situation became clear, difficult but necessary decisions began to be made.
Likewise, staff members repeatedly raised concerns. Financial warnings were given. Questions were asked. Some employees even continued to raise concerns when doing so was uncomfortable or unpopular because they knew that the
district was headed towards a financial crisis. In some cases, many of those cases, those concerns were dismissed. In others, employees were actually discouraged from continuing to raise those concerns to levels where they
thought they could get answers. So, rather than confronting the problem, the focus too often became on controlling the message rather than solving the problem that was before us. This was not a situation where nobody knew. This was a situation where the people
who knew were not listened to by a person who continually made the conscious decision to not face reality, to not choose transparency, and ultimately lead us to the situation we are in tonight. That is why I believe this crisis was
preventable. As a result, we are now being forced to make decisions in the middle of the summer that affect people's livelihoods, their families, and their futures. These are conversations that could have occurred months ago, allowing employees
more time, more certainty, and far more dignity than what this current process allows. I want to be clear about something tonight. The employees who are affected by these reductions did not create the problem. The board members who are now being asked to make these difficult
decisions did not create the problem. The staff who sounded the alarm did not create this problem. Past leadership created this problem, and now we are being asked to deal with the consequences of decisions that should have been addressed much earlier. That
is why I'm angry. Not because we have difficult decisions to make. Being a leader often requires difficult decisions. I'm angry because many of these decisions could have been made sooner, with more transparency, more honesty, and especially more
compassion for the people who serve the district every day. I want to close by saying that I do not enjoy talking about the past. Anyone who's worked with me knows that I'm not someone who likes to dwell on mistakes or assign blame. I believe in identifying problems, fixing them, and
moving forward. But I also believe that people deserve the truth. The employees whose lives are impacted by these decisions tonight deserve the truth. The community and our taxpayers deserve the truth. And our board deserves the truth.
The truth is that this situation did not develop overnight. Warnings were given, questions were asked, concerns were raised. And over and over again, opportunities existed to make different decisions that would avoid much of the hardship we're facing tonight.
I felt it was important to say this publicly because accountability matters. Learning from failure matters, and if we are going to build trust, it has to start right here with honesty. Having said that, I'm not interested in spending the next year looking backwards.
This is the first and last time I'll have this conversation. My focus will be on fixing the problem, restoring the financial health of the district, rebuilding trust with our staff and our community, and on making sure that we never find ourselves in this position again.
What happened needed to be acknowledged, the truth needed to be told. The people who are going to be affected by these decisions tonight deserve that much. So now it's time to move forward. It's time to do the difficult work of repairing the damage, making responsible
decisions, and building a stronger future for this district. The truth needed to be told. Now the problem needs to be fixed. That's exactly what I intend to do. With that being said, I would now like to take the board and the community through the budget revisions that the
team and I have created in an effort to start to balance next year's budget. I I think the easiest way to do that is to try and look at the two postings, the posting of
the budget that was presented earlier on and the budget that um was just presented. So, as you kind of look at those, you get an opportunity to see the changes that the the staff and I were able to make um
and I can tell you the internet's down, so this is going to be fun cuz I don't have my Google Doc, but I think I remember it. I spent a few hours on it. Um but I kind of want to just open this up to an opportunity. You guys have seen the original budget. You've seen the revisions that the team and I have made to bring you a balanced budget tonight,
but I want to open it up for questions. Again, I think the the staff, the community, our parents deserve to hear this transparent conversation about where we're at and the difficult decisions we're going to have to make in order to move forward.
>> It hurts. It hurts to look at. >> So, we're actually going to hit our TABOR this this time. >> So, the budget that we've presented is hitting TABOR. It is That was our goal. It would be great to end with some extra
unassigned fund balance, but yes, and that TABOR amount might be a little less because it's 3%, it's a percentage, but yes, the budget that we've created, that of course will continue to ebb and flow, but we'll actually monitor it, and pay attention to that. Um is that is the
goal is to hit TABOR. If we hit TABOR and have a penny left, I think we're in good shape when you look at the cuts that we've had to make in 1 year. >> I do want to I appreciate what you just said, and I I do want I know all of y'all are here that
I want the truth, no matter how ugly it is. Like, if I I can't make a decision for our constituents if they don't have the truth. If they If it's being hidden from me, then I I don't I don't know what I don't know, so it it it
I'm not going to shoot the messenger or anything else. Like, I don't I don't care what it is. Just as long as I know the truth, then we can move forward and deal with it, and we don't have to We may do a retrospective on how did we get here, but that's just to understand
why so we don't make that mistake again. The truth is truth will set you free. >> So, looking looking at this you know, one question One question that I have noted here is
So, the single assumption that hurts most if you're wrong. Um So, what what is the single assumption that hurts most if you're wrong, and so probably >> So, it's if
I I think the most difficult part of all of this is understanding the risks, right? We have to reduce We have a reduction in force. We have to reduce the number of staff that we have. Um we have tried very hard to go down to the penny to make sure we don't have to
cut one more staff member than we have to. Your point of do you want to hit TABOR? Yes, if I hit TABOR, and we've got $100,000 left at the end of the year, and that meant we didn't have to cut that one last person, that's something that would be difficult. Um we
have tried to get this as close as we can, um because as a, you know, a lifelong educator and former teacher myself, it's hard to find a job at the end of June. That's why you make these decisions early. The decisions we're making tonight are very difficult. And so, we
have literally, this team has spent hours amongst hours looking at exactly what benefits someone took. We're not using averages, we're looking real numbers, um so that we try to get as close, I mean, I'm getting numbers every day. Here's the checks that cleared, here's
the money that came in. We are watching this like a hawk because you don't want to have to cut one more person than you have to. Um and so, to me, that's we can't make a mistake on that. We've got to be as close as possible. So, if we end up with Tabor and $1, someone
might say, "Why didn't you have more?" Because we don't want to cut any more staff. Um so, that would be >> So, other than other than RIFs, what other areas got cut going into this? >> So, there's there's kind of three areas
we looked at. Um there are word positions that we just simply did not refill. Um if we knew we had a teacher retiring and maybe the the class size coming up was lower, um we made some decisions early on on
things like uh recess paras and instead using staff to do that. We chose not to rehire a CFO, a CAO, positions like that. So, those were reductions, but they weren't legally reduction in force because we made those decisions before
contracts came out. Um we also did some transfers. So, if we had an opening at one school and an overage at another, we simply moved people around. Um so, that people kept their, you know, you might have been driving to Singing Hills and now you've got to drive to Running Creek, but
your job stayed intact, your benefits, your pay. Um so, when you look at the total cuts that we made, and I will pull it up so I get the numbers exactly right here. When you look at those reductions,
we reduced 2,517,127 dollars of photo comp. So, that's salary and benefits. Um and transfers, you know, we don't necessarily count those as a savings because they're already counted in the reduction, but we
transferred several people. So, it allowed us to not have to reduce as many employees because we were able, and I tell you I have to thank not only um the ladies in finance and HR, but all of our directors and building leaders who I've
never seen a group of people more flexible, just willing to do whatever. Conversation after conversation, phone calls on vacation, late-night texts. Hey, I'm looking at this person, what's this salary, what do they do? Could we reduce from four teachers to three
teachers? And then as those leaders went and talked to teachers, the flexibility of our teachers to say, "Yep, if if if you can't rehire this person, the four of us that are left will will each work a little harder." Like, you don't normally see that, but I
think everybody realizes A, the situation that we're in, and B, that they don't want to see their colleagues cut. So, really everybody in this district has stepped forward, they've been flexible, numerous people, people in this room have taken on extra roles
next year. This is what happens when you have to cut. Everybody takes on an extra role. Um we're seeing that in schools, we're seeing that with leaders. So, um overall, we are looking at a total of 3,150,000
dollars in total comp cuts um from last year into this year. That is a significant amount of money and a significant amount of people and again we only got that done because of the work of our staff
really digging deep this team finding the actual numbers our leaders being courageous and having conversations and then our staff members being willing to step up and maybe take on extra roles, take a little bit larger class, whatever it is to try to save as
many positions as we could. But when you decrease in enrollment and you increase in expenditures, something's got to give and in a school district where 80% of your money is staffing you don't foundationally change your
budget unless you change structures which is usually staffing. >> 81% >> Yeah, it's >> 81% of the budget is salary. >> Yeah, you you can only, you know, I don't know, cut down on paper towels and save so much money. You just it's got to
be staffing unfortunately. >> So with this deferred maintenance so not much left. >> No, and there hasn't been. >> Yeah, well that's that's just kind of the way it's been forever. It's just
we're we're lean um and we have to put the priorities which is people. What do you foresee the probability of having something come up? I know we're sitting on a well. Um
you know, the other the other issues that we have as far as deferred maintenance goes. Are we going to be able to address those? >> So one of the things that we're going to do a little differently is when you get impact fees, improvement fees, different you know, fees that builders and
individuals have to pay that allow us to, you know, to help repair district facilities, that money is supposed to go away into a capital facilities fund that's kind of locked away, right? It is It is a a reserve account that should not be
touched. In my research over the past couple years, we have constantly used that to backfill the general fund, which is what happens when you have too many staff or you spend more money than you're bringing in, you've got to pull from somewhere. We've used that along with
other areas as a savings account. We have built a budget that allows us to live within our means and keep that capital reserve account. So, as those fees come in, they won't all come in day one, but we're anticipating somewhere between 750 and 800,000 dollars should
come in over the course of 26-27. If we're truly living within our means, we shouldn't have to transfer that money to the general fund to make up for other areas. So, we should be able to start rebuilding that um and have that savings account for
capital facilities. Now, I think that's different and sometimes school boards, and you guys have done it before, will say, "Well, we want a 10% reserve. We want" You have to understand that money would be earmarked. So, if we say, "I want 1 and 1/2 million dollars in reserve so we have a month of payroll in
case something happens." You don't get to count the 800,000 dollars you have in facilities. That should be earmarked. There's a difference you guys have heard me talk about assigned and unassigned reserves and I think we use those a little too interchangeably. We would have an
assigned account just for capital reserves. We shouldn't touch it unless they are capital projects. Um we should be aiming for separate reserves for things like a month's payroll um in savings. We should have 800,000 dollars.
We should have more, but 800,000 dollars in the capital reserve fund, we should also be aiming to get a month of salary and benefits in a separate you know, reserve for us. So, we are working through it. Our our maintenance and operations team, I
think, have done a really good job of trying to get things done on a shoestring budget. Um we've had a lot of conversations lately with different partners as people want to partner with us. We can make this budget work. We can increase student achievement. Really hard to get
chunks of money for capital. Um so, as community partners have come forward, we've been saying, "What what can you do for us, um you know, in terms of capital?" Um I know Nicole has had some great ideas of working with the town and the county in terms of what we can do
um to make sure we're getting the appropriate amount of fees in from builders. Again, I don't think we live in a community where the average person wants to raise their taxes for everybody for a few people who have bought a new
house. So, we have to use those impact fees and we've got to make sure they are the appropriate amount. You guys had a demographer in here, I believe, earlier this year who suggested raising the cash in lieu amount. Those are things I think we've really got to start looking at is
are people coming into our community, are they giving us the fees that we need to actually sustain our facilities? Are are more people going to kind of, you know, put more wear and tear on our facilities and we're not getting any more money because that $12,000 we're
getting per pupil funded from the state, we'd really like for that to be able to go to teaching and learning, not supplement capital. >> I have a question and this kind of goes back to your beginning statement, but I think it's just worth spending a little time to talk about it. As we're looking
at this new budget, looking back at the last one, what were some of the decisions or assumptions or even failures that were made that created the crisis that were that were in. And I've heard you talk about, you know, the enrollment loss. I've heard you talk about
the inability to kind of right-size once that happened and overspending. But can you maybe just kind of summarize it so that our community can understand how did we get here? Because I think understanding those red flags is going to be really important for us as we're walking into next year to make sure that none of that happens again.
>> I I think a bit of a perfect storm. You've got a lot of other districts right now that are struggling financially. You have a lot of districts that are coming down off of a COVID high, right? You had a lot of extra one-time monies infused in public schools. Those are gone, and you
have to cut those positions after that money goes. We have grant funds that after those grants leave, you've got to decide are you then going to um you know, to keep those employees. So I Tyler did a great job of explaining, we're not doing matching, we're not doing things where 2 years from now
after the grant's gone, we've got to pick up the salary. Though we've got to start looking long-term and not just short-term. We didn't right-size. We've continued to lose student after student. Um You guys were told that I this is, you
know, my opinion. Um I don't think you guys were properly illuminated as to the impacts of having one of our charter schools increase enrollment by adding a teacher in nearly every grade level the same
year we opened up a new charter. When you look one of the biggest differences, and I I think Ron for pointing this out, between the initial budget that the past superintendent presented and the one we just presented is no one changed the charter allocation. I don't know why we would
think we could lose 150 kids to Legacy and ICA and that that wouldn't increase our allocation to charters. We have to give 97% of the money to them. So, every kid that leaves one of our neighborhood schools and goes to a charter, and this
is difficult for I think a community like this, a board of uh like you guys, and a superintendent like me that 100% believes in parental choice in education, we still have to face the fact that if 200 students choose to leave our neighborhood schools and go to
those other choices, we may personally think, "Good for those parents. They were able to make the choice for their kid." But, at the same point, we have a fiduciary responsibility to understand what that does to our district. And when you lose those 200 kids, I mean, the allocation
that that was not changed to Legacy alone was, I believe, $1.8 million. We had to cut an additional $1.8 million in the last week and a half because the allocation is going to change when they get more kids because most of those kids
are coming from our neighborhood schools. And so, you have a lot of things like that where we've brought in competition, which again, we may personally agree with, but we have a responsibility to understand how that impacts the schools that we have. If you
lose 150 kids, just in general, if you think 25 kids to a classroom, when you think we should cut six teachers before I bring those teacher contracts to you, and before I suggest raises, and before
I say, "You've got to pass these contracts today. We've got to know." Might you not stop and think that, "Wait, we probably need less staff if we have 150 less kids?" Those types of decisions, and I can't for the life of me understand why those
things were not shared. Um those have put us in this position today because again, we could have cut those six teachers. We knew this was coming for months. We could have cut those six teachers before they ever had contracts. We could have non-renewed people who
were in their first or second year. We could have done a lot of things that valued our employees. Um we're making all these last-minute decisions because we weren't transparent or we didn't understand the budget or something. Maybe we did need a calculator, David. I don't know. >> [laughter] >> Um
the math ain't mathing. And so >> Spell "spruce". >> Yes, spruce. >> [laughter] >> It's in there. It wasn't very accurate. Um There were, I mean again, I don't want to dwell too much on the past. There were a lot of mistakes. And I don't know how many of those mistakes were lack of
transparency, how many of those were lack of understanding. I for the life of me can't understand some of the assumptions that were made. Um and that's just this year. When you look at the audit over the past couple years, I mean we've been overspending every
year. Um Tonight with the budget, you get an appropriation resolution. That is where I'm asking you to basically allow us to spend the money in those areas. I believe last year's appropriation was overspent by like $6 million. The budget itself
The budget itself was overspent by two. It It's just you can't keep doing that. I've explained the, you know, your own personal finance thing. If you're bringing in a thousand dollars and your bills are 1,200 and you got a thousand bucks in the savings account, come month six, you're in trouble.
And we hit month six. Everything hit. You just We had um a fund balance here, I I believe, uh like 1.8 million. And I might have these numbers off a little bit. And it dropped to like 800,000 and then last year negative 131.
Um Those things should have been brought to you. The truth should have been told. Our staff should have known. Our community should have known. Instead, we sat up here and said, "Yes, we met TABOR." No, we didn't meet TABOR. TABOR was $800,000.
We put $600,000 and a $131,000 IOU on a bar napkin in the account and tried to say we met Tabor. It's a lie. We didn't. And so we are in this position
because of poor leadership. >> And And one of the things I already talked about was just accuracy in numbers. What kind of confidence do you have that the numbers that we have in this budget now are accurate? >> So, the ones that we've seen, I feel very comfortable with. When you look at
salaries, they are straight out of our system. When you look at benefits, it's exactly what what people asked for. Many of the assumptions that were made here were inaccurate and the staff here was able to go in and say, "No, let me look at the last couple years and let's
actually see cuz some of the numbers they didn't make any sense to some of us." We were like, "Well, why'd you put $130,000 there for?" So, for example, the transfer of fund 23 athletics, you'll see is 585,000. In the initial budget, it was 500,000.
Tracy actually pulled up fund 23 and we actually looked, "How much will we have to transfer out of the general fund to actually balance the budget?" So, these are real numbers. Some of the things we don't know finishing out 25-26 is what's still going to come in. We've
had some pretty loose spending rules that we are going to tighten up. We're getting in some receipts, some reimbursements. Um we're hearing some things that all of us are like, "Yeah, that's not how you do it." But, they've been allowed and there hasn't been accountability. So,
we still have some expenditures coming in that we're working through. There's still a lot of promises, as you guys know, that have been made that we're working through. Um so the expenditures to finish out this year
we're still watching very closely, but when you look at the numbers that we're putting in for next year, um I think they're as close as you can get right now. They'll obviously change over time. I I keep joking, I got the budget balanced at zero, right? We had Tabor and like nothing left over. Michelle
puts in a new hire, the new hire decides to take benefits when the employee they replaced didn't take benefits, and now I'm 9 grand in the hole again. And so, this is going to change daily, but we're actually looking at it daily, so we're going to know. So, I feel very confident that the numbers that we have,
what's going to be interesting moving into next year is when you look at the revenues there at the top, we're going to have to look up true up those revenues that the state gives us on the spreadsheet are based on enrollment, and we know we're probably going to be about 200
kids down. So, those revenues there are going to most likely drop. Now, there are some um averages that the state lets you use use where you don't lose all your enrollment in 1 year, but if we don't improve academics, improve
budget, improve our reputation, get the chaos out like you guys are doing, we're going to continue to lose kids, and those averages, we're just going to continue to bleed staff. Um we turn this around, and I think we'll start getting kids back, and then we're
not going to lose staff. Um and so, if we follow this, and we continue to update it as we get the real numbers, I feel confident that we are as close as we've been in a long time probably. >> That's good. At what point do you think we'll kind of be through the residual
effects of this year's budget, where we're still trying to figure out, you know, what other expenses are going to potentially be impacting us further? >> I would probably say we'll probably get a month or so in the school year, and then some of these things will get journaled back to 25 26. As it sits
right now, 25-26, we have I we're estimating, you know, maybe $800,000 cash on hand. It's different than fund balance. Once all the things that have to be accounted back to 25-26, we'll most likely, I believe, probably
end up in the red, which means we won't meet Tabor. I mean, if the day ended today with our fund balance, we barely meet Tabor if we met it at all, but we still have a lot of things that'll get journaled back to 25-26, but I would guess sometime late summer, early fall
we'll have a better accounting, and then of course we'll have, you know, the audit that'll come out and tell us, you know, later in the winter exactly where we were at. Um but we've kind of been watching, when you look at the past budget, our goal was hit June payroll, which we're going to
do. Again, thanks to I don't know that we would have, but thanks to the hard work of these ladies like watching every dime, and when do we send this out, when do we pay this, when do we hold that, we'll be able to make June payroll, and that was our goal, and really then shifted our um
our efforts to this, making sure we hit July and August payroll. The interest interest-free loan isn't available until, you know, late late late August, 1st of September, so we've got to make sure we're creating a budget where we hit July and August payroll. So that very quickly, once we
knew June payroll was going to be okay, moved to July and August payroll. >> I have a couple of questions about a couple of specific numbers on the on the expenditure page. So number one is on the technology line, 628.
Um so, the 25-26 expenditure said 149,000. [clears throat] For 26-27, it says 74 with a reduction in expenses of 75,000. So now considering that tonight we just voted to basically not buy Chromebooks, is
that like sort of a pre like assumption that we were not going to buy the Chromebooks or was that something else? >> It was. We don't get another 80 something thousand >> I was just hoping for another 80,000. I was trying, you know. I was trying. >> I had a feeling we may go that way and
so I well, and again had the had I felt during that conversation the board was going to go the other way, I might have had to say just so you know we don't have the 80,000 if you want to >> [laughter] >> if you want to purchase those. >> Pass the hat tonight.
Okay. Well, thank you. I I thought but I just wanted >> part about doing all of our business in public is you guys find out when everybody else does. >> Yeah. Exactly. Um is yeah, I I had already cut that and a few other things. fine. I just wanted to be sure. Yeah. So, I'd make that blank. And then my other
question relates to the unassigned fund balance line. So, the 25 26 budget says we had a 1.6 million dollar fund unassigned fund balance and then now we've got the 1677 1,677 dollars.
So, um so just if you could just how did we what was unassigned that we could all of you know that we could that all of a sudden that number is so much lower? Just you know, work me through that if you would. >> [laughter] >> So, it's it's just lack of accuracy. I
mean part of when you look at the at the whole budget um that amended budget assuming we were and again we heard it all year long, right? We're going to end with 2 million. We're going to end with 4 million. >> I mean I remember that number. >> Yeah, it was faulty assumptions. It was
numbers in here that were just flat out wrong, things that weren't accounted for. There were areas in here where we literally budgeted, I don't know, 900,000 dollars >> [clears throat] >> and we knew it was going to cost us 1.5 million. I'm like, why wouldn't we just
put it in there if we know that's what it is going to cost us. So, there were areas that were under budgeted. Um, there was money that quite honestly was moved around in a shell game that was moved from one area to the other.
Um, it was very hard and it was a great conversation with Tracy at one point where I'm like, Tracy, how do I rectify this budget? She said, start at zero. Like, don't don't bother going there. And it's true, as we've gone along the line, it just hasn't been
um, we didn't adjust revenues at true up. So, some of that should have dropped. That was um, you know, another I think over million dollar error. Um, there was a lot of errors, a lot of faulty thinking, um, and
lack of accuracy, I think, in some of this or lack of truthfulness and transparency. Um, we may never know the answer to some of those. >> So, one thing that may come up, and I can I can see it on here because
um, like special services. Special services, if it's more than I'm thinking that it is, it's only that. >> Special Ed, GT, ELL. >> been exorbitant, but there is a substantial reduction. Can you explain
how that's being achieved? >> Yeah, so the initial proposed budget showed special education special services costing us about 5 million dollars. That is a huge chunk of change, especially when MOE, maintenance of effort, right? The government basically
says, you need to spend about the same amount on special ed every year as you did the last year unless you've shown a reduction in students who who have disabilities. It was about 4 million. Um, we were able to sit down and Lenae did a
great job of looking and saying, where can we cut and still make sure that student needs are being met? A lot of that was in paraprofessionals. I think um Linnea inherited a culture and now I have as well where maybe the answer out
of a lot of IEP meetings was we just need a para. We just need another adult. I think the original budget for Singing Hills showed 14 paras. >> Oh, wow. >> I I've never seen that in my life. Um so we've made some significant cuts in
paras. Those are often times cuts that a lot of districts will make. They hurt. They're real people. They do a great job with kids. Um but they get added into IEP meetings when they might not be a necessity. Um we also had situations where we had a
social worker at every building. We were able to go back to let's just have two social workers and maybe, you know, one can do the middle school and Singing Hills, one can do the high school and Running Creek. We also have counselors. We have school psychologists. Um we had the HMC program at um
Running Creek where I think we were spending I don't know, several hundred thousand dollars on a program for three kids. >> What was that HMC? >> HMC Happy Mediums, something like that. It was a program that was brought here
by past leadership. And it literally had probably three or four hundred thousand dollars of salaried employees in there for three kids. So we were able to move away from that. Those kids are definitely supported um
very well in our center-based programs um at a significant reduction to the district. Um so yeah, I would definitely that would point that out as well, Director Olson, because those are our students who are most needy. We absolutely have to make sure we're
giving them everything we need and they will and more. Um you guys have heard me talk a lot about the program we're putting in place at Running Creek. That is not expensive. We will make sure we don't over staff students into special education. They have about 20% of our
kids on an IEP. That is not accurate. 20% of our kids do not have a learning disability so that it impacts their education so much that they need an individualized education plan. I I would bet money on it. >> We may have given them a learning
disability by using computers. >> By >> [laughter] >> Very you never know. Too many cocktails, too much calculator use. Um, but as we improve our tier one instruction, as we actually create an RTI / MTSS system, we
will be limiting the number of students we staff into special education and hopefully staffing students out as we demonstrate that they are at grade level. And so, it is a significant chunk of money. I think when they when you look at contractors, salaries, and
benefits, and um, you know, just departmental spend, I think it's cut about $900,000. So, a huge amount um, that really it's again, you have so many funds here where we were supplementing with the general fund where you just
can't do it all. So, that is now I think more in line and [clears throat] then as we, you know, do a better job with tier one instruction, get kids staffed out of sped, we might not need that much spend in the future. So, um,
I feel 100% confident that we have made the right cuts there. I feel 100% confident that students with an IEP and without an IEP will thrive more moving forward than they ever have or I certainly would not have recommended or
or even approve myself those those cuts. Um, but a lot of them I want to say it's on here. I mean, a huge percentage of those were we cut 12 paras because we were just Let me look real quick so I get the numbers right. Yeah, $390,000
in um the reductions were 12 paras. And I just I And I've seen other systems do that. They just think, you know, a para is the answer. And if we give this kid a para, it'll help. I I've rarely found that to be the case. And >> So, how many paras were we And which was
this at Running Creek or or all together? >> Um No, this was at at Singing Hills. We had 14, I think. I We're down now to um like six or seven at each school, which I think is a more reasonable number. We have center-based programs at
each one of our schools. We have some students who do need a one-on-one para maybe for medical necessity needs or things like that. We're at a much more reasonable rate, but when I first got here as academic systems consultant, there were times I walked in special ed
classrooms where there were more adults than children. And that's just I don't think that's best practice. I just I don't I don't think that's that's the best way to spend our limited amount of funds. And so, we're It's another area we've right-sized. >> And is that
>> NA has done a great job of leading that effort. >> And is is that also helped by that we have kind of centered kind of the more severe needs into kind of one school and less severe needs Isn't that what we've done is sort of separated them out a
little bit because because the staffing needs are different. >> So, we've spread the programs out. So, we'll have an affective [clears throat] needs class at the at Running Creek. We'll have a an SSN class at Singing Hills. The middle school has both and
the high school has both. Um But again, even though >> efficiency given efficiency to the staffing for those. >> Correct. And even those programs as we continue to grow in our academics, we will probably have some of those students. We want students in the least restrictive environment possible. You
don't want to put a kid in a center-based program unless they have failed with multiple interventions in a general ed classroom. So, hopefully, as we improve some of our other classrooms, we can even move some of those kids out of a center-based classroom back out with their peers. Um you know, if you
have a kid who's leaving a center-based classroom and they're out with their peers and they need a one-to-one para, that actually might make some sense. But to have six kids in a center-based classroom and then give all six of them a para, it just doesn't make sense. It's not a good a good use of our funds.
>> So, one more question. So, if there's quite a decrease in curriculum and instruction, what does that mean? >> Um so, we cut Kim Moore's position as chief um academic officer. We didn't replace my
consulting position. And then we cut a lot Now, we did increase the math coordinator. So, it's not a I want to make sure we're transparent and showing both sides. We cut an employee and a contractor. We added a contract or added an employee. But a lot of it is in
department spend. We were spending money on outside consultants. We were spending money on outside software programs, i-Ready, um things like that that to me are not needed. Um you've heard me say, as I've presented some of the other plans, we have the expertise within the
staff. The distributed leadership team is a much better place to put our our money and our time and our effort into allowing our own people to um to help each other. And so, it's a it's it's a decrease in giving money to
outsiders that were intended to come in and help us grow our scores and obviously did not. Um we can do that ourselves internally much better and much cheaper. So, a lot of that is is external costs that we were
paying outside people to come in and do work. >> So, Kim's salary was included in the curriculum and instruction expenditure line? >> It's um Let me see which one you're looking at because you'll see staffing >> on expenditures. >> So, the one that dropped from 300,000 to
60,000? >> Yeah. >> That is um that is not the staffing So, that is just in um stuff we quit stuff we quit buying. >> Stuff we quit buying. And is that like the consultants and things is that get
rid of them too? But yeah and your your consultant fee is in there or not? >> Um No. No, that you would see in the the other file on staffing when we cut some of those positions. So, what you're looking at and the way these um
the way these are set up is you get a salary and benefit expenditure. So, that's salary benefit, but then the expenditure file location, that's the the stuff, I guess you would say. >> Yeah. >> Well, that was a lot of stuff that I would like to see some detail on sometimes.
>> Absolutely. Yeah, I can print that out and get it to you guys. Yep. >> um you know, we were worried about what we were going to do for this year for a couple of things and I don't know where that was. >> Yep. Yeah, there's there was um
>> With the i-Ready contract or something. >> i-Ready contract was in there. >> probably pretty big. >> Yeah, that was >> have enough for new math curriculum. >> Yeah, do we still have it? >> So, that's what I've got left in there. I don't know that we're going to be able to afford to buy much more. Um
>> So, that but it is that is what that $60,000 is for. >> That is what that is what um I would suggest we spend it on. Yes, it could be for any number of things, but that would be my suggestion. I don't see a lot of other curriculum needs that
we have. Um >> about this year? >> You know, there's a couple, you know, we're doing changing assessments, right, to dibbles, but we got the CELF grant to do some of that. So, we're also going to some more research-based materials that the state
supports that we can get grant money for. Um and so, we're able to save some money there and um still do some of the other expenditures, but a big chunk of that is what I would consider contracts for stuff.
I can give you that breakdown. >> Where's all of the like printing that we usually have a whole lot of that in the first, you know, half of the year. Sometimes it's curriculum-related, but uh just for classes and things like that. Would that fall under each individual school's >> Yes. So, yes, so when you look at their
again, not the salary and benefits, but the expenditures by location, they get an allocation for how many students they have. Um in that fund, so like Running Creek, $270,000, you'll see something for their copier, you'll see something for supplies,
you'll see their worker's comp insurance. Like, you name it, it's all um throughout there. >> So, they don't have to worry about that being cut from the curriculum line since it's already allocated. >> Correct. It is out in schools. Yeah. And most districts did this a few years ago. They tried to take most of their
centralized spend and put it out in the schools where it's actually being spent, cuz otherwise it looked like, "Why are you growing administration?" Um why isn't the money out in the schools? And so, we've changed a lot of our accounting codes over the years to try to
demonstrate where that money is actually being spent. It's still not all perfect, but it's much closer. >> So, another question I have is on 623, uh expenditures by location, Board of Education, $191,000. We're going to get accused again of all
of a sudden voting ourselves a salary. So, please describe that. >> [laughter] >> Well, I can't only have four board members now. >> Yeah, so you know, we all have a raise. We're 25% raise. >> [laughter] >> No, you'll notice there is no Board of Education under salary and benefit
expenditures. The board um the board expenditure is anything from um CASB fees to election costs, um >> And when you say that, I'm just going to clarify that's the fees that we have to
pay for having our names on a ballot for the for the whole That's all that is. We do not >> We're not supplementing your >> supplement our campaigns. Just saying that. >> No, but >> [laughter] >> if we put people on the ballot, we've got to pay. >> Yeah, we have to pay. We have to pay our
share of the election fees, yes. Just wanted to clarify that. >> Yeah, no, [laughter] it's a good clarification. >> Yeah. >> Um you have to answer that on the horse's mouth tomorrow. >> Ah, there we go. >> [laughter] >> So, I've better to do that here, but you know, you have that um I'm trying to think whatever. There's five or six line
items on there. If there's any travel reimbursement, you know, sometimes boards will want to go to um >> Like a training or something. >> a training, if we wanted to bring someone in to train the board, those types of things. There are some um I don't know, general supply line items
in case you guys need need something. Um but to me, yeah, we dropped that. It's a very reasonable amount for a >> I just wanted to clarify cuz that was going to come up, I knew it. >> [laughter] >> And actually, while we're on the topic of that line item, I think it's worth it
for you to potentially take a look at all of our membership organizations that we are a part of, that we pay to be a part of. Cuz I I for one would like to understand how much we're paying for that, if it's something valuable to us as a board, if it's not. I think it's worth reconsidering our membership.
>> Okay. Yep, I could The only one I have budgeted for next year is CASBO, and a lot of that is not necessarily because the board needs it, but the board clerk, Jamie, needs it to be able to get some support on if the legislature changes policies for her to have to go through
and research all that, get legal review. It is well worth CASBO sending those out, and then all we have to do is tailor them to our community. Um and so, I think >> benefit. >> Yeah, in my experience, that's probably more for the board clerk than the actual
board, but it goes under your budget. >> also a good place. I mean, they have a lot of model model policies, and we I mean, we are going to edit them most, you know, many of them at least. But it's a place to start instead of starting from scratch, and that's for the board, that's that's invaluable, too. Yeah. Well, then
in that case, I know that we've been a part of CLASS. We are part of CLASS right now, but I don't know when it's up for renewal or how much it would be to or even if the board wants to continue to be a part of that organization. So, if you would look into that so that we have, you know, can make an informed decision moving forward.
>> Yes, I can look that I can tell you I did not put that in the budget, so if the board would want that to come back, I can certainly do so. Um I put CASBO in there cuz they're the ones that help us with board policies, and that's what we needed. >> Yes, thank you. So, it looks like
transportation has gone up quite a bit. >> So, >> It was under before, and it's just right now? >> So, transportation is, as it sat on the original budget, and I think this is another one that's definitely worth having a public conversation about. We
spend on salaries and benefits, as well as expenditures, about $2 million a year in transportation. We only bring in just under 500,000, so it's a $1.5 million transfer from the general fund. Um
this next part that I say, I I just say for clarity's sake. For a expenditure that legally we don't have to provide, we have to provide transportation for students in special education if it's in their IEP as a
related service. We do not have to provide transportation. I'm not saying we shouldn't, I'm saying some districts don't. I happen to think we've got to shrink that delta somehow. That 1.5
million is too big of a general ed or general fund transfer. Um Jeff Canella, our transportation director, has done a great job kind of I think changing the mindset. He did a wonderful job with the Stampede. We were able to help out the community. We
didn't lose money, that's a plus. Um he's done a great job trying to get some of this lined up, but there's only so much you can do. I also know that and I agree with this philosophically, I'm not sure I can support it
monetarily. We've provided, you know, basically free transportation for our charters. Um I think that is really probably difficult um when you're looking at a budget. Um we're not even charging them
for field trips. And again, if we were flush with cash, I think I'd be okay with that because, you know, we're all trying to help out all the kids in our community, but when we don't have any money and we're transferring this much of a general fund, um
I think we have to have a a hard conversation about what transportation looks like moving forward. That could be reduced service. It could be not you know, transporting charter school students anymore. It could mean charging
every student who takes transportation a fee. Many surrounding districts charge a transportation fee, not every student, but the students who use it. Um, we need a long-term solution that this board can support, that this
community can live with, um, because it's just such a huge expense. And I think transportation's done everything they can. We've got great partnerships with the city and the police department, um, and I think we've bent over backwards to try to be everything to everyone, but that's expensive.
>> Mhm. >> Um, we're not appropriately, um, charging from an accounting perspective, even our own schools. Right? If we transport the football team from here to La Junta, somehow or another, that accounting
needs to come out of athletics versus transportation, because we need to know how much we're actually spending on athletics. As you see, athletics is another one, $580,000 transfer. We need to take an honest look at are we charging the right athletic
fees? Because we keep, again, you've heard me say, general fund is supplementing, general fund is supplementing. Um, so, we have to look at are several of these areas, are we getting what we need? Do we need to increase fees? Do we need to decrease
service? So, yes, transportation, we've, um, we've looked at everything we can do. We've got, I believe, 12 general ed routes. We've got a handful of sped, special education routes. We have a couple students that we have, by law, to
transfer to, um, schools that that more meet their academic needs. So, there are some things we have to do, but we also have do some things we probably don't have to do. Kids are on the bus for a long time, because we make a lot [clears throat] of stops. Maybe we do fewer stops in the
future. Um, we shuttle kids back and forth from Legacy to the high school. That creates more wait time and it's also something that I don't believe we're getting reimbursed for. So, and again, this isn't a an anti-choice,
an anti-charter conversation, but we've been giving away the farm on some of these deals, which again, when you asked earlier, how did we get to this point? Well, I don't think we've always negotiated from a point of strength. And I think sometimes we've let our
philosophy get in the way of good business. And at the end of the day, something like transportation is a business. >> And and to be clear, this board, when we agreed to transport charter school students, it was
presented to us and we understood it as it would be it would >> We should know >> extra expense to the district. We were going >> We're going by there anyway. >> go to the stops that were already there. And then, over this last year, I heard some parents talking about how long
their kids were on the bus. Was that contributing to that time that they were on the bus? >> I think there's a couple things that have contributed contributing to it. One, you've got to be able to line up all your starting in times, if you're doing multiple stops, if if, you know,
if the bus that takes kids from the middle and the high school out to their neighborhood is waiting on the shuttle, I don't know if they are, I'm just saying hypothetically, if they were, that could increase wait time. If we did have to add more stops, um or didn't eliminate stops because we've got a lot
of kids getting off, all of those things could increase wait times. And so, >> I heard that Legacy was unwilling to negotiate their their uh let out time in order to >> I have I have heard that there that that
was a difficult conversation. I did meet with them today and said that depending on what happened today, we would have to look at starting in times. I did not get any pushback. I have heard that that wasn't always the case. Um but I did not today. >> My understanding too is, you know, on
Thursdays, now we aren't going to have this next year, but on Thursdays we've had up to this point, we've had late start days. And my understanding from somebody at Legacy is that on those days Legacy's students weren't transported by
by bus because they, you know, they didn't have they don't have a late start day. So, that was kind of interesting that they could work it out for one day. >> [laughter] >> Well, my priority is the kids that are going to the four
schools and their transportation. If there was a way that we could make it work that would not inconvenience and keep the kids on the bus longer or cost the the district money, um then
I I I would be okay, but we have to prioritize. >> We're in here making hard budget decisions. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> That's a pretty easy one to >> Yeah, we've got to My understanding, um I mean, you you you might we have room on the bus and I can like I can
understand the philosophy, right? There's five seats empty on the bus, let's just put these five kids on. >> They can go to an existing stop. >> They can go to an existing stop. What I don't know is, well, what if it was six kids? Did we add another route? Like I do know Jeff is working right now to try
to figure out are there any routes that have any efficiencies in them at all? I can tell you having done a little work in this area, that's difficult to do the more kids you have riding the bus. Um does every bus need to be the full, you know, 60, 70, you know, person bus?
Um could we save money if we had, you know, some of the smaller buses because we might have smaller routes going out to the outskirts of, you know, of our boundaries? I think it's a conversation we've got to have because again, long term. And when you look at it, and
again, I look at all of this in in a rob Peter to pay Paul. I mean, every dollar you save is a dollar we could put to teaching and learning. That's a dollar we could put towards staff salaries. We need to recruit and retain the very best staff there are. It's tough to do that
when I'm, you know, transferring 1.5 million out of the general fund to transportation and 580,000 to athletics and right, I could go on and on. These are all and I think some of the decisions that have been made in the past, we didn't always tell people that. Like,
oh, you want this? That's a great idea. However, it's going to be at the expense of this. You You needed that second piece of information that I'm not always sure you got. >> And if you want this and we don't want to cut that, this is going to be what it's going to cost. >> Correct. This is the fee, right? It's
like the computers, right? Okay, if everybody comes back and says we want one-to-one at the high school, okay, do you want one-to-one at $300, you know, your freshman year? Some of these things we again, if and if we're not going to increase taxes, which as I said, I
cannot in good conscience ask our taxpayers for another dime, we might have to use fees for use. Not fees for everybody, but if you're going to play sports, we need to look at the sports fee. If you're going to ride the bus, we might need to look at a bus fee.
If you need a computer, we're going to look at a computer fee. I just feel like we've been the central bank and the you know, the expenditures just keep building and the revenues aren't coming because we're losing enrollment. Um, and so, we're just swirling down the drain
on some of this stuff. >> So, how are we like the transportation and and the sports, how are we doing versus the neighboring districts? Are we being competitive? >> So, well, I think there's a couple things. One is the the right way to do
it is whatever that transportation cost is shouldn't go to the transportation budget, it should go back to the actual athletic event or the team so that you can actually look and see what does football cost us, right? If you look at
the budget, you might see the head coach, you might see the assistant coaches. Should we see the transportation costs for all the games they have to travel to? Should it be a portion of the athletic director, a portion of the athletic trainer? Should it be a portion of the stadium lights or the water for
the stadium? We don't account for some of this stuff in a way where we can actually see what something costs to then take that fee and go, all right, so if the fee is this and 100 kids normally come out, I guess we're taking this divided by 100 and that's the fee.
I mean, you could look at some of these things as an average over two or three years and get an idea what your fee should be. >> So, Ted, are you saying we should do that moving forward? Is that your plan? >> I'm going to say you can't do that if you have >> If I don't have the data. >> Right. >> Yeah, I think we've got to look at that data and then we've got to make some
recommendations and some difficult decisions of do the people who are using the service need to pay for it because we're not in a position where we can raise taxes and ask everybody in the in our boundaries to give a little more. I
I think >> So, what does that look like? Is that like a a fee for playing football and it all goes towards the >> we have, but it might need to be increased. I don't It's obviously Our athletic fees are obviously not covering us because I'm having to transfer
$580,000 from the general fund just to break even. Um so, it could be looking at, you know, any number of things of what it costs to get a proper accounting and then divide that out. And again, there's ways districts do this, right? You could
still, you know, use scholarship in students who are on free lunch. You do a reduced rate for kids who are on reduced lunch. You don't want to raise fees to the point where some kids aren't aren't able to participate, but in my experience, um
people will pay for those things that they value. It's just like transportation, right? If I were to say, "Let's raise taxes for this 1.5 million," why should you have to raise your taxes for a bus your kid doesn't ride on cuz you get up and drive them?
Like, we I really think we've got to start addressing whether or not fees are the right thing to do. >> And to that point, how do the neighboring districts handle the commuting to school and home on a bus? Are Are Are they uh subsidizing like we are?
The The neighboring districts >> there's a couple different ways. Several charge fees. Some charge, you know, uh uh trip there and a trip home, you know, they'll charge a round trip fee. You get a little key card and you buzz it. I don't think we have to be that
sophisticated. I think we could say, "Here's your bus pass, you know." $200 would not be unreasonable. And if you think about it as a parent, if you had to drive your kid to school and pick them up 172 72 days or 166 days a year,
um when gas is $4 a gallon, $300 is a bargain. Um and you're going to get parents who go, "Yeah, but what about my taxes? My taxes already paid for that." Well, transportation isn't a right like education. Education is a guaranteed
right. You have the right to a free and appropriate public education. You do not have a right to, and I this I know this sounds brutal to say, but we're talking about budget here. You don't have a right to be transported to school. Um we might have to look at a fee for service.
>> Well, and I can imagine a couple of I wanted to point out. The one was I was so surprised when I learned that there were some routes that are 2 hours for these kids to get to school in the morning and then to get home later in the day. So, total 4 hours of being in a
bus. And on top of that, a majority of them are elementary school kids. They're coming, you know, from Running Creek and that's how long that commute is. I can't imagine, you know, if I had a kindergartner or first grader or second grader >> I only spend 2 hours >> to be on a bus for 4 hours. That's just
so long. And so, I I would imagine, too, that there might be a good number of parents who, you know, are like, "I don't want to submit my kid to having to be on a bus for 2 hours. That's just too much time on a bus, especially that little." But, um so, I just wondered,
too, if you felt like this might be a good area to survey parents on to find out whether or not, you know, folks really need slash want this type of system that we have in place, how they might be open to some changes, um and
or, you know, what what what would it look like if we phased some things out or changed some things, what would their response be to that. Um I just wonder if it was up to me, you know, if I knew that paying for my bus, if I wanted to have
my kids to ride the bus, was going to open up, you know, several hundred thousand dollars worth of salary that could go to better teachers or to get great teachers or or to give our great teachers raises, um I would be open to that. But but I wouldn't know that that
was an issue unless the school presented me with that type of a scenario. Um and so, especially in situations that we're in right now, I just want to be as wise as we can be with the money that we have. And um to continue, you know, putting money into a program where I'm
not even sure how many, you know, if it's a if it's a very large significant percentage of students, if we're just talking about commuting back and forth from school, like how many families, you know, are aren't even a part of that >> Yeah. >> altogether. Their parents are driving them anyway, or the kids walk to school
if they're close enough. So, anyway, I just like to have some more information and maybe even get, you know, a a feel for what the community feels um is is the right path forward. >> Okay. Yeah, we can find a way to gather data.
I just want to be transparent that if if we don't change something for the long term, we just need to get used to the fact that it's 1 and 1/2 million dollars every year that we're going to be transferring over. Um and we can do the same thing for
athletics, right? We can we can dig in a little deeper, we can do some surveys, we can look at actual costs. >> I think we should start tracking the actual costs so we know exactly what it costs. >> to do that. >> We do need to. >> And have it broken down. I I'm going to ask a little more detail on
the on the transportation numbers, both both the salaries and the expenses by location. >> Yep. >> Now that I know the call it. >> Now that you know. >> Um and everything I've heard, I'd like to see some options for even just modest reductions. >> Mhm.
>> And there's just hey, if you did these two things, that's $300,000. >> Okay. >> So, on the on the salaries, it looks like the the salaries have have been reduced by $400,000.
From the previous budget to this. The So, the salaries have been reduced. So, then I'm and I'll ask a question about that in a minute, but then the expenses for um transportation have increased by $322,000. So, questions on two of them. Have we got fewer employees in
transportation now that the salaries are reduced? Um do and how come we have so many more expenses? Is it because gas prices are going up? >> Bus prices are going up. Yeah, so >> say? >> Yeah, but the bus lease is huge. 300 and some odd thousand in the bus lease.
Employees, yes, that's my recommendation is to reduce some staff there. If we have low-hanging fruit in terms of routes, we might, you know, not need as many routes, those types of things. If we cut the number of stops, so yes, I think that is an area where we do have to >> Okay.
>> Um and again, this is another one of those like I talked about, it is very difficult to have to make this decision this late in the year, but I think that's an area where we probably need some some vacancy savings. >> Mhm. >> Um but yes, so when you look at um
the actual, you know, supply area of it, it did increase. A big chunk of that is that bus lease. Um and again, I believe we only have a year or two of that left. Um I've also talked with um Jeff recently about, well, if we
lease all these new buses, have we sold the other ones? Can we get anything for that? We met with the insurance company today today and some of those buses, the old buses, we're even still getting charged for on our insurance. So, we're going to expedite that a little bit. Like, okay, if we
have new buses, these old buses, we don't need. Let's sell them. Let's get that cash in. Let's get them off our books so we're not paying insurance on them. Um there's a lot of little cleanup stuff like that that when you get in tough budget years, you need to look at.
>> Well, it should be anyway, but especially now. >> How many buses are we talking about? >> I don't know, but I think it's probably three to five. >> Okay. >> Um that we could, you know, um so we're going to look through some of that. There were, I don't know,
46 vehicles on our insurance. >> Mhm. >> Makes no sense to me in a district this size. Um I don't know where they're all parked. >> Is it Is it personal? >> I don't know. It's There's >> Are they all in the lot over there? >> Yeah, [laughter] I need to look. There was like a van from 1996. I want to know
where that's at. >> Wow. >> But yeah, so we've got some cleanup on some of that type of stuff to look at. Going through insurance today was a really good way to see what assets you have in the district that you're being charged for that maybe we can go look at.
>> And insurance isn't cheap these days. >> No. >> No. >> Really half a million dollars? No, it's not. >> Okay. >> Speaking of insurance, I do have a question on line 800. Um Looking like that's going
the uh Is that going down? >> Going down. So, part of that I think is an accounting thing. So, there are are parts in the budget I talked about earlier where we're taking centralized costs and actually accounting them to the schools. So, if
you were to look at the spreadsheet behind this that shows the individual schools, that go up to those budgets up above, right? 270 for Running Creek, 420 for Singing Hills. Some of those costs now live there. They're the um property
insurance, the um workers' comp are living in the schools. I I can't 100% say for sure. I'm pretty sure that's why that dropped is they got moved over. Our utilities certainly are not going down. I would say our utilities going Our insurance is not going down. Our
insurance went down. So, this line would represent any utilities or insurance that does not exist inside of school. For the most part, yes. There are a few here and there that for some reason, the way this original budget was built, for example, transportation has a line item
in theirs for workers' comp. I don't know why their workers' comp is in there because the business office workers' comp isn't in theirs, the superintendent's office workers' comp isn't in theirs. There's some interesting things as we work through the budget, but it's what we were handed
and we could not completely rebuild it. We will be using a completely different format next year. We'll be starting from scratch. Andrea is already working with CDE to get the right templates, but some of this was just okay, if that's where it lives, that's where it lives.
Um we have to get this approved by June 30th. We can't rebuild the whole spreadsheet. So, for the most part, yes, it's either there or in schools other than there's a few areas where it is in a department, but those are very few and
far between. And maybe there might have been a good reason for why that was in there at one point. I don't know. It doesn't make sense that it's in some and not others to me, but but yes, both of those costs have gone
up in totality. And this is another thing where hopefully as as, you know, Andrea starts new working with CDE to get this stuff in templates, you want to see that same template every year, so it's apples to apples. I mean, when you're looking at something different every year, it's
really hard as a board for you to go, well, why did this go down? Like, you can say, I remember last year when we used the same template, you said this. Um it's hard when the, you know, we keep moving the target on you. So, we're going to get to one and
use the actual templates that CDE recommends that their people use, so we're all on the same page. >> What's another thing? When these numbers are correct, the schools themselves now can constantly know, okay, this is how much
budget I have left. I'm right. I'm 3 months in and I've spent half my budget. Okay. >> Better slow down. >> Better slow it up. >> Tablet and chisel. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> And then general phone stipends and benefits.
>> That to me appeared to be a catch-all um where again, as I've said before, I think one of the mistakes that put us in this situation is we had a lot of promises going on. Um a lot of individual stipends, a lot of individual raises, things like that.
I have to assume those were in there. Um I'm hoping they were budgeted somewhere, but we have a salary schedule that we are going to stick to. So, I slashed [clears throat] that immensely. So, we do have some stip- an example of
something that I'm I'm proposing. Um I haven't shared this with staff yet, so you guys will hear it first. We spend $15,000 a year on cell phone stipends. It just doesn't make any sense to me. 10 years ago, if people were still being
charged by the minute, and I said, "Hey David, I need to be able to call you if, you know, the boiler goes out." I could maybe understand that. It makes no sense to me that we're giving several employees $40 a month for a cell phone stipend for this idea that I need you to
be available 24/7. Um we all have cell phones anyways, and again, I would think if staff members knew that this $15,000 could have kept us from having to, you know, um roof a pair, I think they would be okay with that.
Every um I verified with Tyler that every employee has a radio. So, you already have a radio in your classroom. You've got, you know, a radio on your belt if you're an administrator. Cell phones, everybody has them. If we quit doing the $40 stipend, people aren't going to get rid of their cell phone.
They're still going to keep it. It almost feels a little bit like we're enriching people personally on taxpayer dollars because I don't know that there's a business purpose. I mean, I didn't ask for a cell phone allowance in my contract and I'm pretty sure I
have to be available 24/7. Uh there are just some stipends like that that don't make sense to me in 2026 when we're having to riff people. Um there's some other stipends we've got to look at and see if they're in there.
There's stipends for various things um that um HR and finance have done a great job of putting some processes to. We were handing out stipends for hard to fill and as you saw we got rid of that policy because it wasn't being followed. We'll have to put in place uh
an internal procedure for what actually is hard to fill. Um we just had a lot of money and again, my feeling is if we added up all that money, we probably could have given everybody $1,500 instead of $1,000. Like again, we got to have to help people
understand when we're being nickel and dimed with all this stuff, it hurts our ability to give real compensation raises to the whole group. So, I decreased that quite a bit because um and I've got a document I'm working on that I'll send out to staff closer to
the start of school that kind of says guys, please quit doing this. Like the answer's always going to be no. If you walk into my office and say I need $2,000 or I'm going to go get another job, I'm going to say you have to do what's best for you. I have to do what's best for the system and I can't meet
everybody's individual needs um because there's a lot of great employees in this district who chose not to do that and now they're getting paid less than people who chose to do it and I think in some cases we're encouraged to do that by their leaders and we need to stop
that. So, I don't see the need for that large of an an account there um because it's not something we're going to use moving forward. >> I have I have a question though on the numbers on that general fund stipends and benefits. You were saying you reduced that, but it
actually looks like it's increased. So, it says $300,000 for this 26-27. It was 116,822. >> Yeah, that >> say earlier that you had a little buffer because we don't know the unexpected? >> Yeah, but no, that I'd have to go back
and look. We absolutely dropped that. I I'd have to go back into my notes and see um >> I heard that, too. I was waiting for a >> where that came. Good good [laughter] catch there. >> Be to David Hall. >> Um yeah. No, I'd have to go back and look, cuz we
dropped that pretty significantly. And I'm wondering if that's in the Well, if I could get into Google Docs, I could look. Um it might be in the newest update. >> Well, where are you accounting for, you know, new employees who might take benefits that you didn't account for
before? >> So, in that that's what I was joking about earlier when I said every time Michelle hires someone, if they get benefits So, it changes. So, when you look Um no, that would be in the actual salary and benefits line >> Yeah.
>> of each department or school. So, if you look at the very end where you see our reserves and you see $755,000. Um and you see I have a unassigned fund balance of 1,677. That number continues to fluctuate
because as new people come in and get benefits So, if someone comes in right now and takes $10,000 in benefits, I'm now going to be in the negative, right? >> Right, but I was just wondering if you if you were accounting for any like little bit of room
in any of these other categories for those types of situations? >> So, as they come in, we're adjusting. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. We are trying to stay true to the penny. So, that idea of you know, do we leave a little bit here or there? If we do, I think it would mean cutting another person. So, if push comes to
shove and when we're all hired out, we're 80 grand in the red because eight people chose full family benefits, then we're going to have to go to department budgets and cut. >> I see. When are we going to know that that final number?
>> Closer to the start of school. We're still doing some hiring um in key positions like language arts and math, stuff like that. So, we're getting closer. We will have to come together at some point in July and approve um new hires. >> Okay.
>> Um even if just real quickly, but there will be >> you expect? >> Oh. Eight-ish, maybe? I'm trying to think. That's not including coaches. When you look at our website of how many open jobs we have, most of them are coaches.
I don't know, Michelle, what do you think? Eight, 10, somewhere in there probably still open? >> Yeah, there's still some movement because we've made offers and then rejected and there there's some movement going on. Um as far as benefits go, anybody that
starts in July, they're eligible for benefits um September. >> Okay. >> And so, for the benefits, that number is going to push up. >> Might be 7,000 instead of 8,000 or something like that, but yeah, that that
is where and that's another thing where it's like we're we're so tight, we're going to have to like this Google Doc will just stay on my computer constantly. We are just going to have to keep watching it. It will be a living document. Um yeah, it it's going [laughter] to
have to have to be because we're going to be that tight. Um and so, I I and again, the only other way to do it is to not be that tight and possibly have to rip a couple more employees so you don't have to watch it as closely and none of us want to do that.
>> We're hoping to one and done. >> Yeah, really one and done. >> That actually brings me to a question that I had just generally speaking now that we've talked about a lot of the specifics, but you know, as we're moving forward, what what types of reporting mechanisms are going to be in place so that we're monitoring this living
document to make sure that we're going to end up where we want to end up. >> Yeah. >> Yes, I already told Andrea we'll be you guys will get to get to know for I think some updates specifically on I mean very early we're going to have to watch cash
flow and I think that's something as a board again um you've got to hold us to we want to see it. What's our what's our cash flow? Where are we at? Um how much is coming out every month in in pay and benefits and and those types of
things and yeah, I think some type of overall health report CDE has been very helpful um when they met with us being able to suggest some things that um we could provide. Um but it's really going to be staying up
to date like you said if we're 3 months in and we've spent half our money, you guys need to know. I can tell you prior to that there's a lot of other things that we're already working on to try to clamp down on some of that. Um you know, I I think having done this
before in another place things like no overtime without prior approval, no travel, no conferences. I mean, we have employees a community member pointed this out on our P-cards. We have employees purchasing hotels in Denver. Like most of us would not spend our own
money to stay in a hotel 30 minutes away. We just wouldn't and so um you know, stopping overnight travel, uh halting conferences, uh no reimbursements without uh prior approval. Genie's got a whole list for
me. She sees it all come in, and she she knows where we've got to clamp down. I think we've just gotten very liberal with our spending. It's It's like we're not even paying attention in some cases. And so, we're going to implement some things that put some better guardrails
up. Um so, that when we show those numbers to you every month, um you know, if if I tell you we're going to put some guardrails on P-cards, you guys should be asking every month, "Let's see it. You said you were going to stop this. You said we were going to
do this. Prove it." Um I would some of those things where we spent money, where we've gotten a little um out of sorts, when we hit true up, I'd be asking us in October what October count is. Are we up, kids? Are we down, kids? How does that change your
projections? Um I and I think CDE has a pretty good layout of the types of things we should be focusing on every month. Um and it's one of the things we've talked about if we're able to get the retreat together this summer to have them come in and share. And the nice thing is it's a calendar,
and it's a routine, right? Every September you should do this. Every October you should do that. Um but really, I in my opinion, we should kind of have two standing discussion items, and one is budget, and one is academic achievement. Those things should be discussed at every meeting. There's a
lot of other work that we have to do, but the rest of it doesn't really matter. If we can't make payroll and our kids aren't learning, what are we doing? >> I don't care about a policy if if my kids are doing a thing. >> Correct. And so, we kind of need those two standing agenda items. Um and I would expect that you ask us for real
data. And then follow up. Um we should be able to prove some of the the assessments that we're going to will be quarterly, but there's other stuff we should be able to show you pretty early on um in terms of where we're at um and get a gauge of of how
that's looking. I'd be asking schools to come in and present. "Hey, we know these changes were made. How are academics looking? How is that?" I mean, I would expect Running Creek to be able to come in here and and show you how much better this new system is
working. You might ask principals or operational directors, you know, in October "How are, you know, these new budget parameters working? Are you getting by without a phone stipend? Or, you know, do we need to do something different?" I mean, we can set up a lot of different
reports. I think part of it is "Don't take my word for it. Ask the people who are actually implementing this. Ask these ladies um for updates." And I've shared with them and I've shared with Jamie um
I don't ever want any of these people to ever feel um any way about coming directly to this board if they ever feel I'm not doing something right. They should absolutely feel they can come straight to you. Um Michelle and HR should absolutely feel she should come straight to you, and you
guys should remind them that if they face any retaliation at all, they should come right back to you. Um we have to change, you know, some of that culture. Um I want the board hearing from the people who are just do who are doing the work, not just the superintendent who
might not be telling you the whole story. Dig dig a layer deeper. It's great that I'm sitting here, but and I don't mind presenting the budget, but next year it should be Andrea. Right? We should be go a layer deeper and actually ask and make sure they're not telling you the truth.
So, we can um I think easily set up a routine for that of what that looks like, but I would I would caution the board don't stray from budget and academic achievement. The rest of the stuff we can figure out, but it really doesn't matter if those two and if those two aren't getting
better, you should have someone else sitting here. So, I would continually ask difficult questions about those two areas. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> I'm trying to think if there's any other
>> Talked about a lot. That's all the notes that I had to make [laughter] sure that I that I shared. >> We did. We talked about a lot. >> And again, you'll continue to see updates. There even in this budget, Ron was already to point out a couple things
that we've got to come back and fix. So, we will be continually >> say this is going to be an ongoing conversation? >> Ongoing. Yeah, the things that were brought up, I didn't see it till right before I came in here, but I'm like, yep, we'll get those fixed and we'll figure out like when it's appropriate to bring back revisions or
you know, does it need to be >> Yes, yes, it is. >> Yes, we've got it by June 30th pass a budget, but we'll also then decide and and talk with those who have who have proven that they've done this work, right? Like Ron, like, what do we do? Is this just a board memo to update the
board? Does this need to be a transparent conversation? Does this actually need to be resubmitted? Those types of things. So, we've got a lot of help. CDE's offered to help. We've got um people again in the community who have done this job and done it well who are willing to help. So,
everybody wants to see this succeed. So, um I think you're going to get a lot more transparent communication and if it's not going well, you're going to be the second to know a minute I do. >> And I know we've mentioned it a few times, but I do just want to say thank you to all of the folks in the back of
the room who have um I know I couldn't have done it without your help. So, I'm very grateful for your expertise and your knowledge, uh your long historical knowledge, and I thank you. >> Absolutely. >> Okay, nothing else?
>> All right. >> Ready? >> Okay. >> And can I get a roll? >> Director Plancher? >> Aye. >> Director Hunt? >> Aye. >> Director Olson? >> Aye. >> Director House? >> Aye. >> Okay, so next up we have the 2026-2027
interfund borrowing resolution. So, I move that the board approve the 2026-2027 interfund borrowing resolution as presented. Nicole, can I get a second? >> Second. [laughter] We second, girl. >> I'll get Nicole down.
>> [laughter] >> I think everyone. >> Okay. So, um do you want to explain it? >> Yes, so this is another one that um by law we have to do, and it's really kind of letting the board know {slash}
getting permission to move amounts between funds. Um you saw on the budget, I mean, not only do you sometimes um use the general fund to supplement one of these other accounts, but you know,
by law, I think uh like a nutrition account, you can take like 10% transfer it to general fund. So, this is and these numbers I can tell you will get better and better and more accurate as we get closer, but it's really being transparent, and that we
will be moving money around from fund to fund. Um >> And that's just a typical financial practice, right? >> Yeah. >> That's not anything shady or anything. That's just >> No, no. This [laughter] is I will say that for the record. Yeah, this is something I I mean every
district has to do. The The number of funds are different. The dollar amounts are different, but my understanding is it's really just um allowing us to be transparent that you'll move money from one fund to another occasionally. You
guys will be able to see that live and in living color color every month um as we present these. I think you you'll be able to see where we've transferred um money. You know, if if we hit May and the $580,000
wasn't enough for athletics and we got to, you know, say hey as we're finishing out the budget, we think we got to transfer more money over. We'd have to transfer more money over to put that account in the black. Those types of things um we'd want to be transparent about.
>> So, basically what you're doing here according to the rubric here is you're borrowing and you have 3 months to pay it back. >> To go back. And then you pay >> I think you answered my question. So, borrowing from the food food service fund cuz I was always told that's not an option, but 10%.
>> That's my understanding is you can do some. Um and again, part of it like, you know, we've said like I don't want to ever borrow from the capital reserve fund. Um you know, we're we should be putting money in there, but I think it's more I don't know how I'd categorize it
more of a a transfer heads-up >> that this this may or may not happen. >> And it's 3 months after the beginning of the next budget year. It's not just 3 months from when you do it. It looks like for according to the way this you have to repay it not later than 3 months after the beginning of the following
budget year. >> Yeah, and I think what you'll what I've seen in the past is sometimes here some of these were nearly wiped out to transfer over to the general fund to try to balance that budget and then
going into the next year you might see some of that money come back to start them out and make them whole. Um I some of these, like I've said, I don't want to ever have to do that. >> I was just going to say, I know we're in a pickle right now, but generally speaking, I'd like us to be able to to
not have to do that. >> To not do that is correct. >> Yeah, that would be first first choice, for sure. >> Okay, so any further discussion on this? All right, can I get a roll call? >> Director Butcher? >> Aye. >> Director Hunt? >> Aye.
>> Director Olson? >> Aye. >> Director Powell? >> Aye. >> Okay, sorry about that. Can I do a roll call? Um 2026 2027 beginning fund balance resolution. So, I move that the board approve the
2026-2027 beginning fund balance resolution as presented. Can I get a second? >> I'll second. >> Okay. I want to break that streak. Any discussion? >> Is that right after the other one or I'm not I'm not
>> Yeah, it's not in there. So, this is kind of a a strange one um because we put it on to be transparent and I'm not 100% sure um as we created this budget we created this from a zero-based
perspective, meaning in the past there's no way you can have negative $131,000 in unassigned reserves and then say you're built the next budget saying we're putting
four we're starting with $439,000 in nutrition and we're starting with $300,000 in um athletics. And so, from a um I think it's a difference between as as Tracy continues to explain it to me between cash flow and fund balance, but
we literally built the budget and so we put it on the agenda when we posted the agenda to be safe. But, as we dug in, it's just something I don't feel comfortable asking the board to, which is why we
didn't move forward with it, to approve that when we're starting at zero. We are most likely, you know, on paper going to end the year, the fiscal year, once everything's journaled back in the red. So, we're not starting with any
beginning fund balance. So, yeah, on paper I suppose you could say we're starting out with $400,000 in nutrition and $300,000 here. I want to be transparent with you guys and the community. We might start out in the red. What We're not going to meet TABOR,
we don't think. We're probably not going to be in the positive. Um so, we're starting out at zero. That's how we built the budget. There's nothing in that 26-27 budget where we assumed we were carrying over even a penny. Um so,
we didn't move it forward in terms of formal, but since we'd already posted it on the agenda because we were looking at it, I wanted to be transparent that I don't I don't see how we can move forward, you know, asking the board to approve a beginning fund balance of the zero.
Like, it's it We built the budget based on where we think we're actually going to be, best case scenario. So, there's no formal action that needs to happen, but I wanted to be transparent with you and the community because I don't whether it was done
from an accounting perspective correctly in the past, it wasn't transparent to this board. You know, you were sitting there thinking we're starting off the year with 1.6 million. No, we didn't. Um we didn't even meet TABOR, so.
Some of these types of things um I think will be a more routine for us next year, but it's it's been a weird spring budget season in terms of trying to be transparent versus trying to do things the way they've been done the
past couple years, and I would I'd rather rely on transparency than um than anything else. >> Well, we next year we've already met. I mean, assuming this budget goes, then we've already met TABOR prep mostly for
the next year. >> Yeah. And then we can say we're starting out the year with $800,000. Well, we are, but we aren't. You know, it's like And again, that's why I always I I think to be transparent, you have to talk unassigned
reserves and cash. That's just I think that's how most of us live our lives. Um And we have to make that clearer to the board versus you know. >> Yeah, just cuz I have $400,000 in my 401k doesn't mean I can just go take that. >> Yeah, you don't you don't tell people
you got $400,000 in the bank. And so, um so yeah. So, we didn't actually bring the resolution forward because I don't think it's needed if we're >> It sounds like we get to vote nay again. Um motion that we just Yeah, that's right. Or we can we can just withdraw the motion, too. I mean,
since there isn't anything to vote on. >> Okay. >> That one that might be appropriate on this one is to just withdraw the motion. >> Okay. I first withdraw the motion. >> Which I know I got four nos and a withdraw. >> [laughter] >> Woo.
>> What do I do with that? >> I know it. >> Where's Jamie when you need her to be writing up these notes? >> She's [laughter] yeah, she's >> She told us to go >> showing us how valuable as a court [laughter] clerk she is by messing everything up. >> Well, you did great. I mean, you've kind of whipped through our roll calls really well. So.
>> Well, she wrote it all down for me. >> Oh, I know, but you know, thank goodness for you. >> I could not have done it without >> them herself, so you have to have those things in front of you. just do. So, anyway. >> Save me the poll poll motion. >> So, um with that, I
I move to withdraw my motion. >> I'll second that. >> [laughter] >> So, can I get a roll call? >> Director Fletcher? >> I. >> Director Hunt? >> I. >> Director Olsen? >> I. >> Director Powell? >> I. Okay, so we have one more item, and
that's the one that Sorry for the late night, everybody. That's the one that I moved from >> [laughter] >> um >> 1.3 >> Yeah. So, um the superintendent contract, um there's a couple of amendments I want to
propose, and you're not going to see them because they're on the board docs, and they're they're not in your folder. But, um you have the original here. I think it was at the very, very beginning. >> Yeah, that was >> Okay. >> That was in the middle.
>> So, on 1.3, basically read that out, and um instead put in there renewal of agreement, this agreement shall not renew automatically, the term may be
extended only by affirmative action of the board taken at a public meeting and reduced to a written amendment signed by both parties on or before January 31st of the applicable year.
Absent such action, this agreement shall expire on the termination date set forth in paragraph 1.1 um above. Superintendent shall, by placement of the topic on the board agenda on or before November 15th of each year, remind the board to consider
whether to extend this agreement, which date shall be con- which date shall be at least two months prior to the board meeting where renewal or non-renewal is to be considered. >> So, this is basically just keeping up with the the tradition that we were doing with Dan. We would add it to the
agenda just >> It's just sort of an affirmative thing rather than just a rolling on thing. >> Well, and and we did, you know, when we put it on the consent, we approved the consent. >> Yeah. >> So, it's basically just keeping up with the way we've been doing it. >> Yeah. >> Mhm. >> So, I'm all
>> You okay with that? >> Yeah, I think Yeah, Rhonda had shared this with me. I think it's almost defaults to no versus yes, which I absolutely would suggest to support, like um that that is absolutely okay.
>> Okay. >> And then the only other changes I have on the contract My screen is a little slow. So, in 8.4, there were a few cross-reference
changes that it fixed. Six versus eight. Um So, in 8.4, um I added mitigation and offset, which basically says any amount otherwise payable shall be reduced
dollar for dollar by compensation superintendent earns or becomes entitled to earn from other employment or consulting during what would otherwise have been the remaining term. Superintendent shall use reasonable efforts to secure comparable employment
and shall report such earnings to the district. So, basically, you know what, if there is a decision to terminate, um it's you know, it's basically you're not just paying out for a year and then they
can go off and do whatever they want. >> And also, wasn't there something about no lump sum payment either, right? >> Um well, and that's that's Oh, sorry. >> Okay. >> So so it's it's basically [laughter] it's basically no lump sum in the straight time. >> Yeah.
>> Um next is installments. So payments under this section shall be made in regular installments over the offset period rather than as a lump sum and shall cease upon superintendent's death or material breach of any obligations surviving termination.
So rather than a lump sum, it's you know, it will not be paid out monthly like it is. >> Like a salary. >> Yeah. Um And then Notwithstanding any other provision of this agreement, all payment obligations
under this section are subject to the annual appropriation limitations set forth in paragraph 1.1. Such obligations constitute a current expense of the district payable solely from the funds appropriated for the then current fiscal year shall not constitute
a multiple fiscal year direct or indirect debt or other financial obligation of the district within the meaning of Article 5 Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution and shall be payable only in installments not exceeding the amount appropriated within the fiscal year.
So I think that's pretty basic. So Um Those are the those are the changes that I proposed. And >> Yeah, I The only thing I would just clarify for the community is any of that
like buyout language is only if I'm fired without cause. That's only if the board just shows up tomorrow and says, "You know what? We've changed our mind." I can still be fired with cause and I walk away with zero. Um I can decide to leave and I walk away with
zero. We can mutually decide that I leave and I walk away with zero. Um you know, most of these contracts are written this way not for the current board of the superintendent, but for if another board comes in, so many um you know, districts, that's how it is.
You're not negotiating a contract with the board that hires you. You're in It's for the one who later might fire you. And so, that would just be if, you know, let's say another board comes in in 2 years and says, you know, we don't we don't like you, you're gone. Um superintendents want some type of um
income insurance as As I've shared with Rhonda, I'm not too worried about this. As I told you guys before, I wasn't ever interested in being superintendent again and don't want to be superintendent anywhere else. So, it's not like if this doesn't work out, I go look for another superintendent job. So, I am perfectly
comfortable with all of those things. I don't think it is smart um for a school board in a financial situation like this to try to do some golden parachute for a superintendent. That makes no sense at all. um I'm more than than happy with with the
revised language. >> Great. >> Great. So, any further discussion on this one? Okay. So, we will um I haven't made a motion yet. So,
I move that the board approve the um revised superintendent um Dr. >> Dr. Ted. >> Ted. Just call me Ted. >> [laughter] >> For Ted. >> Okay. >> I'll second it.
>> Okay. And any further discussion on this? Okay. Can we get a roll call? >> Director Fletcher? >> Aye. >> Director Hunt? >> Aye. >> Director Olson? >> Aye. >> Director Powell? >> Aye. >> Okay. And with that,
um, our next board meeting, believe it or not, is, um, August 11th. >> Our next regularly scheduled board meeting. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Um, so, August 11th, 2026, here in the board room, district office. And with
that, I adjourn this meeting at, it looks like, 8:42.