We're now ready for a word of prayer. Vice president Washington. Heavenly father, we're here tonight. Please guide us with wisdom and help us make these decisions that will guide our district over the next few years as we navigate these waters that all of us are going through right now. And know that we all are here for the right reasons. In your name we pray. Amen. Amen. Thank you. The trustees will now go into a we had no individual sign up to speak this evening, so there'll be no, audience with individuals, tonight.
So we'll move on to the rest of the agenda. The trustees will now go into executive session for the purpose permitted by the Texas Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code, section five five one dot zero zero one through five five one dot one four six, Section five five one dot zero seven one, consultation with attorney. Section five five one dot zero seven two. Section five five one dot zero seven four, personnel matters, appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties,
discipline, dismissal, complaint. Section five five one dot zero eight two, school children, school district employees, disciplinary matters, or complaint. Section five five one dot zero eight two one, personally identifiable information about public school student and to conduct interviews to fill vacancy in place six on school board. The time is 05:03. We will return as soon as possible. Test. We are back from executive session at, 06:55.
We'll now, proceed with the rest of our meeting. We have a work session and discussion, on budget on the agenda tonight, doctor Wilson. Yeah. Thank you. So we did based on at the at the board's request, missus Strannathan and, mister Allison have put together a budget presentation for us. The the the thought is to jump in when you have questions. It's more of a dialogue and a conversation in this setting than it is presentation and informality like we like we had during our regular meetings.
So we have quite a bit to cover, so I'm gonna turn it over to John and let them get started. John traded it off to me. I'm gonna remember that. Right? So okay. Welcome, everybody. One of the things that you'll see is that in the presentation, the first part of this is pretty much duplicating. Is it good? Pretty much duplicating what we've seen in our prior presentations along with, our budget and then long range planning and stuff like that. So we'll go through those sections pretty quick. We've got a a couple of slides in there that'll give you updates on how
we're closing the margin there in reference to, what we need and then what we're coming up with in reference to, to to close that gap with some revenue. So if you have any questions, just ask. After that, then, John's gonna go over, the MEP and go through that with everybody. So and talk about that. So let me know if I'm going too fast or if you want me to go slower or faster, and we'll jump through that. So, just a quick review.
You can see on the first slide that, what we have up there is just talking about how the funding occurs. I think this is a very nice slide for us to put in there, especially if we're gonna put it out there on the website for people to be able to look at and and understand exactly what that funding looks like, and then just a very quick version. So we know, you know, that, the basic allotment is at the $62.50. So that's what we've done our calculations from, but we do know going on through that is that it is also dependent on the ADA.
The next slide, we know where we stand with the school funding. That hasn't changed. And then following there, just talking a little bit about the local and the state, in reference to, you know, even if we get the extra, we don't get to keep the extra. So we have to give that back. And, that came up at some of the tables last night and in the conversation, which I think was great so that people understood that because I I think sometimes there's a struggle with that is, how come you don't get that? Well, the state regulates that on whether we get to keep that or not.
So So if you looked at our last, budget statement at the last board meeting, we were the question you'd had when we were 10,000,000 more. Do you wanna talk a little bit about why that revenue showed up and the ramifications of that? So is are you referencing to the 4,000,000 that we saw that when we went back and they were making up the difference in that? So there was the, the the difference. So when we Oh, I got you. When we establish a budget, and you all approve that, we still don't have our
final totals on local tax. So those are those are estimated based on what Tad has provided us as well as the state. So, the assessed valuation went up some, and the collection rate, maintained, it was it was higher than they had originally anticipated. So you you're seeing we're collecting more revenue than what we had projected in our our budget.
The downside of that is we don't get to keep that. That will flow through, and then the state will reduce their portion of funding based on those numbers. So that's that's one of those unknowns, and we'll touch on it here in in just a minute that as we continue to prepare, we can only do that based on the information we have. And those final tax values don't come in until after we've approved a budget and, in the tax rate. So, you'll you'll see some differences. In some years, it's been a little less than was projected.
This one, they saw about a 2% gain in the, base assessed valuation totals. So that, brought in more revenue in theory for the school district, but the state will just offset each dollar we receive there. They'll they'll reduce their portion of it. Payment. Well and can I make just one point too is is we often get the question about when we're lowering our local tax or raising our local tax? Why aren't we raising our local tax when we are in such a need for funding?
And I think we just it it probably is behooves us to reiterate that even if we raise our taxes, we don't get that money. It it goes away. It yes. And it it it goes back, and we have this conversation. And, every time we get ready to set the tax rate on the the the MCR, which is the the the maximum compressed tax rate, we're actually given what our maximum tax rate would be. So the the concept of, well, you could go ahead and raise taxes more and that bring in more more funding for the school district.
Once we hit that max, so we have a max and we have a minimum with the MCR. And it it it's this, analogy of if we actually, set our tax rate at the maximum allowed, it's not gonna bring in additional funding to the school district because the state is just going to offset that and and balance out. So what we're allowed to have, so to speak, is set. And if we collect more, the state will, participate less in in what they give
us, and the same is true, and they set at that MCR, they set the bottom limit. So anything we go below that, then, the state approaches that as though we're not contributing our portion to the tax rate. So they will lower theirs and lower our enrichment capabilities. So it's always that that jungle. We have a very narrow band on what can be the minimum, what can be the maximum. You're exactly correct. Do you mind if I piggyback off that real quick? No, ma'am.
So when you're saying that these the projected revenue, whenever we're putting that number in, once are you saying that once it's set, it's set and that anything that comes in above that then flows to the state? Is that why? Because once you set that number, or is that already based on the maximum that we can pull in? So it's a little bit of both. Okay. So when we when we do our revenue projections and you all pass a budget, our our expenditures are set against that expected revenue.
Okay. So, if the revenue exceeds the budget, the then and where the tax rate was set on on what that would generate us, then the the it's gonna flow to the state. On the second portion of your question, would you repeat that for me? Yeah. So I mean, basically, you answered it with so the formula is, when you're looking at what our tax rate is, so that that basically sets what our projected revenue
should be. And so when it it actually comes in above that because we collected more, then that's where it's funding to the state. So my my other part of the question was, is that because of the, MCR, which sounds like it's part of the calculation and that's why. Comes into into that calculation. Yep. So as as we if we collect more, we don't get to keep it. So there's to my understanding, there's there's there's a a narrow window of the maximum and minimum, and we need to balance somewhere between there. If revenues come in too high, the state says, okay.
You're gonna you get to keep that money essentially, but we're gonna take it out of the money you give you next year. Comes in too low, they're like, oh, well, you don't need that much money. We're gonna reduce what we give you. So you can have is that right? You pretty much have to keep that you that stay within that small bin window, which is why as as, Heather pointed out, this happens all the time where people under the conception under the perception that if we just raise taxes, then the school will have more money. No. They will for one year, and then it gets taken back the next year. So it's a very temporary fix that just turns into a problem.
Whereas if you are too low and you don't tax enough, the state gives you less in total as well. So it has to be the happy minimum that most people just don't understand. Yeah. Well, I'm I was more talking about so that number that we are putting on the spreadsheet, when you see something like, oh, we've actually collected 10,000,000 more because that's not some that's not uncommon for the community to see that and be, oh, we have an extra $10,000,000. What I didn't realize is that it just flows directly to the state because there is only I mean, when you're looking at our tax rate and you and you
project that and you put that there, anything above that is just gonna go straight to the state. I wasn't aware of that. That. So that's that's really interesting. So, yeah, I saw that originally whenever we were talking at the last board meeting, and I was like, what is this $10,000,000, and what can we do with it? Nothing. So that was that was good to learn. Yeah. It looks good for a moment. Alright. So going on on our next slide, what we have there is just where do our funds go. Just sharing with everybody in the community once again on the largest percentage there, of it's kinda misleading if you look at it thinking that we're getting a large chunk,
which we're not getting a large chunk. So going on from there, expenditures, this goes into where does the expenditures then break down locally with our contracted services. As you can our supplies, materials, and other operating costs, and you can see, of course, that the payroll and benefits is always gonna take that the largest chunk out of that. So Which is the reason that our, our solutions to the budget issue are going to involve positions. That's that's where the largest, investment is.
So when we need to make reductions, it's going to have to involve positions because all the all the other portions of, the budget, you could cut all of them, and you're still not going to have, a as large amount as as you do from your, payroll. And, Jonas, or and Pam, either one of you can answer this. But just real quick, remind our community what kind of falls in that category of, other operating costs. I'll take that one. Okay. So when when we talk about, other operating costs, you're you're going to have, some,
you've got your contracted services, which is, the color challenged one here, the 8%, would be our transportation, food service, some some of those areas. Other operating, costs can be, other contracts we have. It it would be our TAD fees. It's gonna be everything that doesn't fit in into those other categories. So it's it's gonna be a wide assortment of items that would be listed under
under other costs. On the summary that's in each, at each board meeting with our budget, That's probably the easiest example to look at because it breaks it down by the funds that we have to report by, and you could see how how each of those those fit. So it it gives you a little better breakout than this. This is pretty pretty basic. Mhmm. Alright. Going into our challenges, our challenges have not changed. Insufficient and then the complex state funding formula, which we have already discussed, declining enrollment,
our student attendance, which, even though we'll see that on a slide where it's gone up, which is good, but it's also being offset then by the declining enrollment at the same time. So inflation and then underfunded mandates and state Robin hood schemes, those have not changed on us. The next slide, you'll see that declining enrollments with that, which we, I know this is our, '23 or, I'm sorry, '25, '26. But when looking at the demographer and then also looking at the lower grades and
putting those together, looking it's not increasing as we keep moving forward. So the attendance on that is what we're seeing at 94.6. Before spring break, we were seeing it at 95. But if you look at past trends, we know that does not hold coming in in the spring here. So we're hoping it will, but knowing that it potentially so we plan for the '94 to keep it around that 94, 94.6 when we're planning out the budget. So this is kinda I have this question for Corey.
When did we start the truancy court? When when did we hire that company? Was it in the '22? So it it was it was at the very end that last some that last nine weeks. We did a little bit of 2023. And so 2023, 2024 is when we we started in earnest. And we're seeing positive results from that and and getting enrollment back. Yeah. So 20.1% is about 200,000. Mhmm. So every point 1% that you see is an additional 200,000 for the district.
So, that's but, again, it kinda to Chelsea's point when she was talking about is is the formula fixed? Yes. Except on things like this with our variables that we put in. If we're off on our variable, and that's the challenge of it. If we're off on a variable by point 1%, that's $200,000. And it's kinda hard to predict when you're gonna have a really rough flu season or when you're gonna have, you know, opening day for the Rangers game or or
something like that during the day. There there are a a variety of reasons that are that are difficult for us, that it's we take our best estimate, but on the back end, TA will settle up sometimes, not even that same year. Sometimes it's a couple years later with ADA and say, hey. Our refined ADA is actually this. We're gonna keep we're gonna hold back another several $100,000. So these are that's why this is so important, but so difficult to to project
out. Well, and then that's the other factor of with the final exams or mid midterm exams and such is getting those Yeah. Those high schoolers to come in Yes. To school. And and that's a good point because that change was made two years ago. Mhmm. And is which you'll see a big jump in that as well, because high school exams had we had it before, it was costing about 500, semester. At least Yeah. Almost a million dollars a year. Just in absences. And and I do wanna, compliment the the community as we started talking about attendance.
And we made the the final changes, which were not popular at at first, the truancy court, a lot of efforts to to communicate how important attendance is. You know, asking parents, please don't schedule that dental appointment till after the the the window for attendance and those types of things. The community has responded really well, which we can see by, by our our attendance continuing to to to creep up. And that's been something I know your conversation around, our campus is focused on.
We talked to the PTAs, and it really was a community effort to to bump that. And it's, you know, it's a million plus we're we're going to see compared to where we were with the attendance rate. For the record, I do wanna say that on opening day, I always wait till after attendance is taken to take the kids out. Just wanna say that. And we appreciate that. So just real quick on, on the point Heather raised on the the truancy court. I recall at the time this was put in place a fair amount of discussion on the the corresponding costs, for the truancy court, because there is a cost to
it. Maybe that goes into other operating costs perhaps. Mhmm. But the ROI, against what we pay versus what we've returned through the, the budget increase through the ADA, is is terrific. And I think we get is it an annual update? Yes. On so we'll be seeing at some point, another report on the truancy update. But I just wanted to point that out. Thank you for bringing it up, that the the ROI on that is terrific.
Well, I don't wanna take away the fact that it's truancy court. Yes. Because kids are missing school, but the most important factor is we're getting kids back into school. And and if if people aren't aware of the truancy court, it really is I wanna even call it a magical program because I've seen it in action, and the people that are in place that that consult with the parents and the kids do a fantastic job. So it's it's it's kudos to to, Corey for bringing that a couple years ago and and to the families that go and interact with it. I think it's as positive an experience as it can be.
And they and they do a great job, and it is about supporting. The the good news to to, mister Burt's, comment is we actually are able to use title four, and so that's not our general operating money or revenue. That's kind of the federal side that is restricted, but there is a caveat that allows us to use that for increased graduation and and those things. But but I would also say you're right. I think we we talk about attendance a lot in terms of dollars, but we also know that every day a kid is absent, academic performance suffers.
And so from the academic side, there is a correlation between number of absences and student performance. So although we talk about the the financial, it's, the academic side is just as important. You know, and I agree. I think that I've always been in favor of this program because of the ROI, right, investment versus the return. But since we're talking about it, I mean, I have had several members in the community that have went through the process, and you've sent me letters and stuff like that. It does seem a bit harsh, maybe a little too aggressive.
So I think as we continue to evaluate, I obviously love the program. It's good for the dollars. It's good for the or it's good for the kids and the education perspective, but we we probably need to maybe look at making it a little less harsh because, some of the stuff that's stuff that I read was a little, like, that is a little too aggressive. Yeah. Actually, I had I I wrote down a question. That's why I was writing furiously while you were talking. And this is not something, obviously, we're gonna have because it's something that I just thought of. But, when it pertains to the, truancy court, I would love to see a number
whenever we get the next report on just how many students actually go through truancy court, either decide to homeschool after going through that, or that we actually turn back into full ADA with the school. So if that's something that we can just include, that would be great. I mean, maybe it's because it's harsh or maybe it's just they've decided a a different route, but, I I would love to see that number as pertaining to the budget. So Alright. Moving on to inflation now. So, this was a slide.
We brought it back in that, we put gush way early in the budget, but I think one key to look at with this, excuse me, is that going back and calculating since 2019, that what that increases look like. And I know we did that calculation back in the budget that if we, the basic allotment was brought up to that and just kept up with inflation, it would be, well over 7,800 is what we should be getting with that. So I think that's important to look at that we're not even keeping up with
the inflation. Moving on, these have not changed. These are the underfunded mandates that have been out there that do impact. These are, this is money that we have to plan for and look for that, do not get funded, even though they're mandated to be funded. And we, I know that, in special education, that one continues to go up, as we continue to meet the needs of the students in the district. I I do have one thing to add on this. So we were recently on a call with TEA and, of superintendents across the state.
And you see reading academies on there, and we are adding math academies. The state is adding math academies. The comment was made, there is a cost to this, but you already received the money. It's already factored into your system. It's I have not seen it factored into our system. I believe that the that it was explained as that's already in your pre k, k three, or or your early literacy, your early math allotment. So just know that's a very expensive I think if we contract out 5,000, per
teacher, if we contract that out, we've opted to hire somebody internally to get our folks through that because it's it's cheaper. But that's an upcoming cost too that we we buy everything that I heard on the call, that we don't anticipate any more funding for, but that's gonna increase that quite a bit. So we have to have every teacher, Jennifer, what grade for math academies?
Yeah. So like with the reading academy. So multiply 5,000 times the number of k one two three teachers we have in the district. Man, I wouldn't even guess. Oh, yeah. Principals, assistant principals. It'll be well over $1,000,000. It'd be well over 1,000,000. K. Next slide up. We just have a basic graphic here in reference, added some color to the slideshow. Right? In reference to an enrollment, these things are the budget reality. Our enrollment is going down. Our costs are going up and then our revenues are staying flat. And so that's the pressure that we continually have to look at as we keep
preparing this budget to move forward. And our timeline, that has not changed. We keep moving on that. I do want to say thank you, to the departments that are behind me because they have been a big part of this as we've been going through this timeline and as we have been this has been, a lot of digging in the last few weeks. And as we continue to move forward as to what we can pull out of, budgets and out of departments and also with staffing that is going to have minimal
impact on our programming so that, we're trying to stay as far away from that as we can with the programming with our students. So Pam and John, I I just wanna back to the timeline, and I know we've discussed this before. John smiling, like, anticipating the, the question here. We've talked about the backwards way where we have to approve a budget basically in in June, but we don't know all the revenue components of it till the tax
laws come in until, what, August? July, August. July, August ish. And that that presents a great deal of complexity, I know, for staff. It it produces some uncertainty for the board. I like to prove a budget based on what I know, not what I think is gonna happen, but especially when you're talking numbers in the in in the millions like we are. And we've had discussions. I say we it's kind of a collective discussion on the the challenges of doing
a budget to bless you. Bless you. Doing the doing the budgets the way we do them today versus rolling back to, like, a, you know, a a September, budget process, which is what we had apparently in the past until it was changed a few years ago to, a July 1, June 30 budget. So it's kinda like two pronged. I know it's difficult to do it the way it is, and you don't I think we've talked about you're gonna investigate it, but what are the challenges of moving
it back to, a a September one? And does that even though that might be complicated in the overall scheme of things, does it make it easier on the front end to do a budget? So yes and yes, we think. We we have started, investigating what it would take for us to to change our our budget year. It's been interesting as we've talked to to the auditors and and some others. They're unaware of anybody that's actually done it. We do believe it's possible there would be it would be a very the year
in which we we would attempt to do it would be very interesting because, in essence, we're gonna have to do two budgets. You're gonna have to approve two budgets. We have questions around tax rate settings and and and some of those those types of things. So we're in that investigative stage to see, what does it take, you know, and to evaluate. Is is that a a move that's positive for us? It would definitely help with setting the budget.
You know, there's there's a lot of other implications when it comes to to procurement, contracts, those types of things. So we're we're we're definitely in an active, investigative phase on trying to see what what all that would involve. When the, when a number of districts when districts were given the opportunity to move to a, June 30 end of fiscal year, there there were a number of districts across the state that that did it. From what I understand, probably 40%.
Part of that is it was a little bit of what was perceived as as a financial windfall. Where that windfall occurred was really on paper. Mhmm. So my assumption is, and this is just with with without all the facts at all, we might see the opposite occur when we make that switch for a budget year. But, again, in real dollar sense, it will be more the accounting aspect of it than, you know, we'd actually lose, money in that process.
There's just a lot of questions. We we started with the auditors. We've reached out for some conversation with TEA, and, you know, we we feel like we've got the the next six months or so to take a look at this. And what would it take, and is it is it even feasible? So so my perspective on this is, because this is one of the first questions I asked after I was first elected was why I was seeing districts with different fiscal years. And it was explained to me that Keller had chosen to move to June 30. And then, you know, as you learn to understand the the different timelines and when
things are due and when you find out information from the state and whatever, it never made sense to me why we ever moved to June 30. So I I kind of I kind of piggyback off what you said. I think that the only real benefit to it is that optically, on paper, it showed a windfall flaw of cash for one year. But and and so it it creates that appearance. And and the reverse would be to move back. It's gonna optically create a massive deficit even though the cash flows are still operating the same. It's just when you document them.
Right? So that's that's kinda what I think. I think from an an organizational perspective, it makes way more sense to have it later in the year than June 30, but it's you know, can we communicate to the community what that really means and what it's gonna look like versus the reality. Right? And one of the things we'll have to do is look because going from September back to that, your gap you don't really have a gap in those budgets. But going forward, when you've got one budget ending in June and another one not
officially starting until September, you've got that gap there. That that's that's what I've been reaching out and asking questions about with other CFOs. It's just saying, okay, When you moved, you know, what did that what did that gap look like? I wanted to know a little bit more about that. And especially when you've got contracts, because there's contracts that end in the summer and other things that we would have to look at, you know, restructuring and, going from a twelve month taking somebody off of a twelve month and then moving them up,
you know, into that to fill that gap if we're gonna try to align the contracts also with the budget. So it's just, you know, it's just a lot of questions. Coming up. Wouldn't need I mean, we want if I was doing it with one of my companies, the way I would do it is I would extend I would attempt to extend their contracts by an additional three, four months or whatever is necessary to align. I think I would imagine most of them would comply or be okay with that. Yeah. And I was in a district where we had to do we contracts were off from the budget, and we did that. And so they had it was an eighteen month contract instead of a twelve month
for one year to get it caught back up. So So Yeah. That makes sense. A lot of moving pieces to it. There are some restrictions on contract length, and so we just gotta we we have some assumptions about it. Now we've gotta, to get the details, and, of course, we'll be coming back to you as as we take those steps and learn more, for further discussion. Alright. And then to our now we're gonna get into the budget assumptions. Those have not changed either. We know that we've got the, no new revenue coming in, that we're staying flat
on our growth and our tax growth. Our balanced budget is our goal. And then we've got the loss of $10.83. So, and our ADA at 94%. So this is where we start with on the next slide where we've brought this forward to you all, in the past, in reference to what it, what is that cost? So these costs that are above and above, and what we need to do with that and to fill that gap. So we start with this knowing that we've got 12,000,000, that's gonna be above and
beyond. And then that's where we go back in and we've met with departments and we've looked at, you know, the staffing and how do we get that staffing to match with our student population and our student needs and start looking at that where we can make those adjustments. Once again, I cannot say enough thank yous to the staff behind us that have helped with that and have come forward and made offers. So I wanna add one other thing in there. It's it's our staff up here has done a phenomenal job.
Our campus principals have done a really phenomenal job. So we have what happens is we go through and we put out the projections on what we believe. And then Sarah and Aramee have met with every principal. They've gone through the schedules. They've gone through course requests and have sat down and say, does this work? And there have been a few that they've had to come back and say, it just doesn't. We need we we projected to lose this many FTEs or add this many. We actually need a different number.
And so we've had to, it's a give and take. But I do want you to to know the principals have been involved in that process and but also that they've done a really, really good job. Our secondary principals, we thought we here's your numbers, and they were like, we got it. We got it. And so, really proud of their work and, the and the level of detail and attention to detail that they put into this. And I would say the collaboration's been really good. Like, even when people have come back and said that, you know, this isn't gonna
work, there was there there haven't been hard feelings or contention. Everybody has worked together as to come back and try to make that work so that it doesn't have that feeling of things are being taken away or, you know, we're trying to run a program or take, you know, something away from that building. So and the principles have been phenomenal with that. I totally agree with that. So looking at our assumptions here, we're still looking at that loss of, student basic allotment, which we kept that number at the 6.7.
Still looking at wanting to move forward, you know, with a raise of 1% to all staff at 2,000,000 and then a step for all staff, in reference to teachers that have that step, that ability to take that step. Transportation, that this is part of the contract, and John can jump in there on that on what that looks like. Or Yeah. We have, in in the contract, there are each year escalators. So, both last year, this year, and next year, we're at about 4%.
The in years past, we've been as high as 9% or so. So, you know, this is this is not counting on increase to to gas prices, those those types of things. This is the on the on the base contract. Now if we offset the number of buses that we need, that helps offset some of this cost as well. Right now, it's a little too early to project how many routes we may not need based on the the loss of students.
It just depends on where those students are. And, you know, we continue to look at at areas of transportation. You know, one of those that we've talked about and continue to analyze is a three tiered system, and that means a bus is going to do an elementary route. It's gonna do a middle school route, and it's gonna do a high school route. So it means you need fewer buses. But to accomplish that, it means that our school start times all have to be an hour different because you need forty five minutes for the route and fifteen minutes
then to to get back and and start the the the next one. So that's a pretty pretty sizable change for our schools and and the community. Continuing to look at that to see is the savings worth, that type of of change that would be necessary. So we're always looking at ways that we we believe we can reduce transportation costs since that's that's an expensive piece. And, year to year, it never gets less expensive. So just how do we mitigate the the increases to those, to those expenses?
Moving into utilities, I don't think we've had a lot change there, have we? No. Property and casualty, still waiting on that. The April, and we should have, good information back. The one positive is the the coastal area, for whatever reason, tends to renew the April 1 where you find the rest of Northern Texas renewals are are more the the April, and we're seeing, minimal increases in those renewals, which should be a good
trend for us as as we get, get our information back. Tends to be pretty competitive the the last year or so with, more more players in the underwriting field, and that's that's always a positive for us because more competition also means that, we can stagger our property casualty when when they take it out. We actually are insured by about 24 different companies. No one is gonna take on a district this size and and the risk of
the entire district. So you see tiers, and and the more players you get into it, the more competitive, particularly some of those smaller tiers where they'll bid for 10 or 15,000,000 of, of our insurance, which helps lower the rate. So keeping fingers crossed that that, you you know, we've had a couple years where we've seen some really significant increases, but it looks like this year, it it should be fairly fairly flat, is our hope. And then HVAC? Anything different with that?
The never ending software. Like I'm interviewing him before. I know. That number's scary, Tom. Yeah. And then our iPad and staff devices were the ones that were approved by the board. So thank you for that. Alright. Can I ask a question about the assumptions real quick? I know that we look at things at different times across the year and conversations happen, but these assumptions we've seen several times. They are what we are basing it off of, and we don't need to be changing them throughout the year. Right? The time has pretty much passed for any assumption changes. No. We continue to to take a look at that. Probably the one that we've had the most conversation around is the HVAC.
Mhmm. Mhmm. And knowing what our our portable cooler costs were in the fall. Right. So we're we're watching what spring carries here. Yeah. And I'm sorry. I'd I meant more on the revenue than the cost side, like, the tax rates and things like that. Yeah. So, okay. Yes. Absolutely. So each each month, we get a little more information, and we go back into the projection templates, and and we make those changes. So like with TAD, we know what we get in March.
Typically, there can be quite a bit of variance by the time we get our our April numbers. The number that's most interesting for us will be what potential we see for new revenue on the on, the assessment side. So, yeah, we we watch that. We we update it each time, that we get that information. And then TEA has recently released the state property values, which we've been able to
update. They they ticked up a small amount, which is positive, not not a large amount. So we continue to watch the the revenues and what projections come out, particularly from TEA. We get bits and pieces. So one of the areas that that you'll see here in a minute on our work to to close this gap as we've made an adjustment on what we're projecting on revenue. Let's go ahead and and we're there.
Yep. Take a look at special ed evaluations. So originally, TEA was telling us they thought they we would be receiving, just under a million dollars for the special ed evaluations we do for, homeschool vouchers, those types of things. What we're tracking right now is we we are not going to do as many as they projected. Now that may pick up in the summer as requests come in, but so we've we've moved our revenue projections down.
So we we will adjust up, down as as necessary, or that will really come into play as when we get close to the approval of the budget, and, eventually, the setting of the tax rate will depend on what those revenues look like. Yeah. Good good question. So here's how we're, so far approaching hitting that, 12 and a half million dollar gap staffing. Of course, 86%, it's it's gotta come from large portion is gonna come from our staffing. Now, a good chunk of that is because we're needing to right size our staffing
based on our student population, but we also know we're we're not gonna be able to reduce enough staff equal to to the students. It's not a it's not a one to one. So we've we've worked through, looked at those areas. I think we will see a few more, few more positions that we'll be able to to not replace this time of year. Anytime we get a resignation or retirement, HR and the assistance hoops are looking at those positions on is it a is it an absolute need to to fill that?
There is some offset when we get retirements, because oftentimes who we're hiring, we're hiring at a at a lower pay rate than, you know, a veteran teacher that's been with us for for twenty five years. So we monitor that as well. We look at what's that that delta between them. And then, as we sit down with departments, particularly, like, on the operations maintenance side, we continue to look at positions that we we've continued to maintain the position in
hopes of hiring and doing the the reality check of, okay, we've had this position for two years. We cannot hire someone. So what's what's our option? Are we looking at a contracted service here? Are we we just having to to close that position? Because any position we have that's unfilled that we move forward in the next budget, we have to have the budget allocated for that salary. So it's it's not a you you know, you you have a master plumber at
$65,000 a year. If we've moved that position from one budget year to the next and been unable to fill it, we've had to have 65,000, in the budget. The flip side of this, or I'm going into this explanation, is when we close those positions, we're also closing off the potential of that budget being available to us later in the year because it's it's not going to exist anymore. So right now, we get to this time of year, and we've got, whether it's,
state competitions or other unexpected expenditures come up, we can look at some of that money that was allocated toward those open positions, and that's where we're able to say, okay. We're we're six weeks away from the end of school. We can use this budget to to offset that. When we close those positions and we're budgeting that much tighter, it gives us very little room for error, which means the likelihood of us having to come to you at this time of year toward the end of a budget and say, you know,
we've had another HVAC unit go out a a chiller of 250,000. We we do not have the budget available. We're going to to have to look at fund balance or some other ways in in which to pay for that. So I I just wanna say that upfront as we tighten that, it also gives us less flexibility, as as we move through the budget year. Budget reductions are coming from departments. We will see some some more in this area because we haven't quite finished with all of our our departments.
And as Pam said earlier, folks are are stepping up, understanding the the situation we're in. And, as they're looking at costs and renewals, they're reevaluating. So I think probably another couple $100,000 at least in budget reductions. Reallocation of of compensatory education allotment, prior to, the last legislative session, compensatory education, we were required to spend at least 55% of the dollars we received, and there were
some very specific requirements to for those funds. It's maybe the one large positive we had out of the last legislative session is they removed the 55% requirement, and they removed a number of the strings attached to it. So it's gonna allow us to reallocate some of those funds, still meet the needs of our students, but they it's much like bilingual and some of the other areas. There there are so, it's so narrow in how we can expend those funds.
We had trouble in some years meeting our 55% because we couldn't do it within the guidelines and parameters that were there. Now that's that's opened up, we believe we can move some cost around, and that that, that will help us offset about 4,000,000 of of other expenses that we had. Workers' comp, this one, I should have put a big asterisk next to because this is one that we're gonna have to come back and talk about in potentially in next year's budget.
So every year, we have, by, by law, we have a audit done on our workers' comp, and they will give us actuarily how much we have to maintain to cover workers' comps claims. And they do it's it's kind of a three year look back. We've been fortunate last year and so far this year, our claims have been under what we've we've typically seen. So we set aside so much per employee per month for the workers' comp.
They're, we just got our actuary report back, and we're about a million to higher than what we will need to be next year. So we will be able to reallocate that that extra. So the reason I say we we have to think about this is this is really kind of a one time. There's no guarantee that will occur next year. So if we we don't have, another good year against workers' comp, then that's a million too. We have to start looking at how are we going to to find that or
or find the efficiencies in next year's budget because we won't have it again. We've talked about special education evaluations and then KEWELL. Remember when we closed the physical facility, we said for one year, we would support a transition to a to a virtual KWEL. We've done that this year. The new insurance program, there are two options for virtual care. So, you know, why we know folks like the the staff through through KWell, there
is full options for virtual care. That, KWEL provides that doesn't require us to underwrite it as as just part of the insurance program. So as you can see with with those on where we are, those are kind of the the larger pieces. We're about a million short of where we we need to be. We'll continue to work to to to your question about revenues and those types of things as we make those those adjustments. We know, some of those, those those assumptions will change positively and negatively.
And this is also the time of year, as mister Verlaine and and our different departments are getting their renewal cost back for software and those types, we we reevaluate. Good news, don't have a dollar amount because, we were we were meeting with technology while you all were involved in executive session going through that budget. And the, the security, that you all approved. I think, was it two months ago?
November. November. As, the tech team is working through that, there are some other expenses we had for other software that will no longer be necessary. So he believes we're we're going to see, at least, potentially, of a 6 figure reduction in in just that one area because of of offsetting that. So there's still a lot to go over the next few months. So at this point in time, we're not concerned that we won't get to where we need to be. It's just, you know, now every dollar counts.
I know everybody gets sick of of hearing me say as we talk about budgets, our world is addition by subtraction. So if we're going up someplace, bring me the solution on where we're we're we're going to be able to reduce, and everybody's done a really good job. So when when we bring you that final budget, I don't think there will be any issues with us us coming with a balanced budget. So quick question. And and the discussions of workers' comp, it seems to me that we're self funding workers' comp. Is that how it works? Mhmm. Yeah. Alright. Okay.
Ongoing budget considerations. Just a a a quick note on on here. Again, these are the things we have to look at, property values, what our attendance looks like. There are TA decisions we're still waiting on from the last legislative decide decisions. A couple of those will be how some of the funding we received is paid out, which right now we can't count as revenue because we don't know how we're gonna receive it. That may offset it, the staffing efficiencies. And then department and campus allocations, we have not touched campus allocations in any of
our budget reductions up to this point in time. It's something that we've we've had conversations with principals. We've looked at how much money is left over at the end of of the last couple budget years with campus allocations. So that may be an area it's not a huge amount, but we'll we'll be taking a look at on kinda rightsizing that to to what they're actually spending on. So that that gives you an update on where we are and how we're working to close the gap. I I would say one of the other variables, though, is the MCR. Is when you're we're we're looking at the tax rates of making sure because that
that can be a swing. And so as we had some conversation before, we're trying do the templates actually calculate it out? To give us an idea and estimate of our tax rates? There there is a a a template, right now as of today in in looking at it and putting the the the most recent state data in, our MCR looks like it would be identical to last year. There's still a number because property values and and some other things.
So that's there there's always some some change to that. But with the state, property value study having now been finalized, that's that's a a a key piece for us. We'll con we'll continue to look at it. I don't anticipate a significant swing more than a tenth or two up or down. And that's always like, if you remember, and last June was completely different because Mhmm. We did not know the implications of or the how HP two was gonna play
out. But it's always just to reiterate to, again, to mister Burton, a conversation about the changing of the fiscal year, June is always a best estimate of of what we're gonna do just because we we don't have by then, we wouldn't even have that from TA yet. Mhmm. So it's after we set it, then we get into July, and then we get into final budget adoption in in August. One other thing to to point out, gotta take my little bit of a dig
at at the last legislative session. Golden pennies and copper pennies when they were originally, built into the statute had an escalating factor to them. So that was the one one area districts that their communities their boards and their communities had elected to take advantage of that. You knew that the value of those were were going to go up a a little bit each year. In the last legislation legislative session, they capped it.
So regardless of what happens with inflation or assessed valuation, it's capped. There there there's no additional we used to receive on our tier one and tier two based on kind of what was what was happening. So they they fixed that. Which is where the $55 in Yep. The additional allotment money came from. Mhmm. Yeah. It was the cabinet of your gold cover. So it was the one pocket from one side to the other. It wasn't new money. It was just they they capped it and took what they had projected they would
need for those increases. And, you know, we're we're we're very kind and gave us that $55 on the basic allotment. That average out about $5 a year for five years since they last gave. Real quick before we move on, I just wanted to say thank you. I know it's been three years of really heavy cutting, and it gets harder each year because there's less spare to cut. So thank you to everybody for cooperating and collaborating and and working through this and all the hard work you two are doing as well. So Sure. Right. Ready, sir? Okay. MEP bond. What what tonight, is designed to do is just to give you a a basic
snapshot. I'm not gonna go in line by line. I wanna talk a little bit about how this was developed. We've had some preliminary conversations, but wanted you to, to to to see some of this before we begin to talk to the citizens bond committee, and and we dig deeper into it. So, with this and and again, like I said, that we've we've got quite a bit of information here, but, I think we can move through this fairly quickly.
So we're gonna look a little bit about the history, the methodology, a summary of the findings, and then take any questions and stop me as as we go through this. So this is one of those we we've we've talked with our combined committees. When you look at the number of campuses that Keller built because of fast growth in really, it's a it's about a decade to fifteen years is why we're up against what we are now with needing to do facility infrastructure because you have all
of those schools built in a short period of time, and the life cycle on major systems are reaching end of life. So we have a significant number of schools that are all reaching that point at about the same time, and that that's gonna in increase the cost. So just to as a reminder on on how that looks. Hey. Real quick, John and doctor Wilson. Can you kind of reiterate what y'all said last night at the bond committee in terms of how this funding is structured? Just I thought it was a good way to encapsulate what's m and o and what's INS and how it was set up by the state just to give us
a primer real quick before we dive into details. So so no. No. No. I'm I'm getting the death stare to keep this short. So we really have two buckets. We have m and o, and we have INS. M and o is where all the day to day, their operation expenses, all of that comes out of m and o. M and O is also subject to recapture. I and S is our interest in sinking, and that's, you know, that's paying our debt. So it's it's paying off the the the bond debt in in the interest with
there. It is not subject to recapture, and it's one of the things we talked about the committee last night. The the the one component about bond is a 100% of the tax dollars that the community provides stays in Keller. State doesn't get a penny of it. So it's it's it's the one piece of tax for for schools that is is
a 100% local, but it's only debt payment. It can't be used for salaries. It can't be used for any of those those operating expenses. It can't it can't commingle with the with the m and l. So one of the the slides that we talked about last night that John presented here just a bit ago was that $500,000 for HVAC. So right now, that HVAC, we're paying for all of that. I think we set aside 1.2 additional last year for HVAC. We're having to set aside another 500, so essentially 1.7.
The the problem with that is that is a capital improvement, and you can spend so we're because we're replacing because we can't purchase anymore, we can't sell any bonds to access, the the funds necessary. What we're doing is we're paying for it out of m and o. And when you pay for those things out of m and o, what ends up happening is you're you're going to have to cut it from somewhere. And that's teachers, that's programs, that's, a reduction in all the services that we provide
on a day to day basis. Instead of and what I told the the the group last night, this is the system that the state has set up. They have said, if you want capital, it's through it's through, the sale of bonds. If you want the, maintenance and operation, which is an interesting term because it's maintenance and operation of your day to day, which is not capital, then here's the funding for that. So we're we're just utilizing the system as as as the state is is set
up for us. I would love to have additional funding that we could use for for capital, but we just don't receive that. And so they tell us, if you want that, go do this. Yeah. I like to always tell people that the MNO is just your basic checking account. It's just it's just your everyday stuff, and and you can't use bond money for that. There's a big, big confusion about that that bond money can only be specifically used for those items that are laid out in the bond proposal. That That's correct. We will soon receive. Yeah. But, you can have certain staff be used for that money.
Right? People who are, involved in administering the bond and That's great. Yeah. That's great. Because I know that's that's one of the things that we dealt with when we were kind of running low on the previous bond funds. That was some of the discussions we had about some of these employees are gonna have to move out of the I and S into the MNO for for the construction side and some of your project management folks that are implementing the bond. So, yeah, that's correct. Yeah. Typically, about three or four positions. So so to to put it perspective over the last three budgets, if if I recall correctly, we've had to increase about $2,000,000 in our budget because of HVAC.
That's not all that we've spent on those areas. $2,000,000 is a 1% raise for all staff. So that's that's what it's cost us as as we in each year, those costs seem to go up because we're we're reaching beyond end of life for for some of these things. So And and that's and I'm and I'm glad you brought that up because we can't it is correct. We cannot use INS for a teacher raise. But through the passage of a bond, let's say we did, then that would free
up quite a bit of money that would then go back in to, like, if we've talked about before. The two investments we need to make. One is in our our teachers, and then the other is making sure, that we are financially sound and strong well into the future. But this offsetting that capital through a bond is is significant money that would be reinvested in staff. And this slide is just, an infographic to to to highlight what the 2019 bond
about 315,000,000 in encompassed. So, it's been all it's we started this process a little over two years ago in that, we worked with RWEB, Engineering and, hired them to begin to do, an MEP audit of all our campuses and facilities. And MEP means mechanical, electrical, and plumbing. So they, put together a scope of work for us.
They did site surveys. They literally went to every campus, every electrical panel, every crawl space. And one of the the key pieces of that project and and part of why it took them so long is not only the the size of our district and number of campuses, but we also wanted a catalog of all of those systems. So they were able to to develop, and provide for us the the the the
maker, the unit numbers, serial numbers. Then they went to look at at, standard life on on those items, and help us, put together where are we with, our our MEP. What are what are those needs? A key in why that's so significant for us is it will help us look at our outline years for preventive maintenance and potential for other bonds.
Because now we can look at it and say, you know what? Chainlink fence has a twenty year life expectancy. How much chainlink fence do we have around our campuses for safety and security? And and build a much more proactive plan on on how we're going to to address these issues. Then they took a look at the the the national standards for for those areas, looked at the soft cost, hard cost, looking at inflation.
They projected a 10% escalation cost on on in these areas, year over year for for eight years. So they they gave us a a good starting point, a lot of information. The method that they used when they came back to give us the the review, we liked so much that it's now the model we're using and that we ask, BLK and Armco with Roofing and and the others to to follow this exact same
model. So they broke it down into the the major areas that they were looking at. You see a little a little graphic that's there with that description. So when we began to look at at summaries for each campus, we have the graphic. It shows what's there, and and it's and it's common through from campus to campus. It's a it's a very clean way for us to get a a snapshot of what's there. Then they broke it into priorities. We're still working, in in hope to have this done within the next two weeks
with VOK as they completed their assessment, and we're merging the MEP with VOK. So we'll we'll have a kind of a a one booklet utilizing the same format. So we can see everything in one place for both architectural and MEP for each of each of our facilities. This is one of the areas that has to be adjusted a little because when RWB was started their work, priority one was looking at the next two years, and guess what? That was '23 to '25.
So we're having to work with them to adjust and and modify that a little bit. But you'll see as we work out through priority six, which puts us out twenty years from now. So you you can see, you know, kind of those those different tiers. What we'll look at here in just a moment is focusing for this next bond conversation around priorities one, two, and three. So, this is an example of when we take a look at the MEP.
This is looking district wide, and they broke it out by the major categories. So you can look across our mechanical and the colors coincide to which tier. So you can see, excuse me, how much of the mechanical is a tier one or priority one? How much is, priority two, priority three? And then how much is out there on that priority six when we're talking twenty years from now. The issue you're gonna see over and over again is look how much of the
the red in so many of these areas are priority one, two, and three. So, and these numbers are kinda staggering, but you have to remember the amount of square foot that we have in in this district in in our properties and our facilities. So at the very bottom, when you look across the district, if we were to to do everything that's identified, in the, the MEP assessment, at 23 costs, it would
be about 421,000,000. With inflation out over eight years, you're talking about 600,000,000. So then the breakdown of what you see here is we're looking at elementaries and early learning centers. And I do need to to point out when you look at, like, ELC North, ELC South, those are campuses that are no longer open, but they're included in the assessments. So decisions would have to be made. Do you really invest in those in those facilities or not?
Same thing when we when we get to to the next group. So this gives you an idea of what that looks like by campus. And, again, 66.5% of the areas that have been identified are priority one, two, or three. Same thing for intermediate schools. As the, committee made their recommendation regarding, you know, changing our our grade alignment, these would be three campuses again. You could see there's pretty significant needs on several of those, including Parkwood Hill that
would, now not be as as high a priority if if that's the direction we go. So I'll add add one thing on there. So we've had a couple questions just through the the committee meetings that we've had about the timing and why. Why are we doing this now? This is one of the reasons, we're doing this because in order to plan for a bond, we have to know what assets we have and what we're going to invest in. And so that's part of the part of the timing and of all of this.
I I would also add, you know, the we have some older buildings in here, and you can see some older buildings buildings require a lot of work, but also also when you get into, the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing in some of our older buildings, you cross your fingers that you're not not gonna find something else, when you do that. And we have a couple buildings. It's it's very likely that we're gonna find some some things that we did not expect, particularly our our we have a couple challenging ones.
MEP is a little more complicated than what we'll take a look at when we get to to the architectural, because for a lot of these, you can't go in and piecemeal the electrical. If we have to have new electrical panels, that's you you can't just do the electrical panel and not change out other components of the system. In many cases, bringing in new, more efficient HVAC, our electrical systems were not designed for that.
So we we we have to we we have to look at that. So as as the bond committee works through, MEP tends to be more in packages that that if if you're gonna go down this path on addressing electrical at this campus, it it it's not so much that we're only gonna do 10% of it. We probably have to do 50 or or or a 100% of it, and I'd and I'd just, point that out. We continue these and, please, these numbers are estimates.
They're they're based on the the estimate of replacement at the at the time that they took a look at it. So I'll give you an example. We through our partnership with Trane, they took nine of our least efficient campuses. They looked at the MEP reports, and they've gone in and done, assessments of those campuses. And because of their next level of expertise, they're able to look one of the ones we focused is is Central High School. They were able to look at it and say, you know what?
We don't disagree with the engineering assessment, but as we're breaking down the actual units we you have, we can rebuild these air handler units without replacing them at a savings of 30%. And that's gonna have a fifteen or twenty year life expectancy, which is close to the life expectancy of total replacement. So these will continue to be refined. And even as we get into the projects when a bond has passed, we'll we'll
continue to look at those those areas. So these these numbers are are a starting point. You take a look at that middle schools, same format. Again, not gonna walk you through each of those. Our high schools, our support facilities, so looking at at this building, the natatorium, the athletic complex in maintenance and and operations, There's some pretty significant needs in in in the support facilities as well. I pulled this one because it's it's a little different.
Had a lot of questions regarding the natatorium. Natatoriums degrade fairly quickly. This was built in 2010 because of the nature of the building with chlorine, the corrosive corrosive nature systems replacements there have to occur on a on a, shorter time frame than you would say at, at a school. So we got this report back. We began to work to refine it with with with our engineering partner.
We solicited proposals from architectural firms to give us now what would be building conditions. So now we're talking architectural, we're talking envelope, windows. We used Armco, who has, overseen our our insurance claims on replacing the roof from from the hail. They were able to provide us an assessment for all of our roofing structures and pulled it together. And we we ask that, it be done in the exact same format that we
did the the, MAP. So, again, small, but the methodology here is a little bit different in that, they look at what they call an FCI score, which is the facility condition index. They looked at utilization rate. They looked at educational adequacy, which which is something we we wanna take a look at. I would say this is a little more subjective in the way that's that's pulled to together, the scope, recommendations, and project costs.
So, again, we've got the the infographics that are there for for each of it as as they walk through. Same exact process. They went through. They looked at site. They looked at interior. They looked at exterior, so they're looking at playgrounds, parking lots, fields, some of the the the plumbing fixtures, not the actual infrastructure behind them. We had, our roofing partner provide that, and they also looked at audio visual standards.
So again, priorities. Same priorities as as we bundled it. This is where we're working to match the two reports so that the the time frames match with those priorities. Little little different in in the way that the the summaries were were presented in again, going through the the exact, it's just, through the pie chart versus the the bar graphs, you can take a look at district wide summary. So, when you look at at the at the total cost for both MEP and
you look at the building assessments, if we were to do all the priority one, two, and three based on inflationary cost, we're at about $1,100,000,000. Which tells us right right there, this isn't gonna be done in one month. We're we're we're gonna have to look at this, a little bit over time. And that that's why there's gonna be some tough decisions that we're gonna have to make about how do we how do we scale that that down. Again, taking a look at the, elementary and early learning centers, I wanna point out
that any school closures, those are included in that number. So that number would come down as we continue to refine. Those are those are just the the rough estimates. These are theirs. This does not include the MVP. Intermediate schools, middle schools, high schools, athletics. And as we pointed out to the committee last night on bond issues, which was
not in place in the 2019, statute now requires us to do basically, what's the when when you do a a bond issue, we have the instructional cost, which are your educational facilities. Anything that has to do with athletics is its own separate proposition. Prior to that, they were bundled. So now you would have any of the MEP work we do on buildings, the the the building assessments. If it's athletics, it's a separate proposition, and technology is a separate proposition.
So you're you're probably looking at the next bond, and that's something we get in with bond counsel in the the committee work through at least three propositions, if if not more. Support so what what is category support facilities in? Support facilities, those are not separate. So they would be allowed to be under the the the facilities for most of it. It gets a little more nuanced as we take a look, and that's that's why
bond counsel and and, the financial will will help us when when we get to that point. Good question. Support facilities. So our our next step is we're working to merge those two reports. I've got a quick I've got a quick question for you, actually, before I forget. So you mentioned in there that you've you've solicited, information from different, like, insurance companies, architecture firms, things of that nature. Is it just from one insurance company and one architecture firm? Or we Not on insurance. We, we we talked to three different architects, and asked for proposals on what their
cost would be for building assessments. VOK was the the the lowest cost. Part of that is they've done work in the district for a long time. They're familiar with the buildings. They have all the the reports and and schematics. As we talked to, seriously to to another company as well, Their costs were were gonna be quite a bit more because they had to start from ground zero. And but when it comes down to it, right, when it comes to let's say let's say the bond passes and we start issuing out this work to whoever any
anyone can take those assessments, and we can put it out to 15 people to bid. Absolutely. That's what we have to do, and that's what we'll do. Okay. Good. Yeah. Any of any of the folks that worked on the assessments, there's no guarantee there's future work with with with a bond. There there's some clarification that when we get into the the the the more detailed reports you'll see, that we realize we've gotta go back and redefine. Like, if you look at the building assessments, you would see that there may be
a priority one for particular elementary school that that says soccer field. It's not upgrading an athletic facility. They've identified what that and they just use soccer field in general, that the green space next to the school is not safe. It's got too many holes. It's it's too rough. You know, we've got Timberview, as an example that their practice field right now is unusable because of safety. So or their game field, so that we we have to transport students for for
for games because of that. So we're going back in and making sure we redefine, that these are not items that it's like, oh, we we we these are wants. These reports are the needs. And when we when we look at site, we look at landscape, we we look at playgrounds, those are those are needs for accessibility. They're needs for safety. You know, a playground set from twenty years ago is not what meets today's standard nor does it meet, handicapped accessibility.
So those are the types of things when you see the the the finished product, and and we work through that a little more, and then the committee will see. These are assessments for needs, not not wants. So when you say the a separate proposition for athletic facilities, so, obviously, that would be that the stadium. Does that mean, say, on a middle school campus, the fields and stuff, would that be included in a separate in a athletic facility composite proposition, or is that included in the campus? Possibly. Both.
So that's where the assessment and the scope will work. So if you, say, look at a at a middle school, track, you could make the argument it's used daily by PE. It's it's an instructional space. So that's where we have to go with bond counsel, and there's there's a number of kind of tests that they walk through to determine whether they believe it should be on an athletic proposition or on a you could include that in in into
the academics. If you're talking about the fields, you're talking about bleachers, you're talking about scoreboards, or you're talking, about concession stands or, PA systems, those are not gonna be instructional. So you you could have, an area that portion of it would be under the instructional, and a portion of it is gonna have to be under the the separate proposition. What if you're using the concession stand to teaching kids how to manage money and operate a business? I can make an argument for it. You make an argument, but it may not pass the litmus test. So so the bond counsel, are they, so they arbitrarily kinda decide whether it meets
criteria or not. There's no real defined metrics? No. There's there's some defined metrics, and, ultimately, TEA has to agree. So it it when when the board, passes a your your proposition to move to a bond, and this is what that structure is gonna look like, and this is what the language. Eventually, it goes through TEA and the attorney general before it would be allowed. And that's where in those reviews, there have been times that, it's not just up to bond counsel that it'll get kicked back, and they'll say, no.
We're not gonna count this as a as an instructional space. You're gonna have to to to put it as an athletic space or or something like that. There is a process that they go through where, if it's not clear, then you may have, up to three or so attorneys that take a different view, a different opinion, and then they get together and hash it out to determine what what do they as a group, feel is is most appropriate. And it functions a little like case law in that, you know, it may have
been approved five years ago, and you see two school districts that it's been denied for the last two years. So, obviously, they're probably gonna follow the the guidelines on the last two years. But speaking of middle school fields, it is it is rough. We have, we have certain campuses that can't play on theirs, Yeah. Or the tracks. They have to go to two different facilities. So I was I was kinda confused with Keller Middle School Keller Middle School, how it's, like, the lowest middle school for needing updates because I just hear so many
stories. So here's a real quick well, I have a couple questions, actually. So the MEP that was done, that was in 2023. Correct? And that took several years to do that. Took us about eighteen months. Okay. So now we're looking at that same information, but just inflated costs. So is there there will be going back on some of these campuses that we already know identified through the MEP that there there are most troubled campuses. We're still going to lay eyes and make sure that it's not further troubled, in
in multiple areas. Correct? Yeah. That'll be that'll be part of the process. And, you know, once we have this information, now we've been able to update it. So there there are some of those that were identified in the initial MEP report we've already had to do address. So we've been able to to to go in and and update that. And that's that's where that catalog is is so important is not only for for future, but it's allowing us to keep track of of those types of things, help with our planning moving. So, I'm sorry.
We done? No. Okay. Sorry. Go ahead. I'll do this. No. So okay. If we're so since since information was, delivered at the long range and bond committee, kind of what that proposal might look like, as far as either consolidation, boundary, redraws, and things of that nature. So if the criteria was that we would move fifth down to elementary and sixth up to middle school, which would leave three intermediate schools.
We're not taking into consideration that or the ELCs in that number. Correct? So the 55,000,000 that those in priority one, two, three Yep. They're they're still included in there. Until that decision is made, then we'll go back that out Okay. At at that point in time. Okay. And I just wanted to verify one last piece of information that I handed off. So priority one, two, three for all facilities listed, that is the 601,000,000. But for everything is the 1,200,000,000.0.
Okay. Yes, ma'am. So there's, so based upon this analysis that I'm seeing versus the book that we she trustee Kelly referred to that we have from 2023, I do notice some discrepancies, from, like, as far as the amount of work done on one school versus needed versus another. Could could that be attributed to the fact that some stuff has now been replaced, since that time frame, therefore, it's no longer showing, therefore and it's changed the numbers a bit? That's that's correct. Okay. So with the pushback we're gonna get on that, because I've had several people mention
it to me already, is that, ultimately, if we've already spent money on a school, especially when we're talking about school closures, if we've already spent money on a school to repair some of the items to make it more suitable than another from an expense perspective, how is it fair that now all of a sudden that's one of the schools potentially being closed because we haven't spent money on it? I've heard that question from three different people. So trying to take the the the the best way to to to answer that question. Number one, we haven't spent enough money on any one building to to change the
dynamics, significantly. I mean, it's just we haven't had that that capability. The second is as the committee came up with their criteria for consolidation, the the proposal was based on that criteria. So the actual physical facility condition wasn't even in the top three of the criteria.
The the the one that was overwhelmingly number one by all by a a large margin, I think what we figure about 85%, was grade configuration. So that criteria, pretty much of and by itself, dictated how we had to move forward because you're you're now gonna move sixth grade to middle school and and fifth grade. So that begins the the the ripple.
When we talk about, individual schools, like in in the proposal, Shady Grove, facility condition is a component, and it's one of many. So you have to look at, age of building, efficiency of the building, enrollment projections, proximity to other schools, because you could look at another campus that is only contiguous
to two other elementary schools, which means you in the way the geography is set, you've now determined by closing this building, you're gonna have to provide transportation for almost every kid in in that district. So or in that in that school. So there were a a lot of factors. The more schools you have contiguous to the boundaries of a campus meant that there's less likely of transportation and less, it's less likely then that you're you're gonna be
worried about over overcrowding another school as well. So to to that question, when when you get it, it's it's really it it's not one item. It's you've gotta look at at at the entirety of it, in in making those, those recommendations, which is what the the committee established the criteria, Proposals were developed, what meets the criteria, and what meets it to the, the the largest degree.
And and one of those those, pieces that was and doctor Wilson may remember him off the off the top of his head in ring quarter, but one of those was also not wanting to to to impact as few students and families as possible. So we really took that criteria and started the grade alignment set kind of the domino effect for for the majority of the decisions. Then after that, it's taking each of those and and working through. So that that one, I think, is being perceived as having a a much higher
value than it than it really does in the in the overall And I would also add, you know, they're they're year to year. We have to invest We have to put money into our schools, and that's for the day to day operations. We're trying to get, obviously, we've had to put in now when we talk about putting in money, I would say, you you know, the $500,000 for AC is not replacing system. It's patching it. It's patching it to get to a bond. That's what we've always done.
So if if somebody asked me that question, because I'd had that question, and my response was, we're we have to address the immediate needs of kids to ensure that they have a positive learning environment, and teachers' learning environment is conducive to learning, or the teachers' teaching environment is conducive to learning. We have to address that. That's our responsibility, those kids and those parents, and and so we have to address those as we come on. What I would never want to do and this is where, you know, there's that
balance between ultimate efficiency that we've talked about, ultimate efficiency and and meeting the needs of your kids and your staff. And so you have to address those right away. If somebody asked me the question, well, so if an AC breaks next year at a campus that's that's, scheduled to close, what are you gonna do? Fix it? You have to. You have to. Now you're not gonna go in and buy a brand new system, but you have to fix it because if you don't, kids aren't gonna be able to learn. That's the realities of Texas.
If it's if you don't have AC in our buildings, you know, Western Kansas where I grew up, all the doors and windows were wide open. We didn't have AC, but it was also there was not humidity. That there wasn't such a thing there. Or indoor plumbing. In some parts of parts of our community, that's an accurate statement. Yeah. But, yeah, it's investing to make sure we can meet the needs the immediate needs of kids, but then taking a long term perspective too. Yeah. I guess I guess my point, though, that I'm making is that, ultimately, as I
understand the committees have their priorities and things they want, but, obviously, we're taking into account cost to repair schools. Right? That that has to be a major factor whether anyone thinks it is or not because it's a domino effect to everything else. 100%. Right? So and that's the point I'm really making is I understand the the committee priorities, which I align with most of them, but that has to be an appropriate factor. And so the the point that I'm making that the questions that have been brought to me is that if we've spent money already from the m and o budget
on schools to get them less costly than another Yeah. And money wasn't spent on those schools, then how is it fair to close the school that we've already spent money on? Or do we close the school to not close the school that we've already spent money on, to close the school that we haven't spent money on? And so and and the the to John's point, what I'm ultimately, it has to come down to there's gonna be a factor involved with the the spending, but there's also gonna have to be I think there's gonna be a better explanation of a
better understanding of busing routes and those costs and how it's gonna affect because I I am just telling you, I don't think that that's resonating well. And it's not just Shady Grove that you mentioned. It's other schools too that I'm hearing conversations about. So I think that we've done a really good job from a transparency perspective of getting every bit of information you possibly can to people, but I think that we need to do a little bit better job of communicating the other variables other than just the cost on the school because people are noticing that.
And so that just needs to be communicated more. So yeah. I definitely. The ultimate cost is is in in the cost savings, we haven't invested more than we would realize, in those in those specific buildings or any of our buildings, really, to to offset any of the potential savings. The the reality of our budget's been for the last several years, If we've spent money on a campus, it's because we had to. There hasn't been a want to. I mean, as much as we'd like to say that, it's been we've had to
address an issue. And and the other thing is we focus a lot on the MEP, and some of our MEPs look look low. When you get into the structural or the architectural, then all of a sudden, the MEP looks low, but that side's big, just because of the of the remainder of the facilities themselves. So it's it's a it's a definitely looking at him, in in in unison. Yeah. And, Corey, that's a a good point, is is the numbers that you are giving us are just MEP.
That's not all of the other things at at the schools. Lone Star, hidden like, all the facade that's falling off of the pillars and stuff, that's not included in this Yeah. We have we have two Concrete sidewalks that are, you know, six inches apart. That would be in the the campus assessment from from the architects. Exactly. So you you do have some. Lone Star outside is is is challenging. I almost snapped an ankle, over there at the beginning of the year. You have two middle schools, Hillwood and KMS are, they're when you look at the
facility condition index, it's it's they need a lot of attention. So yeah. It's it's the MEP side of this. Now when we look at the bonds, MEP is one component, but we also look at what are the overall needs of the district, because it sometimes it makes sense, and that's ultimately for what the committee to decide. So, really, we're just talking MVP. This isn't anything structural at all. But don't you think that'd be pertinent information for people to know?
No. The the the architectural the the second component you have would include some of those structures. Have turn it back to what the page you had. That's it. Classic. Yep. Right there. Starting the the the district building conditions. So and and that's why we're working to merge these two together so it's in one place versus having to to look at two two separate pieces to it. Well, no. I guess what I'm getting is that they've done some conditions here, but they haven't done any cost analysis like they did with the others that I'm seeing.
Is that right? Yeah. Keith. Okay. There it is. It's on advanced view. Yeah. Can't pull the PowerPoint back up. Yes, if if you look at at, say, for the high schools, that that analysis, in that second component is the the architectural. So it's gonna be looking at at, parking lots, foundations, windows, roofing, interior. You know, I've never understood this, and and Keller is similar to so many schools
that were built in the late eighties, early nineties, particularly elementary. They put in vinyl wallpaper as wallcovering, and that creates, issues in trying to to repair it. You have to replace. It creates mold issues. It's, so that's one of the things that's identified when we get into the specifics is we we've got some basic things like that we need to to address. You know, campuses that have, original carpet. They're twenty, twenty five years old. And in some cases, that's becoming a safety hazard.
So those are included in more the the architectural assessments. And when you when you see the individual breakouts and we've we've merged the two, you'll be able to see a more detailed list. Do you have the number for actually, just kidding. I know you do. Never mind. And and so so you know the committee process. What we intentionally do with the committee is we don't give them we want them to build based on the need and not on a dollar. And so what we're trying to do is get get them to look at here
are the things that we feel our district needs to do, and then we'll put a dollar at the end, and then we'll come back that way. Because what what happens if you do it the reverse, then you're limiting you're limiting the scope of the work. It's kinda like looking at my my grade already, and then I'm trying to do everything I can to fit that grade. Or like I used to do, trying to figure out what did I needed on my final exam in college to get a this.
So it's trying to be true to the process and make sure that that all the needs are getting the appropriate amount of attention. But we have it all, and we can provide it here at a at a later time. Yeah. I I do think that that showing the structural costs of the building along with the MEP is gonna I think it will be important. I think people wanna know that, again, especially as we're talking about school closures and everything else because that's gonna be a big factor in overall cost in the long run. Right? So I think it matters. Yeah.
Well and and just to put it out there since we're not in a committee meeting, what does the timeline look like for the bond committee and the proposal in going to vote? So our our goal would be to have everything wrapped up in June, and then we would bring the proposal to you in July. If you if if there was a proposal that you felt, met your approval and the the board did approve it, then We'd put it on the ballot November. And then just one more thing. Sorry. Once that if it passes, then what does that look like for the district as
far as being able to invest that money? How quickly what's the turnaround for that investment? So and that's a really good question. So just because you have access to all that bond money doesn't mean you spend you sell those bonds right away. You stagger it out to take advantage of rates and get the best, options that you can over time. So you wanna access the the the funding when you can. However, you also have to be when things don't happen quick, then the price is
goes up really fast. An example, we we were looking at last night, Florence and Parkview and some of those others were cost around 30,000,000 to build. They're now 60. So they've doubled since 2019. And that's the that's how I I wouldn't anticipate inflation taking off like that. That wasn't I don't think anybody could have predicted that. However, there is still that a cost that if if you don't get it done
now, it's going to cost you more in the long run, which is why, to your point, Chris, is that when you're trying to pin down and some of that exact cost and those things is difficult because you're you're trying to again, it's a it's a variable you're trying to predict. Bonds will be staggered and structured. You you know, like, for example, technology, you're you're not going to sell twenty year bonds on technology. You're gonna sell three or five. The the other factor that you want is we depending on market conditions, you know,
you may get some fantastic market conditions, so you you you go out for, for more. All those things come into into play on on how they look. From a standpoint of bond passes to the first bonds hitting the the market, you're probably hundred and twenty days, somewhere in that range. So any other any other questions, comments for Pam or or John? Wanna thank you both and your teams for for putting this this together.
I mean, you've set it up set us up for the forthcoming two big events coming. One would be the budget, coming up, through the process. We're eager to learn more, and I think, we continue to have either these board chops or regular updates at the board meetings like you've been doing. I think somebody asked the question, how often you're are you pinging pinging the data to update the slides? So, continue continue that process. And the other big event, of course, is the the bond, development.
We had the kickoff meeting last night. Finally, the the two big committees have separated. We had the first bond committee meeting last night, and certainly more to follow on that. The recaps will continue to be put on the website for each of the of those meetings and all the other committee meetings. But we've got some some too heavy lifts coming up in the next, six months or so. So appreciate all the work done and all the work yet to come. So thank you. Trustees will now go into a second exec session, executive session for the purposes permitted
by the Texas Open Meetings Act, Texas government code section five five one dot zero zero one through five five one dot one four six. Section five five one dot zero seven one, consultation with attorney. Section five five one dot zero seven one, consultation with attorney, section five five one dot zero seven two, section five five one dot seven zero four, personnel matters, appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, dismissal, and complaint.
Section five five one dot zero eight two, school children, school district employees, disciplinary matter, or complaint, section five five one dot zero eight two one. Personally identifiable information about public school student, including consultation with legal counsel regarding pending litigation and to discuss final candidates for KISD board of trustees place six appointment. Time is 08:45. We will return as soon as we can. We are back from executive session at 09:40.
Our only action item this evening is to consider and take possible action on appointing a candidate for place six, on the school board. Do I have a motion? Mister Berg, I move that we take no action on the appoint appointing a candidate for place six this evening. Can I have a second? Second. Any discussion? Yeah. So I'm of the strong opinion that we need a full board to do the business of the district. I don't think it would be wise to walk into situations where we're talking about school closures and, various other important topics that's going on with and walking in those
situations with potentially three three votes that could cause the district to move into a stagnant stalemate. So that's my opinion on the matter. Any other discussion? All in favor? All opposed? Five one. That ends our agenda for the evening. I'll take a motion to adjourn. So moved. I'll second it. All in favor? All opposed zero six zero. Thank you. We're adjourned at 09:41. Achilles.