--------- Roll call Miss Best Au. Sorry, Mr. G >> Parks >> here. >> Mr. Shapiro >> here. >> VP Hargrave >> present. And President Dr. Howard,
>> I am present. At this time, do I have a motion to go into public comments? >> Motion. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I I do.
Residents are requested to state their names, addresses, and subject matter. In the event it appears that the public comment portion of the meeting may exceed 15 minutes, the presiding officer may limit each statement made by a participant to three minutes in duration. And tonight we will hold to
that three minutes in duration. Issues raised by members of the public may or may not be responded to by the board. All members all comments will be considered and a response will be forthcoming if and when appropriate. The board asks that members of the public be
courteous and mindful of the rights of other individuals when speaking. Specifically, comments regarding students and employees of the board are discouraged and will not be responded to by the board. Students and employees have specific legal rights afforded by the laws of the state of New Jersey. The
board bears no responsibility, nor will it be liable for any comments made by members of the public. Members of the public should consider their comments in light of legal rights of those affected or identified in their comments and be aware that they are legally responsible
and liable for their comments. At this time, do we have any members of the community who would like to come to the microphone? One ml, excuse me, one second. Would you please Again,
in light of our last meeting where we did not hold everyone to the three minutes duration for public comments, we will enforce the three minutes then tonight. Um, we gave everyone a ample chance last at our last meeting. Um, but
unfortunately we don't want to belabor this. So, I'm going to ask and if we have an extension, we will c certainly extend public comment if need be. Miss Lawler, if you would. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Good evening, Angela Lawler, 54 Herden Street. Um, I wasn't able to be here last month, so I'm I would appreciate a little bit of grace. I'm looking at page six.
Um, for the preschool budget, there's an increase of $3,441,000. Um, I'm curious as to where that's coming from. Can I ask all my questions and then maybe get an answer? Okay. Um, on page
three, I see there's a lot of um, salaries listed on this page and I see a lot of increases. 270,000 338,000 180,000
70,000 90,000 101,000 96,000 and this is the general fund if I'm not mistaken 558,000 116,000 57,000 now I'm confused because if we're
cutting staff why are there all these increases on salary lines um it just doesn't make any sense to Because as we're telling people that they're no longer going to have jobs, but yet we're increasing the line items,
it looks like mostly for salaries, whether it's for teachers or other professional staff or just the word salaries or administration. Um, also I noticed that today, um, there was an advertisement that came out at
the end of the day for student workers. Although I'm a big proponent of students working during the summer and I do understand that, I would like to know where the funding is coming for that because just as unfortunately ESP members are being told they don't have
jobs now it kind of looks kind of off that we're bringing students in to work in IT and custodial positions when you're getting rid of custodians. Um, I know that this has been a normal practice of the district to bring students in and have them work over the
summer. Um, it just doesn't look right to me. Um, so I wanted to understand where that was coming from and the funding for summer school as well because we're cutting teachers and we're cutting staff yet we're still going to offer summer school grades 1 to 8. High
school is understood because I know it's for credit and I know they need it to graduate. But in the elementary school, they do not need it to graduate. And I know we like to push our kids forward that need the extra help, but it just doesn't make sense when we're telling
people they no longer have a job. And we're cutting the we're cutting teachers, but you know, it always hits the ESPs harder because we don't make the type of money that teachers make. So you're telling people that are basically living paycheck to paycheck, you no
longer have a job, but I see all of this. So that's my time. Thank you. >> Thank you for your questions. So I guess I'll start with the prek budget. The increase in the So first,
just to make the distinction, the prek budget is separate from the general fund budget. So they are independent funding sources. With that said, the majority of that three plus million dollar increase is carryover funds from the previous
year. So it's not like yes, it's carryover funds from the previous year that we that are that's a part of the budget because usually what the budget is consists of is that you get a per pupilation. That's that's usually what the primary
source of your funds are in the prek budget. Then you get an allocation for your contracted provider. This case my contracted provider is Little Bears. So you get an allocation for them. Then there is a general fund transfer to the
preschool budget to support that which basically what that does support is because preschool funds you can't use them for special education students. But we know that we have you know like um um classes where there may be some special
education support needed. So in that case you get you have to transfer money from the general fund to support that amount in the prek. And then finally it's made up of a carryover amount that
you may have had that was unexpended in the previous year. >> A lot of money. $3 million. >> No it is a lot of money. Um it it's a it's a lot of money and to be honest I don't know the full nature of why there was much in carryover but the carryover
funds are not determined by myself. So what happens is that during the audit so right now we're although we're late we're undergoing our audit for 2425 fiscal year. So the carryover number is
given to us by the auditor. So he looks at the financials and then he tells us this is how much money you had in carryover preschool funds. >> Can I ask a follow question to that? >> Sure. >> So my follow-up question would be if
the budget was 6 million last year for preschool or 3 million? >> No, it wasn't. It wasn't three million. It was >> it was it was roughly around somewhere around there like five or >> five million. So out of the five million, we didn't spend three million. >> So I honestly
>> No, I'm just look at it. >> I'm asking only because we didn't spend three million out of the five and now we're bumping it up to six. If we couldn't spend the five, how are we going to spend the 6.5? >> Well, >> it seems like it's always going to be huge carryover, which kind of
>> and to that point, um, the state discourages carryover. So what they started implementing last year I believe is that when you have carryover funds you get a 25% reduction in your overall budget. So
it's not >> it's not of interest to the district to carry over such a large amount because by doing so the budget is reduced by 25%. because they started that last year. Before what would happen is that
part of you know the logic in having carryover funds is you ensure that you have a buffer to support preschool in the following year. Now that amount is unusually large. I'll concede that. Definitely will concede
that you know but as I said the state is trying to discourage that. So in our budget we had a 25% reduction of you know our overall budget because of the carryover amount. >> Are we short staffed at that building?
>> No. As a matter of fact what we did um this year for the budget as um since we you mentioned staffing at least four of the staff at AP Morris was they were absorbed by the preschool budget. So
what they did was they opened up additional positions, you know, like um >> two positions was just classroom positions, but in terms of true vacancies, they opened up two positions they didn't have in the previous budget. >> So they were able to create two room
positions, absorb two teachers, and then they had two openings and then absorb two teachers who would have otherwise been cut because they reduced the amount of their classrooms. >> It's just a huge carryover. >> You're right. Like I said, I'll definitely concede that it is a huge carryover amount and
we've, you know, we've tried to our best to allocate the expenditures accordingly, you know, and spend it as much as possible to the benefit of the students. And you said there was an increase in
salaries and you are right, there is an increase in salaries. part of the in if you notice that when you look at those lines that you were talking about that those lines are broken down by grade level bands have kindergarten first grade sixth grade you know things of
that nature so part of the reason for some of those increase notice the amounts 90,000 8,000 you can probably tie these amounts to one or two staff members because part of
and we have talked before that we started with around 47 positions and through attrition, consolidation of positions and transfer, we were able to get the cuts to 21, which is why in some
in some grade level bands, you'll see increases in salaries because we transferred to those places. But if you notice that um while you see like some of the smaller level increases like that, you notice that you have two very
large decreases in your six to eight grade level band and the 9 to 12 grade level band which would outnumber the cost of you know movement because if you look at both of those um combined that's
$1.2 two plus dollars with that decrease in overall salaries. So that's that part. >> How about the 558 for administration? >> Give me one second.
>> Yeah. Um that's a good point you know and then um a good point that was just made is that you know some part of this is going to be a natural increase you know just due to the contractual obligations of the CBA you know and the CBA prior to doing any budget cuts we
were looking at like a contractual increase of nearly $ 1.5 million so now of course it's going to be less than that because we have cuts but just that in general it's going to also contribute
to the increase in um in salaries. So on paper it looks like we have more staff but in reality these salary increases are due to movement and obligations of the CPA for contractual
level increases. So that's that part. You mentioned summer did you mention summer school at the end? Yes. Okay. So what we made the point of you know last meeting was to say with summer school
summer school goes along with our district programming you know like as well as curricular programming and anything of that nature. What we our approach to this budget was to try to minimize as much as possible the impact
to programming to student programming. And so that was the reason why we tried our best to maintain summer school. And even with that and and and from your position, it's a fair question. You know, even with trying to maintain
summer school, you know, we still had to have reductions in what was offered. I believe in the past it was five weeks, maybe five days, you five weeks. This time around we offer four weeks and four days a weeks as well as I believe four
hours a day which in the past had been five hours a day. So we tried to reduce that you know overall and then extended school year we're obligated to right so with extended school year what we tried to do is so it wouldn't impact the
general fund we tried to incorporate um extended school year and um our title funds so it wouldn't have you know any impact was was that it Oh, did I miss one? >> The student um workers for the summer.
>> Oh, let me speak to that. >> She has an additional question. >> Yeah. Oh, it's the student workers. >> Yeah. Um again like student workers you know fall in line with our approach to programming you know and while on the surface it does seem like well yeah we
got all these student workers you know what about our staff I mean you know these individuals are hourly the total amount of individuals is less than 20 and we're talking about a period of about five weeks so even if you take
that you know combined you combine all of them, you know, um >> what's the cap on that? What's their budget for student workers? >> Yeah, we actually had to reduce their budget. So, you're still talking for student workers. We're still talking
about under 150,000, I believe. So, in that, it's not like I don't want to minimize the amount because $150,000 could be, you know, it could be a teacher with benefits, >> an ESP. >> It could be. It could be, you know, um
and you're right to raise the point, but you know, right or wrong, um our philosophical approach to the budget, and you're right to question it, was we wanted to try to maintain
um student programming, you know, and in all forms. And that's what we did. >> Yeah. And you know with that with the staff what we tried our best to do with those cuts our approach was trying to
look at where we may have had surplus you know which is why most of our at least most of our cuts as we discussed with you were non-tenured employees and we looked at core section offerings as
well to see like especially at the high school and at the middle school that's why if you look at the salary lines you see the largest reductions in the high school and middle school areas because that's where we saw the biggest opportunities to consolidate you know
basically collapse classes that if you have an English class with you know 10 students you have another English class with you know eight students you're in high school you know you see it that there was an opportunity where we could collapse that section and
possibly you know not bring back you know a teacher Sure. So, okay. Well, no problem. >> Do we have any other members of the public would like to address the community? Any more public comments?
>> Good afternoon. Latasha Wilson, 217 Williamson Avenue. Um, >> sorry ma'am. Your name? >> Latasha. Latasha. Proceed. Um, can you hear me? >> I'm not sure if this already been addressed as I'm just walking in. So,
apologize. >> Of course. No problem. Um, so the governor cut our budget by 1.5 million or 1.2 million. >> Very close. Yeah. >> But I know that you can still request the money back. I was just inquiring if
that's been done. Um, I don't know specifically what avenue you can request a cut state. >> So, I work for a nonprofit. Okay. >> And I attended a meeting where the
mayors were all there amongst it was like a budget. you was at NGIT and you basically sit before the panel and basically I don't want to say beg but state your claim as to why you're in
need of the money and I know for my nonprofit we got if not all of it most of it back >> well not I would think that well let me ask you this as nonprofit are you funded by a grant
>> yes okay so in that sense your funding source would be different. While it both comes from the state, your funding source would be different, you know, than than ours, you know, like um because our state aid is not necessarily comprised of a grant like it would be
from a nonprofit. We do have grant funds in our budget, but it's mostly um from federal grants that are, you know, disseminated by the state. And that would basically be like our title funds, you know, and you can even say our
preschool um funds as well. But for our general operating budget, um 80% of that budget, you know, almost split equally comes from a and um the tax levy.
>> Yeah. So, you know, with that said, I think maybe the different funding sources, you know, make makes that, you know, difficult. >> I know during the last meeting you said enrollment was low. So, if enrollment should increase, what would happen to
the budget then? Well, if we have a significant increase in enrollment, while I can't necessarily predict the future, but what what I can say is that enrollment drives state aid because it's
based on per people allocation. So, if we have a significant increase in enrollment, then the expectation, you know, would be that we would have an increase in state aid. So with the date decrease in enrollment over the past two
years that's the reason why our state aid you know has you know yeah but you know at least the in terms of decrease in state aid while we had at least you know $2.3 million reduction over those
past you know two years you know be because over the past two years I know she just said three >> but at least two of those years we've been you know hit with that reduction in state you know to reflect >> is the reduction and enrollment
>> consecutive years thank you >> is the reduction in enrollment due to school performance or the kids are just like aging out and growing out of hillside >> that's a good question um yeah it could definitely be a myriad of
things one thing that we do see visibly is um part of our part of at least part of our reduction, you know, is due to out of district placements, you know, um we have an increase in out of district placements. We have an increase of
charter school enrollment, you know, over consecutive years, you know, into charter schools like, you know, you know, like um Kip Northstar and a couple of others. But, you know, and while it's a myriad of things, you know, we can at
least point to that as a contributing factor. Thank you. >> Sure. No problem. Thank you. >> Do we have any more public comments? >> There being none, do I have a motion to close public comments? >> Motion. >> Is there a second?
>> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. Thank you very much ladies and gentlemen for your comments and your concerns. Well, actually just ladies. Um, as this is a special meeting, I do want
to give equal time to the board members as I did in the last meeting because as I said before and I do want to leave with this to each and every one of you tonight, we are also learning here as you are and at the end of the day we are
not just from your elected board members. We are your neighbors and we're residents and this affects us too. So that said, each and every one of our board members, you do have a right and I would say there's an obligation to speak
your mind here now because I know there are a host of questions and concerns you have either. So I'll open the floor. I do want to lead with this and then I'm going to open the floor to my colleagues. Um, we find ourselves in a very difficult position, ladies and gentlemen, tonight
because this does not come easy. Many of us have toiled with this since our last meeting, particularly when it comes to cuts and recisions because there's some of you we've gotten to know and people who've done the job and done it well and contributed to this district,
people who have created outcomes. These numbers are tied to human beings and that is not lost on us. and we find ourselves in the unenviable position of trying to decide on what was, what is, and the potential of what will be.
So, I'd ask that you give us a little bit of grace and consideration as we try to navigate these waters just as you are. That said, to my colleagues, have any comments or questions? >> I have a question.
Given >> I know that um when last week when we discussed the um reductions um to get us to the 6% tax increase, where did we start? Where
were we at um before you got us down to that 6% like was it 12%? >> Oh yeah, we were at um 10%. >> 10%. Yes. And what other than the potential risks reduction in staff um in
programming I believe you said just because I don't know if this group was able to experience um hearing that as well um that went into the reductions to get us down to that 6%. And I'll ask one more question. Um,
I know that you also mentioned that you could potentially, and you can, correct me if I'm wrong, potentially get us to 4%. Is that as a result of the charter
school not being included or is that even with the charter school being included, that 4 million? >> Okay, I'll answer that question first. That one's fresh on my mind. So that would be um without the charter school because the charter school by itself
represents a 4.37 million dollar hit against the budget and we've tried and this budget does include the charter school whether or not they're here or not. we have to include them and you know so to get us down you know to where
we were you know previously that's what went into this so with the myriad of cuts that we had to do we were yeah so that that's to answer your
question that's that's what it is so with the 4% that I was saying while it would still be challenging to our budget if there were no charter school because we have a structural deficit of four of four plus million dollars.
it's at least, you know, cons conceivable that it's possible to reduce the levy without the charter school. But with the charter school, it makes it nearly impossible because I mean, we've, you know, at that
at that point, you know, the well, let me say it this way. It makes it impossible with the approach that we've taken to draft the budget. And the approach that we've taken to draft the budget is the least
amount of impact on student programming. You know, that was one of the approaches that we've taken and the other approach was to not close schools. So we that was something that we tried
our hardest to do and even with the cuts we targeted some of the grade levels that the charter school would potentially be drawing from you know so that went into our philosophy to I said
to not you know cut any schools because we um we believe that in any community that you have you So um a last resort is cutting schools because of the impact
that it has you know on the families on students and on the community overall. I believe that last week um my colleague board member um Beth asked a question and and this may not have been a question but I believe she did ask um
relative to um I think I lost the question um worst case scenario if right now we have not received notification relative to that charter
school. Um, so at this point we have to make sure that we're includ It's mandatory that we include that $4 million within our budget. Correct. >> It is mandatory. Yes. >> Yep. If it wasn't mandatory, I would not have included it. But it it is in fact
mandatory. If we didn't include that in our budget and passed a budget, our budget would not have been approved at the county level. And if we received, and this is a redundant question as well from last week, but just for the purpose of our um our community here.
>> Sure. >> Um if we do receive notification that the charter school has not been approved, um we still have to move. There's no changes that we can make to this budget once we put it in and send to the state.
That's it. It has to remain intact. Right. You see, the part of the challenge is is timing, you know, because right now, today is the 13th. We're supposed to all these changes that we have in the resolution, we have to
upload this into the budget software by the 14th. And the reason why is because um at that point, that's when the township is supposed to certify the tax levy. Now
how they go about doing that if they do it exactly in the 14th I that part I really have I have have no idea about you know so you know once they once they certify you know the tax levy
if we get to June and let's say that there is no charter school now with that there's a couple things one, if there's no charter school by the time we get to the 30th and they've already certified the tax
cut, at that point that money is ours as a district. That four plus million dollars, we don't have to disseminate that to the charter school. Now with respect to let's say our budget and
things that we didn't include in our budget, you know, like programming that we had to cut or some things, you know, it's possible to bring some of those things back. The issue that's unknown that I don't know is how that works with
the tax levy. That's the part I don't know. I do know that if there is no approval um by you know June 30th I mean that if they're denied then that money you know because the township you know like they
you know they disperse that money to us. So it's and then with the charter schools the way that works is we pay on a schedule throughout the year. So we give them by monthly payments over the course of an entire year. So because we
would already know before June 30th at that point there is no payment we would have to pay to that new charter school. So then yeah that money is ours and we can you know do things with the budget but like the like the tax levy question that you asked about about the like six
to four. I honestly don't know like how that part would be addressed. >> Is it something that we could inquire >> inquire about? Um, we could certainly, you know, maybe maybe it's a question for the um for the tax assessor. It's
probably a question at the at the municipal level, I guess, you know, and we certainly can inquire about it. >> Yeah. >> If I can team really quick from on Miss Gordon Given point, >> you mentioned that there's a deadline tomorrow, the 14th. How much wiggle room
do we have precisely? Let's just say for argument sake, we are impass tonight. How much wiggle room do we have from the 14th given the fact that you said that there's a 30th deadline? >> We don't um because it's it's that's a deadline that's given to us like that's
not like something that we have like a target date for. So we we we don't like I think the wiggle room was when last week um when the budget didn't approve and then it came to this week that was our wiggle room you know. So from today
until tomorrow when we have to upload the budget, yeah, we we don't have the wiggle room on that part because if let's say there's hypothetically a denial of the budget, if there's a denial of the budget, then there is no budget to upload. So at the c so at the
county level, the budget software will not be uploaded. we can't make the changes and then that will set in motion a chain of events where then the state get involved. So that so to that question the wiggle
room that we had is gone. We don't really have it unfortunately >> to your point. >> Yeah. And then with that, you know, with if the state does decide to come in, there are two things that could happen,
you know, um because I did mention that there could be a state monitor that they would send and that would be a six a six figure salary that would be at the expense of the district money that we don't have. That's the first thing. So
that's an option that they could do. The other option I actually just learned today when I spoke with the county BA about it is that the other thing that could be done in lie of a state monitor the state can just unilaterally
just um you know like the levy that's already there just approve the budget with that. They could do that also if they don't set an estate monitor >> levy meaning what could you clarify >> the tax levy >> at what percentage could you clarify
>> no no that what's ever in the budget like what's like >> yeah they they yeah >> your proposed >> yeah they yeah so it's more about in that instance it's more about the proposed budget like they wouldn't you know yeah it's more about the proposed budget at that
point you know whether it's 4% whether it's 6% whatever is in that budget they could unilaterally just approve it as is without sending in state monitor. So that's the other option >> just giving you something.
>> And I'm sorry and then I'll let you go. I'm sorry. Um, so to your point, relative to sending in a state monitor, uh, I believe that, um, our board attorney also consulted us, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, relative to
this last week, that if we do not pass the budget tonight, they could potentially, >> yeah, >> send in a um, >> Right. And that, you know, it, like I said, it could get to that level or they could just unilaterally just approve the
budget as it is. But yes, those options, you know, would be on the table. And I'm presenting them as options because I can't say definitively what the state will do. You know, I'm only speaking to what was communicated to me by the county BA of the options that the state
has at their disposal. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Sure. It's best. >> Good evening. >> Good evening. >> Um, two questions. I think last week you stated that we they they were at stage two or is it stage three with the
>> stage two or is that still the same? You still haven't heard anything further? >> We still haven't heard anything further. Um, they're at stage two in in the application process and >> and by the 30th of June. >> That's the latest. It could be before the 30th of June, but that is the the
deadline that the state has to give a decision by. Hopefully, they won't drag it out to the 30th of June, but you know, they've been dragging their feet already, so we have to prepare for the possibility. >> Okay. Um my next question is so what
happens next year budget year if these cuts and potential tax increases are approved will the current deficit that we are currently in will that be
gone and what are the chances of us falling into this again and I ask because every year you know they state that you can do up to what is it like 2% right and we have not done that in the past
and I've been on the board seven years now whatever and I know that there's been a lot of 0% and I'm asking because if we do this this year like if it's approved these tax cuts >> yes >> and then tax increases >> yeah tax increases yes
>> and then next year comes don't do the 2% or whatever that max is I mean wouldn't we fall back into kind of what where we are right now and I'm just asking because I know there are a lot of different districts that you know
it sounds great your percent but then >> the state doesn't necessarily see it as something beneficial and I'm not saying that that I want I live here I pay taxes we all do we all are dealing with the same thing but we have to really figure
out what's going to work down the because we can't just keep putting like bandaids over this every two, three, four years. No, and then we come with a big six, eight, 10% tax increase. So, I'm just asking right now with this $4
million deficit that we're in if these things are approved, where will we be next year? >> That's a good question. Um, >> how do we stay stable? >> Right. I'll speak to that part. So with regard to the the 2%
um and you mentioned you know kind of what's happened in the past without you know having you know the the having 0% levy in your budget increase in your budget. So next year um the
how could I put this? It's not optional, if that makes sense. So, I know in the past there have been budgets presented where I guess this has maybe been presented to you as a board
and to you as a community that we can do an increase this year, maybe not do an increase next year. Um, that's not fiscally responsible, you know, to that point. and my position
as the business administrator, it would be fiscally irresponsible for me to present a budget without the 2% levy. So I could tell you right now that yes at minimum next year the budget will have%
levy at minimum because you also spoke to a point of stability you know which is and I'm glad you brought that up because as we talked about during the last presentation think about it our
you know our um increase on the taxes and while I don't minimize it 2% % on the levy that we have is roughly six plus $100,000. Right?
So if you take increases with respect to health care costs by itself that's a million dollars that already just that alone already exceeds what we get from the levy and that's just the tip of the
iceberg. We talk about as I mentioned to Miss Law earlier when we talked about the salary increases you know talking another million plus dollars you know out of cost tuition increases you know
there were decisions made with regard to building modular units at two schools you know and those payments combined for those two buildings one will be a final payment and the other will pay in the second year and those two payments
combined are um a million plus. So the point that I'm trying and I could I could go on and on with the list of increases but they dwarf the 2% >> levy that we get. So to that point, you
know, like there's there's no way that you reach stability by saying that there that we're not going to apply the 2% levy. I know it may sound rough, but
you know, as a you know, in my position as well as your position as board members, you know, we have a responsibility, you know, to our, you know, constituents, you know, to the community
at large, to the students to ensure that we put forth our best effort to put a budget that ensures stability. So we don't end up as you kind of alluded to in the papers where we have,
you know, where we're, you know, in the hole for and I read something about Montlair $20 million. Hasbro Heights. Um, no. Um, forget forgive me. Yeah. Yeah. Like they're like 2025 million and you know it's like
and we could go on and on with >> Yeah. No, I understand. I just wanted to and >> I'm doing this just because not to make you us look bad, but I want people to really understand the severity of this and what happens
when certain things don't occur. And I think that from last week's presentation and just conversations that we've had that you acting superintendent um both are like looking at all aspects of what we
need, what we can utilize and how we can compound them so that we still can have a good education to our students. And unfortunately that doesn't that that means that cuts
will happen and and it it's horrible. No one wants to go through this. I think that the way that you all are looking at it is fair that you can you can do at this point with what we have to work with. So that's all I just wanted. I'm not trying to put you on the spot. >> Oh no. That's where you're going with
it. I appreciate >> open everybody to understand what we're doing. >> Yes. >> And how we can be a bit better and maintain >> and I appreciate you for um bringing out that question so the the the public have a better understanding. >> I made to that point.
>> Sure. >> Mh. I'll do that to Miss Best point. I don't want to oversimplify this as well because we're hitting on some things, but there are also we need to make it very clear to the public there. There are a myriad of mitigating factors. One of the things that I think was not
addressed fully in our last presentation and I and you can quote me if I got if I got you wrong is the valuations in this township >> have been less than 1%. >> Yes, that I did say that. Yes. >> Over the course of how many years?
>> Um we I did I only did the valuation from the prior year to this year because that was based on what we get from the tax assessor. So just from to um Dr. Howard's um >> point behind. >> Yeah, go ahead. Sure. I'll let you.
>> No, I answer that. I'll answer. >> Oh, okay. Yeah. So I think that what um Dr. Howard is bringing up with the evaluations in the community of the homes collectively that part of the reason why the community feels this a
little bit more at the individual level than maybe in another community is because evalu valuations of all of the homes and residences in a community typically increase anywhere from two to
4% on average and year-over-year and in Hillside that increase was less than 1%. Which means that that is significantly below the valuation increase. So that
valuation went up from about 912 million. I'm sorry. Yeah, 912 million to um roughly 915 million. And the issue with that, why he brings that up as a point is because what that does is
it one illustrates that there's not a lot of development that's occurring in the town and two the benefit of the development is that the tax burden is shared across the community, across the
town, but instead you're getting increases not just from the district, but from the township where you feel it more because it's spread, it's still only concentrating like among the same
people. >> There's there's no new development that's occurring where you're spreading that tax levy increase. you're going to feel the impact of this more, you know, which is the reason why when we broke down like how much this costs at an
individual level, you know, on an average home, we said that this probably be, you know, roughly about a thousand plus a year. You know, that we didn't try to insult anyone's intelligence and say that and break it down by the day and say, "Oh, this is the equivalent of
a cup of coffee." and try to make it light because it's it's concrete numbers and you feel this all the same. >> Secondly, you said that we have not heard from the state. It seems that there's some type there's an inverse relationship that they have until the
30th to tell to determine but there's going to be a charter school but yet we have to make a decision >> with a gun our heads. >> Yes. >> So at what juncture do we speak out? Do we speak out to our legislators? And if we have need to do that, why have we not done so before now?
Now we're the 11th hour and we're all under the gun. Why can we speak to that? >> Um, sure. I could speak only to what I know of. And what I do know of is that you know and I include you in this as
well that our board president, our superintendent, other members of the community, you know, have tried as best as they can the channels that they believe that they have access to
to speak to whatever politicians that they may have access to to try to get answers. and have been met with roadblocks on my part, the most
logical person that I could speak to is the county business administrator because that person would be the one that would have access to the state officials, you know, and I and I think that there have been, like I said, there have been, you know, people on our
board, our superintendent, members of the community that have been trying to get answers. So, it's not like I don't want to narrative that no one has been trying to get answers, but they have
been. And unfortunately, they've just been, you know, met with roadblocks built by bureaucracy and whatever else that may be preventing us from, you know, getting these answers because it
is it is unfair and it and your analogy is spot on. like it does feel like that we're we have to do something under duress and under a certain degree of you know um force.
>> Certainly. Could you explain to the public you discussed and briefly in the best terms we can in just simplistic terms the concept of the bank cap and where the surplus is and has gone. >> Yeah. So, and just to clarify that because I did clarify that at the last
meeting that with our we do have bank cap. We did not use it in this budget but I will explain what bank cap is and I will explain what we did using in the budget to contribute to the tax increase. So what bank cap is is
Miss Pest had mentioned that there were years when the district you know attempted to forego not increasing the taxes the tax levy by 2%. So what the state does is the state says well
we think you're going to need this money so we'll hold it for you. This is the concept of bank cap. So we have expiring bank cap of nearly $1.5 million that expires this year and another million
dollars next year. Those while we were at liberty to use that in the budget without a vote from the township. We did not use that in our budget. We originally had it slated in
our budget, at least a year of it. But what ended up happening is that the state um made the decision to what they do is they pri there are certain waiverss that they prioritize over
others. So the waiver that they prioritize based on a health insurance increase was the healthcare waiver. That healthc care waiver same thing in terms of what it allows you to do with the tax levy. It allows
you to raise the tax levy without, you know, additional voter approval. So that increase, that waiver was about a$1.2 plus million dollar increase. You take that plus the 6% of 600 plus, then you
get to roughly um 1.9 plus million, which represents the 6% increase in the overall tax levy. So that's how we that's how we um got here. >> Last question then I defer to Miss
Euiti. Can you give me a scenario with the response of what it would look like? Should we reduce the proposed tax levy to 4% keeping the charter school in the model in the wind so to speak?
>> What would that look like? Well, okay. Just to be clear, as I said before, um, sorry, just to be clear, as I said before, with the charter school, without closing the school or additional cuts,
there's no 4% option. Now, there is no charter school and if there is no charter school and we did have to go 4%. Then at that point what will we be talking
about is instead of a thousand plus per year annually we will be looking more at about nearly $700 annually. So that would be the difference to 4%. So on a
monthly basis, as I mentioned before, the reduction in tax levy means different things to the community versus what it means to district. So for the community, what it means is that on average, each percentage increase is
probably a reduction of about $15 per month in the increases in your taxes. So at 6% if you're at about a monthly of nearly $90 and you know you reduce that by another
30 now you're at almost $60 a month which results in nearly $700 annually. Now in the school district for us that 2% is 600 plus thousand dollar.
That's what that is to us. So, you know, and obviously it's less for the taxpayers because it's spread across a larger amount of people, you know, and I'm not saying that I'm not making light of going from six to 4% and trying to
say that, well, it's only, you know, a possibly a $300 difference in your taxes annually because annually that's a that would be a 30% reduction in the amount of tax increase. But on the school district's end, like I said, that's
$600,000 plus, you know, and when you're talking those numbers, hundreds of thousands of dollars, you're talking multiple staff members, you're talking programs, you know, that's what that's what's at stake for us with that
reduction. So, just wanted to make that clear to get both sides of it. Thank you for the question, Mr. Mr. Shapiro. Yeah, thank you very much. I my question is probably more for a clarification.
Um the last meeting we had there was invention of a 2% every year as an alternative part to getting us off the deficit because you had mentioned that um if we're going
to go 2% every year every year that eventually we'll get out of the deficit. to know how long this will take to get out of it if we went to percent that is without the charter school. >> Okay. So without the charter school
>> because you had mentioned I I made a note just during the conversation >> you had mentioned the 2% every year moving forward as an alternative part that we could go with >> without the charter school of course. >> Yes. Without the charter school. >> Yes.
>> Yeah. So in in that scenario it would it's it's difficult to try to forecast that and the the reason why is because if I'm just looking at it like okay this is a structural budget deficit
of this amount this is the amount that we get from the tax levy over x amount of years right the challenge with looking at it that way even if I did it in a linear fashion where I modeled this
and we said that over the next let's say six years at the 2% levy we're probably roughly around $4 million which is about the equivalent of our structural budget deficit. The problem is that our expenses rise by more than 2%. annually
and that's the challenge with trying to put together that forecast. So in order to do it, it would be in addition to the increase in the tax levy,
we would probably be, you know, looking at um what are some of the things that, you know, potentially that we can cut, you know, like are there maybe additional routes on transportation that
maybe we can do without? like are we you know maybe is courtesy busing on the table now you know like what would be the additional expenditures that could be removed you know from the budget and that's that's the challenge you know
with that so to try to do the model that you were that you're suggesting >> that's the model you had suggested >> well well I mean >> yeah like it would be it Yes, it'd be a best guess. It' be a best guess. Could I
say it with certainty? Probably not, but it would be a best guess, you know. But like you, like I said, you would have to include all of the different obligations that we have and how they've increased
over time. But either way, you know, with that, I still would say that that most responsible path to that that we don't take off any years of you know
just applying our normal left because when you take off years doing that now you're now here you know at the same and because eventually it you know kind of comes to a head where
no increase no increase no increase and now you have all of these obl obligations you have to meet. Now we have to make cuts. So >> So from what you're saying now, you just mentioned that um the 2%
uh does not cover your personal cost or whatever and there might be increases. So are you saying that um there will be more rifting? You already did a whole bunch of rifting. So is there going to be another wave? I mean what's the
>> you mean like in next like in subsequent years >> the same >> you know um there's you know could be could be I could be
it's something that we we really have to look at because it's the thing is is that to put it simply you either have to raise revenue venue or you have to cut expenditures or you have to do a combination of both.
In this budget, we did a combination of both. So that's the simplest way that I can put it with respect to the math that if our revenue only increases 2%. And everything else around us increasing
more than 2% then we need more money and we need less expenses. That's the most honest answer I can give. >> One more la my last question for you. Sure. >> And my question would be that um
according to the president we have like um a time a clock ticking that we need to do some kind of submission. So my question is now you did mention that we have 6% if we don't um if the budget does not go
through the they could send in someone the the is it the state could do it for us and go with what we already have as a tentative budget at 6%. So will would uh will it be smart to reduce
the percentage now because you never know where it's going to fall because we are shooting for 6% 6% 6%. But I'm just saying >> sure fair question and the answer to that is no. Um, and the reason why the
answer to that is no is because at this point in order to we made all the cuts that we believe that we can make, you know, we've already cut a fair amount of staff
at this point. If we're talking more reduction, you know, to the levy now, we're getting to the point where we have to try to find more programs to cut or more curriculum to cut. Like we were
careful not to cut any curricular programs, you know, like >> right like I found like ELA like you know whatever curricular programs we have ELA, math, social studies, science
very to make sure that there were no cuts to those programs because we we believe that when your The budget is the fiscal translation of
the district's strategic priorities. Priorities, the priority of the district has to be students first. Has the moment we start cutting curricular programs,
we're going back on that. We're saying that we're not right or wrong. Um, this should be a fairly quick question. We've discussed the modular
um units at Her Liquer >> and Deanna Taylor. Yes. >> Which Diana Taylor that's complete? >> Um, we have one. You're right. It is complete, but we have one more payment. But >> her and loca hasn't started.
>> So if we're saying there's a decrease in enrollment, is it is that just generally the district or specifically a school? Because what I'm asking where's that are the funds coming for that and
continue. I'm sorry. If we're cutting staff, what you know, have we talked, have we thought about that and how? >> Yeah, I mean,
great question. you know hurt and looker I I don't know the how arrived at doing this unit considering that of all the elementary schools her and looker is the least
populated so I don't I'm sorry Tiana Taylor is the least populated so I I don't know how this arrived at a decision to build modular units for the least popular school.
>> Are we too deep into that that we can't? >> Yeah, Herd and Looker. We're in the final payment of Herd and Looker. >> I'm sorry. Please forgive me. It's late. Wait, Deanna Taylor, we're in the final payment of Deanna Taylor this year. Um, next budget year. And we're in the
second payment of Herd and Looker this coming year. So, in terms of walking them back, if let's just say this, if that was something that we could get out of that contractual
obligation, then that probably >> Yeah, that would have probably been first thing on the table. >> Okay. Just making sure because I know that people are thinking, >> yeah, like like how we >> just want to you're absolutely right.
like how we how we building more space if enrollment is decreasing. I mean >> I get it. >> I do kind of you know just wanted that to be out there. But >> yes,
>> Mr. Po, >> good evening and thank you again Mr. McNeel and the acting superintendent >> as well for all the work done. Greatly appreciate it. Um, a couple of questions. This one I think I'm a little embarrassed to ask because I it's
somewhat elementary. On Friday, May 8th, we received a public agenda notice that appears different public agenda notice that has been circulated here tonight. What exactly are we voting on tonight? Two items or one item?
>> The the finance the finance agenda is the same. So that hasn't changed. I think what's changed is the labor component. >> You clarify that then before we
>> No. Yeah. I mean what was circulated on Friday had two components. What was circulated just now has one component. >> What? >> And they're inextricably linked as well. Right. >> They are inextricably linked. >> Budget and whatever in labor.
>> They are inextricably linked. You are correct. Oh, I thought you was about to tell me something. Oh, >> Shapiro have anything further? Who has answered that? >> I asked one question. >> Yeah, that's one question. What's the
other question? >> You didn't get a response. >> Not that I could have missed it. >> No, the um lab the difference is that the the labor agenda was removed. So, we are not voting on a labor agenda or we are voting on a labor agenda tonight.
>> We are voting on a labor agenda tonight. >> Yes. >> When might we or the humans here? >> We will clarify that in executive session. >> Yeah. Should we do that and then resume any other conversation out here?
>> I do that. There's nothing further. Yes, >> there's a lot of things further, but I don't even know what what I would have to say about anything here tonight. >> I mean, I'm maybe everybody else does. I don't I can't speak for I walked into
this thinking that agenda on Friday was the agenda we were voting on. Apparently, that's not the case, which may be fine. That I don't know what else I might consider important to discuss here with regards to the budget if I
don't know what its other half is, right? Because the two are inextricably linked, right? The budget for next year and the rips or not rips or however that works or whatever our labor agenda is, I I understood them to be go hand in hand.
So, maybe there are other questions. I don't know yet. I I thought that was the elementary question. I didn't realize that something. >> No, actually that's a valid question. >> Valid question. >> And to that point, Mr. Shapiro, I think it lies at this juncture for us to
explain the overarching reason why we are all here and why we've had to reconvene. Um I don't want to step on this is I won't just get into the nuts and bolts, but I'm going to ask Mr. Would you mind explaining exactly why we had to return
in terms of the voting process? >> Yeah, first of all, my understanding is the the labor agenda is is the exact same, right? There are tenure individuals that subject to a rift. There are non-tenurers that would be subject to
non-renewals. Non-renewals are within the superintendent, acting superintendent, chief administrator. They didn't require board action but they are contained within the budget. So because the vote didn't pass for the
budget, it was requested to reconvene today so that you have an opportunity to reconsider the budget because the budget contains essentially the positions that are the subject of the non rules as well as the
subject of the reduction forces. I I'm sorry I that part I understood what I don't understand is the agendas we were not the same >> are not the same >> that was your same they they just didn't
give you the labor agenda this evening but it's the same exact >> correct >> yes that is correct >> so the labor agenda that we're voting on is what was circulated on Friday, May 8th. >> It's a yes or no, >> but it's the same resolution from last week.
>> Yeah, it's the same resolution. >> Forgot to provide it to you today, but they it's the same agenda. >> We do have it. >> Is it right here? It's right here. It's right here. That's what sketchiness is about. >> It's not I think to be in all transparency, Mr. Shapiro, I think there was a faux pon
somebody's part and I think >> that's fine. That's okay. But we just made it into a 10-minute thing that just all we had to say was, "Oh, no. It's right here and we're handing it out." It was all this clo and dagger. We're going to talk about an executive session. We're going to do this. Changes. There's not changes. There's still I just asked
a question about the paper's not here. the paper's not here and it is now here then that's fine >> and it's the same as that what was circulated. >> It's the same as what was circulated and >> nothing has changed. >> Nothing has changed. >> Okay. So that leads to my second question. Last week we met and the
budget didn't pass. >> Yes. >> And now we're meeting again and nothing has changed. Well, we're expecting the votes to change. Is that is that what this reconvening was about? I just want to say again, last week we met >> we were here for till almost 11 p.m.
>> The budget didn't pass. >> Yes. >> And even the labor part, I believe, didn't get a majority of voters. >> Yes. >> And what we just established is that nothing changed. >> That is correct. >> Okay. But we expecting the people to
have changed their votes. >> To be clear, not every board member voted. every No, no, I understand the differenceion and and voting yes and voting no that I and I also understand that one member wasn't here who is currently president member wasn't here and is currently
absent as well. My question just is is that what we were expecting for those positions as they were then to change because the substance hasn't correct >> so when you voted last week
the reason why it didn't pass is because have a majority vote of the full board membership. There were five votes, you know, needed either to pass it or have five votes to deny it. But either way, we didn't have the requisite votes of
full membership, >> correct? >> Which was five votes. So tonight, whether you pass the budget or not, this is the opportunity for the board to have the requisite votes to demonstrate the
fullation position of the substance. >> Oh, I can't say what we're looking for. I can only say that >> nothing has changed. >> Nothing has changed. That's the only thing that I can say. Nothing has changed. >> We haven't tried to do something else to
>> nothing has changed. Yes, >> thations could be abstensions also. That's part of the system. >> Um, hi. Can I make a comment? >> Kind of rough in here. Um, so anyways, um, I just want to thank you guys
publicly um, for doing the presentation and being very transparent um, and being transparent with the community, students, faculty, staff, whatever the case may be. Um just going back to um I think this is a second opportunity
for us to vote on the budget per se what you're trying to say um I guess pound it down when it's possible but also not having a state come in and still so I think you know being more fiscally responsible when it comes to the budget
um but also hounding down on the 6% I going to go up on everyone's taxes per se imagine working in higher red and being level funded for five years. You don't but also if you don't get the charter school, what you're saying is the money is coming to us and we're able
to put it in different things that in the district of course our students first but also let's say possibly bringing back some people. Correct? And you never right, you never want to send the state back money because if you send the state back
money, you will not get money from the state. you will not see that money again. Right? So, I get the whole 4%, I get the 5%, I get the 6%. Right? But I feel like I think everyone is not everyone, but I
feel like, you know, a lot of people have their own personal opinions, their feelings, stuff like that. I think in the forefront, the students should come first. It's basically me coming from this district as a student. the programs that they have now. I didn't have going
to high school, going to the middle school, right? So, keeping the students first, like I understand it's hard out here, jobs, insurance, but I think that just being more responsible like you are
trying to do, per se. I'm not blaming past administration. I'm not blaming six years ago because I wasn't here, right, or in college. But what I'm saying is is that I think people should be open-minded, per se, to certain things. And I get we don't want to make cuts,
but we're not the district that is closing three to four schools. We're not the district that's in $20 million in debt. We're not the district that's on the news right now. And I think we don't need that now. Right? So, I could be wrong. I'm probably voicing my personal
opinion. I'm not being biased at no at all, but I feel like we're losing the train of thought. >> Thank you, Miss Mark. >> Thank you, Miss Sparks. Do we have any other board members before we >> Yeah, I just had another question. >> Is what's contained in this resolution
complete budget? These lines? >> No. what you're looking at in the resolution is that I explained this um >> right it's just the changes the um the budget that was submitted
>> that budget is online we can't post the final budget online until we actually have a final budget approved which is the reason why there is no final budget online and there's no final budget presentation online that I presented last week because we don't have the full
budget. >> What we saw last week in the slides wasn't the full budget. >> I'm saying it was the topline summary of a budget. The budget probably this big. >> Oh, if you mean the budget itself, the line by line item budget correct then.
Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. Right. >> So, no one here has actually seen that. Correct. meaning the members of this board have seen that actual budget. We've seen the topline summary that was presented to the public. I just want to
make clear. >> Yes, sir. We have a we have the line by line item budget here. >> I understand have not yet had access. We haven't >> Yeah, that's correct. >> We haven't discussed that in committee or anything. Correct.
>> That is correct. >> Sure. But I think the public they understand. >> Sure. Did you have any additional questions? >> Now is probably the time to ask if you >> I do. I do. Um, why don't we have it?
Because we >> line personal information. >> No, it doesn't include personal information. It's a line by line budget which which is uh because generally to give
you a line by line item budget um is not as useful than providing the top level analysis of the budget if you're going to look at the lines and say okay
well you know you're looking at hundreds of lines in a budget this budget is like you said this thick And that's what you want to decision that probably in of itself without a top
level analysis of the budget probably doesn't work because the truth is like you know what would you what would you be looking at without the top level analysis of it. I think that's the reason why we have >> when you have presentations generally in
a budget presentation. Um I don't think you go to a budget presentation and someone puts a 40page budget on the screen. That's generally not how that works. I don't think I've ever seen that in a school district because no one would understand that. But what they do
understand is they understand the amount of revenues that are associated with the budget. They understand the amount of expenditures that are associated with the budget and that top level. That's why that's generally shown in a presentation.
>> I would take caution with that though because I don't want to underestimate what the public would understand. Um I didn't mean any disrespect. I didn't mean any disrespect. Um, this is this kind of like like request is kind of if you're looking at your
checkbook ledger. Um, that's something I think this what you're kind of alluding to, Mr. Shapiro. Would I be offset if I said that? >> You and I discussed the absence of information. We've discussed it multiple times >> and I and I just want to add to that. We
not only did we ask for a line by line, we asked for a top level analysis. So I think that they will compliment each other whether >> whether it's perceived that we would understand it or not. I think the mere fact that we asked for it and
>> fair enough >> and didn't get a response that that was what you were considering um is you know I think that's where my concern is. You have to be able to provide us with information so we can make informed
decisions. It's our responsibility to be able to do that. And quite honestly, last week, I'm not very happy with the decision that I I made. um for whatever reason, we have the opportunity to come
back now and make a decision, but without having all of the facts, it is unacceptable for us as board members to be asked to make decisions without having the pertinent information. Let us
decide. >> That's >> let us decide if it's too much or not enough. Right? and then we can but don't decide for us because that is our right and I will say that the last five years
um six that I've been on the board that has and I know that you haven't been here all of those years that has been a consistent theme I like for us to change it >> that's >> I like for us to change it okay because we deserve to have that information so
that we can make better decisions it's about our scholars. It's about our community. We are a part of the community. A 6% increase is not only going toffect impact those that are in the audience, those that are on, you
know, social media watching, it will also impact myself. I live here. I pay almost $15,000 in taxes. So, I know I know um and I I I want to be able to have the information so that I can make
better decisions, right, wrong or indifferent. >> That's fair. >> Thank you. >> And I appreciate your your comment. >> Thank you, Miss Horton Gibbons. And um I think that kind of brings us extinctly to the point. If we go back and just
look at last week's meeting, um my colleagues have all spoken well and just spoken directly to where we were going with it. The reason why we asked that is because this stuff is what? It's public information and we are the public. >> We are the public. And again, it's not a
knock. I guess this is all new. It's a learning process. But going forward, uh we definitely need to take this as a learning opportunity. They say when you know better, you do better. Uh we're in the trenches of this now. So we're going to have to operate with what we have in hand. And I think that's
where some of the reticence is coming in is that all of us are making an 100% decision based on 70% of information. And that's a difficult thing to do. Um that said, if there's nothing further, I don't want to belabor this process or
the evening. So do nothing further. Do I have a motion to go into executive session? >> Motion. >> Second. All in favor? Be it resolved pursuant to the open public meetings act that the board of education meeting exe close the executive session at this time to
discuss matters relating to but not limited to personnel pending or anticipated litigation labor negotiations excuse me contract negotiations in particular student attorney client privilege and the board will reconvene
the public session at the conclude conclusion of the close session. The matters discussed in close session will be disclosed to the public as soon as the need for confidentiality no longer exists. Thank you for your patience. Hopefully, we'll be back to you quickly.
You need a bio break or a water break, now is a good time. Part: 2
Motion >> public session. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Thank you once again. Thank you to my esteemed colleagues. Um and again, thank you to the public for just being patient with us, but please know these decisions
don't come easy. Um before we move forward, Mr. McNeel, you have an announcement? >> Yes, I do. Um just give me one second, please. >> Okay. So, I do apologize for this, but if you look at page four of the agenda,
it says that there's a net change of $55,950. That um that is a mistake. The net change there should be zero. It it has no impact on the final number. It's just that there was a mistake in putting the
number there. So when we calculated all of the changes um that are plus and minus the net effect results is zero not 55. So I needed to make that clear before we vote on that resolution. Yeah.
And as I said it has no impact on the resolution itself. It's more just um the numbers that are in it. So, if everyone can make that that noted change. Do we have any questions
from the public on that change? Okay, that said, um before we go into moving the motions, um and I know this is a bit unorthodox, but I think the times certainly call for it.
Um yes, by the song of the same name. Um please be advised again that the decisions made here are not those that were made arbitrarily. Um a lot of work went into this on both sides on the administration side and the board members side and that there is the hope
that there will be some type of decision made regarding the charter school some other things down the road that may change the outlook of where we are. hopefully in the positive. So these are things that Miss Horton Given, did you want to just take a piece on that before you go?
>> Oh, um, thank you, um, Dr. Howard. I believe that, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. know that there may be a possibility for um even with the risk that we'll be able to bring individuals
back, but that's really contingent upon um the finalization of the approval or denial of that that charter school effect. >> Yes, that is correct. You know, and even with that, you know, as you know, I do want to caution that, you know, the the
majority of people will probably not come back, but there's a possibility that some will. you know I just want to be fully transparent you know about that so nothing is um you know like misconstrued you know about it but yes the possibility you know
>> and there were 21 correct >> yes that was the final number that we yeah that was like yeah >> estimated [clears throat] >> estimation >> that's [sighs] missiti
would you move the items under finance I move the item on the finance one, two, three. Thank you. [snorts] >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Um, roll call. Miss Best,
Miss Aguide. >> I say um yes to one and two but no for three. Thank you. >> Okay, sure. >> Missra. Yes. Miss Horton Given, >> is it possible to ask a question about
numbers? >> I think so. Yeah. If you have a clarifying question. >> Yeah, sure. >> So, for medically, we're not supposed to. But is it a clarifying question? >> It's clarifying for me, >> but [laughter] okay.
>> Nobody else but me. Um number three, the adoption of the final budget with modifications to the sensitive what >> exactly? >> So basically that's that's where you see
this long list of accounts and you see the you see the column where it says tenative budget and final final budget. That's what that resolution is pertaining to. So when it's talking about the changes between the tenative
and the final budget, that's what this resolution is about. Because what generally happens is that you submit a tenative budget, the tenative budget is approved by the county BA. If there are changes between the time
you submitted that tenative budget and when you drafted the final budget, you must document every single change to every single account line >> line by line. That's the reason why when you look at this, you don't just see numbers and the and the amount of the
change, but you also see the individual account line that's impacted. >> Okay. >> I mean, thank you for asking the clarifying question. And that's actually an important question for you to be able to understand what you're voting on.
>> Okay. So, give me a second. >> Please continue. >> She asked for a second. Yeah. No. >> Okay. >> Mr. Aai. >> Yes.
>> Miss Parks. >> Yes. >> Mr. Shapiro. Um, in addition, I'm sorry this is out of order, but it's a technical note on the resolution. There is an [clears throat] error in the last
paragraph of item number two. That correction should be read into the record and I don't know if you need to reconfirm the votes or not. >> Restate that one more time. >> There are two errors [laughter] that >> the final paragraph, correct?
Yes, I I see them. >> Yes. That the and I'll read that into the record that now therefore it be resolved that the the correction would be Hillside Board of Education and the
County of Union and that will be the correction. Thank you, Mr. Shapiro, for pointing that out. >> We don't need to resertify for that doing Please continue. >> Oh, okay.
All right. So, Mr. Shapiro, you had said um your vote was an extension, right? Okay. >> VP Hargrave. >> Yes. Okay. Um, and President Dr. Howard >> [snorts] >> Yes.
Okay. Um the resolution passes with a majority vote of the full membership. Five votes. Okay. All right. >> Yes. Yes. Would you move the items under labor?
>> Public does not have these items and we do apologize. There's a profile on the parts. >> Do I still need to move >> Mr. Shapiro? Would you actually there's a few more copies? >> I would like to move item one under labor relations. Yes.
>> 22. Yes. And no. >> Okay. Okay. Um just give us a second. So um given you can >> I like to correct my vote and um one and two yes and three no.
>> Okay just one and two yes and three no and give us vote was previously no >> that's on finance. Yes. >> Yes. >> One and two yes and three no.
Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And still, you know, based on based on that the right, it still passes with the vote of full board um majority. >> All in favor? >> Forgive me. It's late.
All right. What do I >> I apologize. Who was the second on that? >> Thank you, Miss Parks. Just call it. Just roll call. >> Okay. So, roll call. Um, >> some good times.
>> Miss Best. >> Yes. >> Miss Eu. Yes, >> Mr. Astra. >> Okay. So, in good conscience to our taxpayers and
our outstanding employees, I can't let them bear the damage from previous administrations. So, I'm going to say no. >> Okay. >> Miss Horton Given. >> No. Mr. Okai.
Yes, >> Mr. Shabiro. >> Oh, sorry, Miss Parks. [snorts] >> Yeah, >> Mrs. Shakaro. >> [clears throat]
>> VP Hargrave >> and board president Dr. Howard. For the record, having struggled with my first decision with the hope that there will be a change down the road, I cannot in good conscience vote for this one. My answer is no.
Okay. Um by there were four yes votes which means that this resolution does not pass. and just >> No, we need five. There are four. Okay, I'll call out the yeses and you
can correct me if I'm wrong. >> He's No, you got it right. You're correct. >> Oh. Oh, okay. Yes. Yes. Yes. It doesn't pass by majority of the full board membership because there's four votes. Um, just keep in mind that this
resolution with the budget, the resolution connects directly with the budget. [laughter] >> I'm just making the point. That's all. So, it's so so it's not unknown.
It's not >> it's not unknown that this res the current budget because right because the resolution um here is the
you know like the staff that would be impacted are it's built into the budget that we're >> that were presented. So what I'm trying to say is that albeit not that clearly
what I'm trying to say is >> right >> okay then that's fine. >> No, there's um I just got clarification from council and we're um everything is okay. So >> just to be clear, that resolution failed. That's it. It failed.
>> Exactly. And that's what he clarified. >> Who said yes, said no. It's important for us to know the yes and the nos. >> We need to know names. Who said yes and who said no? Unless
>> um I did call I did call out the names as Okay. Okay, thank you. >> Sure. >> So, what happens, >> right?
>> No, since it fails, right? Does that will people of course will be retained, right? And it will go into the next budget. Correct. Or not right now. >> Right now. It's this budget.
>> Yeah, it's this budget. Yes. >> Yes. >> Right. So, what does that mean? Do we still do we make more cuts in certain places and stuff like that?
>> Move it again. >> Yes. Do you care? My majority of the board. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Okay. >> It's best. Would you move it? >> The motion is moved again.
>> Who? You move it. >> Then a motion to reconsider. >> Did she vote yes or no? >> She voted yes. >> So, somebody >> Somebody who voted no would have to move it. >> Someone who voted no would have to move
it. [clears throat] >> Someone who voted no would have to move the motion. >> Move it and second it. Yeah. Someone who voted no. [clears throat] >> What's What's the purpose? A motion to reconsider can only be moved by somebody that voted on the prevailing side of the
motion >> and the prevailing side was the people that voted no. >> So somebody that voted no would have to make the motion. >> Actually there was no prevailing side because it was even 44. So what would that be? >> Motion failed. So >> failed because people voted no. >> So then someone who voted no would have
to make a motion and I cannot. So therefore Right. So basically my question was to clarify all of this because it did not pass right and this will affect that the
budget that we're bringing in for 2026 2027 there has to be more cuts being made and I specifically ask to programs for the students and those programs that we have are going to be cut
>> right So what they're asking is I guess pink because you said could we motion to vote again but you can't because you correct >> no no I suggested a technical solution to the current problem
>> which was perhaps someone should consider a motion to that's what I threw out and that's what created this conversation >> but the motion f so >> yes do we have a motion to his point do
we have to reconsider? >> I can't. >> Yeah. Why can't you? >> Yes. >> You voted no. >> Change the outcome. >> You're in the prevailing side, which is the no side. So, if you wanted to, you
could. Nor do I >> can I ask a question before we go on and my question will I say clarity we are saying that we are now
more cuts right >> for the students >> we're for the students >> I don't know cuz we don't need more cuts See, this is a very difficult decision for everybody and we and we already knew
what the consequences are for what we voted for. And I think we all voted our conscience. So, I'm not sure why we're going back and forth of why we need to revote because none of this is hard. I mean, easy. I'm sorry. None of this is easy. Like, nobody wants anyone to lose their
jobs. But we all have been presented the facts of what's going to happen and we still voted the way that we felt we needed to. So why are we doing it again? Take what you did and move on. Like it's hard, but we gonna be here all
night again saying the same thing that we knew last week. This is not easy. Like we and I don't want to keep saying that we live here and we pay. We know that. That's why we're elected because we live in the community and it affects everybody.
But I'm making the best decision that I can for what I know for the students and at day he's in control >> and I don't know why we need to revote or why we keep going back and forth. Go ahead, Mr. Go ahead, Mr.
Y. >> Is there a second? >> Is there a second? >> Yes, you can. >> No, >> there's a motion to reconsider. Is there a second? >> Okay, thank you.
>> Is there a second? >> Okay. All in favor? >> Just like what he did second. >> We want Yeah, but we want somebody who's on the on the no side to second,
>> right? Yeah. Miss was not on the no side. So, someone on the no side has to second it. Is that what I'm hearing? >> I believe that's what council. >> That's what I'm saying. >> Yeah, council is saying that. So, is there someone on the no side?
>> Okay. It's been moved. It's been moved in. >> It's been moved and second. So, now we'll just recall the vote again, please. [clears throat] >> The vote in the rec. Okay. The motion. Go ahead, please. >> Do we have the second? Yes.
[clears throat] >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Just to reconsider the vote, not the vote, >> right? >> Whether or not you want to reconsider it
and then pass the vote to act for the actual. >> All right. Okay. So, roll calling to reconsider the vote since we have the second since the motion has been seconded. Okay. So, to reconsider the vote for this agenda item.
[sighs] >> Miss Best, >> Miss Agued Day. >> Yes. [snorts] Miss Estram. >> Miss Horton Given. >> No. >> Mr. Okai.
>> No. >> Miss Parks. Mrs. Shapiro. >> Yes. >> Le Hargrave. >> No. >> And President Dr. Howard. >> Yes. [clears throat] >> Okay.
that. So, let's know that we're reconsidering this. Okay. >> Get past dealing with Trump. We'll get past this too. It's done. [laughter] This is done. You guys, please.
>> Okay. >> Do we have a motion to adjurnn? >> Well, thank you. >> Is there a second? >> All in favor? >> Okay. I got