Uh, welcome everyone to the special meeting of the Lakeland Area Schools ISD194 school board meeting this May 19th, 2026. Um, this meeting um will be fairly short um before we launch into our next meeting which is the work session. Um,
first could we do a call to order please? Um, starting with my right >> Tony Rankenburgger. Carly Anderson, Kim Baker, Tracy Broald, >> uh, Mass Swanson, Paul Carbone, >> Michael Bowman, and I'm Amber Cameron.
Um, before we vote on canvasing the results of the election from last week, we do want to publicly thank the entire team that it takes to run a special election and specifically thank those who put in months of work ahead of election day. specifically the district's communication staff, the
assistant to the superintendent, our middle school principles and teachers, and of course, Superintendent Michael Bowman. Each of these individuals played an important role in sharing information about the bond referendum with our community. In addition, we want to thank Dakota and Scott Counties for their
election support, our six absentee election judges who came in to work at the district office for the 46 days of early voting, and the many election judges who ensured an efficient voting process on election day. Most especially, we are grateful for
every voter who took the time to learn about the referendum and exercise their right to vote. A quick summary before we vote. We had a total of 6,880 voters with question one um which was
all the questions passing with 3,717 votes. Uh with that I would like to make a u recommended action before the board. Like to make a motion to approve the resolution canvas can canvasing the return of votes of school district
special election. Chair. Um, we need to approve the agenda first. >> Oh, my apologies. Is there a mot It's okay. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? >> So moved. >> Uh, first by Baker. Is there a second? Second by Reenburgger. All in favor? >> I.
>> Any [clears throat] opposed? Motion passes. All right. Thank you, uh, Director Baker. Uh, with that, we will move on to, um, I'll remind the board again. A motion um to approve the resolution canvasing the return of votes
of school district special election. >> So moved. >> Uh first by Rekenburgger. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Um any discussion? >> Hearing none. All in favor? >> Actually roll call. >> Oh yeah, sorry. Roll call vote. >> Paul Carbone.
>> I. Matt Swanson. I >> Baker I. >> Reikenberger. I >> Cameron I. Anderson. >> Hi. >> All right. Uh, with that, I'd like to make a motion to adjourn the uh, work
session. Uh, is there a um second? >> Second. >> Any discussion? >> Um, there's >> that's not >> that doesn't work. >> Okay. >> Is there a second? >> Oh, Anderson, any discussion?
>> All right. All in favor of adjourning the special meeting, say I. >> I. Any opposed? [clears throat] >> All right. Special meeting is adjourned. >> Thanks everybody. Thanks everybody. Sorry, Brian. All right. >> Welcome everyone.
>> All right, it we are on air. We are live. Um, welcome everyone to the work session of the Lakeville Area Schools ISD 194 school board this May 19th, 2026. Uh we will start with roll call starting to my right.
>> Tony Rankenberger, >> Devin Reyes, >> Bill Homegrren, >> Brian Thompson, >> Michelle Humphrey, >> Karly Anderson, Brenda Alrech, Kim Baker, >> Tracy Holden, >> Matt Swanson, >> Emily McDonald, >> Paul Carbone, >> and Michael Bowman,
>> and Amber Cameron. Uh, first on our agenda for the work session tonight is facility use and fees update, and we have Deon Reyes here to um present to us. Thank you for coming. >> Absolutely. Good evening, chair, board, superintendent Bowman, executive
cabinet, and everyone here. Uh I am going to here be here to talk about just annual facility use um how we are doing in Lakeville and uh go over some uh very minor uh proposed changes. Um and we'll
get right into it. I believe each of you does have a slide deck [snorts] and I'm not going to read every single line there. Um it was included in your board book. Yeah. Okay. Uh so on slide one uh just as an overview uh we do uh have
over 10,000 um annually requests that come through. Um and that is not just within our district and within our community lines. that's comes from anywhere even as far as California and Florida for companies that want to come
into the Twin Cities and uh hold different functions. Uh we work with more than 400 this year. Um we're up to 480 uh from the time when I did this uh presentation about a week and a half ago. Um an additional 30 groups have
contacted us to work with them. So um always moving um and it is a it is a moving target definitely. We do [clears throat] have a dedicated phone and email set up just for our facility use within Lakeville. So after hours when school is done, um you may have
seen uh the posters, the laminated signs and uh A-frames at all of our buildings that say if anyone has questions, has security questions or safety has lost something, needs a staff person for any reason, they call that number and um someone is available whenever use is
scheduled in the building 7 days a week, 365 days a year. So, um, we want to move on to slide two. I can move to slide two. [clears throat] Um, again, just a more of a definition point. Uh, we won't go over every little
detail, but in our district, we um break it down from district sponsored to non-district sponsored. uh and the guidelines of how the priority is always going to be on district sponsored use as anything that falls under the liability the ownership of what would ultimately be under the guise of superintendent
Bowman and you of course the board non-district is uh examples that we give um for folks who may um ask about why can't this group that is local be a part of district sponsored items um is how are their funds allocated who is making
their decisions and making their bylaws uh and if they are not within a district role that is defined again by the board by the administration um then they would fall under that non-district umbrella. [clears throat] So if we move on to slide three again
another definition slide we will get to the uh meat and potatoes of why I'm here and which will be quick. Um but this classification slide we did not change anything nor are we proposing to change anything for this year. We still have three classifications for non-district groups. We have our local class one
users uh with the definitions broken down there. Class two is going to be at like local nonprofit adult because we do prioritize youth use in our buildings over adult requests um as much as we can. Uh and anything that's non-local.
So if Burnsville or Bloomington um an association from there needed space and we had space available, they would be able to apply for a permit. And then class three would be anything that is for-profit, local or not local. So, if I'm talking too quickly, please
let me know. Extra caffeine today. Uh, again, definition. Um, lots of folks will end up asking, well, what's considered local? Um, because there is so many different gray areas. And, um, local for us is anything that isn't within a pime primary address is based
in Lakeville ISD 194 district boundaries. and the organization overseeing the events insurance lists the group's primary address in Lakeville. And that does actually come up on a pretty much a daily basis with my team and I with calls and inquiries that we get.
So here we have um going into for you guys it is on slide five utilization by user group and type and the type of report that we pulled pretty much is going to be able to show on the left is the chart for what our district uses
overall versus all the non-dist um this past year it was 83.8% for district use that is up from last year's 81.8% 8%. So that means that um at every single level from secondary, middle and elementary um there was more
school functions that were created for whatever academic or um extracurricular activities the schools themselves had. So that in turn does put a push on our local groups and any other user groups to get creative in how they request space and then again how we allocate it
out. Um the [clears throat] chart on the right breaks down when we talked about our non-district user groups and those are the ones that do have a fee schedule that is applied. Um again our biggest group is is our local youth and that
class one at 90.6%. Um that's actually up um almost two whole points from last year when it was 88%. So, we've been working really hard to try and prioritize those things um even with that mass amount of requests that we get in. So, move on to the next
slide. And this is going to talk about the revenue piece. [clears throat] We did keep class one separate because last year there was a larger um rental adjustment than there ever has been. Um
and that's not something we um we try and hide behind. We know that that took place. That was a decision that administration and you the board um you know gave that direction. Um we listed here intentionally um just so we can acknowledge that it's there. However, we also wanted to break down the custodial
fees, our facility and auditorium staff fees, kitchen, and our application fees. Um each of those combined did increase over the prior year. Um, we chose an intent as, um, Director Homegrren and I discuss on a regular basis that we're
not here to make a profit. We are here to try and get to closer uh, net neutral costs. And, um, we are on our way for what that looks like. So, if we move on to the next slide.
[clears throat] So, cost and forecasting. So, overall costs were at $837,380. and that covers all of what falls under facility use. Um over the past year that did expand um from what prior years had
had. We did have um dedicated uh facility supervisors in our secondaries uh Monday through Friday from 30 minutes before bell until the last public person left the building of activity for the evening. That was for multiple of reasons, but one of them was
for liability for a point person to be on site if there were any issues, any concerns, any safety, and also so that our other support teams in the building that had to get work done were able to focus on their jobs at hand and not be pulled to things. Um, [clears throat] when there are large events, say for
example, there's uh one of the high schools holds a large speech event and there might be sporting contests for the high school and in the gyms, but yet there's youth gymnastics and there's, you know, a whole bunch of things happening in the academic wing where they're renting classrooms. We forecast
when we sit down as a team and we will assign additional supervisors to those. um as approved last year, if a group that's non-district happens to be in the building on one of those nights, we will charge them for a supervisor just because if they have a group of hundred
or more and it's a special event, we want to make sure they get the support, but that we're not going to just give them a staff person. There is going to be a cost with that. Um the fee that or the cost sorry for the custodial on grounds listed is because of the joint powers agreement changes that went into
effect uh that came to both city council and to you as a board um effectively uh December 1, but we saw operations really take effect first in the spring. So the overall revenue for uh actual for
20 for 25 was 720,721 and our forecast as of today with um the reports pulled through May 9th from July 1 last year um through June 30th but it was pulled on May 9th sorry uh we're
forecasting at 872 874 for revenue and expenditures uh we're forecasting at 837380. So you can see there is there's a very vast difference between F-25 and uh 26. Yes, sir.
>> Uh what's what do you think led to the the decrease of about $100,000 on expenditures year-over-year? >> Led to the decrease on expenditures for year-over-year. >> Mhm. >> So you're looking at 935 going down to
837. So in last year, how things were allocated for custodial and grounds, we worked to ensure that because of the changes that was made with with my team, particularly moving out of community education and into the operations team,
we wanted to make sure that how funds were allocated um for custodian on grounds were true to what our team was revenue, that's not a word, the revenue that our team was bringing in. And so we wanted to ensure that the additional costs that custodial grounds was going
to have because of the joint powers agreement that we dedicated monies to those items and that included staff people and equipment as well. >> So are some of the expenditures that would have been listed on here now in a different category for the district? >> I would have to defer to director.
>> Well, one thing we're seeing is we used to have a lot more um custodial staff on hand and now we don't have to do that anymore with the support from this team. So that cost has gone down. So the custodians on hand in the buildings on a nightly basis that's most of the difference. >> Yeah.
>> They used to be supervisors on >> Yeah. They used to pull the we used to pull the custodians to do everything, right? And they weren't really they weren't trained to do it. They need to do their own job. So yeah, we're have a lot less hours in our custodians in the buildings. I think last year we saw a
huge uptick in um overtime hours and and that was and because of that reduction that's where the cost savings come come >> well and when you think about what a casual staff person for facility supervisor what they will have versus a full-time um custodian or grounds person
um without taking away from the needs of what is needed in the building to turn the building over for school the next day. Um, it's been a, you know, we go, we learn as we go, but we wanted to make actionable steps to make things more accountable
and and stronger. >> So, so if I was a a community member, I I I want to know, okay, um, the facilities, when you think about the facilities, one one had one would assume you already have resources for the general facility as a whole. and uh
[clears throat] you because you still have to take care of the grounds, you still have to do whatever just for general school maintenance for whatever that might be. And so if we're generating or if we're charging tier one, two, and three that you know this this extra the revenue of 700 or
potentially $800,000, $872,000, uh are the So the consu stakeholder may ask, are the usage costs, the usage fees, the additional usage things that are going on, does that equate to the $837,000
in of expenditures that warrant that? So, for example, if we didn't have um tier one, tier two, or three people renting our facilities at all, we still would we still be doing some of these activities? Does that make sense? >> Yeah, that makes sense. Um we'd have a
lot less staff in the buildings. Yep. >> If we didn't have the rentals, right? Another thing to remember, too, is if we didn't have the buildings full every night, we'd have huge costs that we would never have. Like we don't run the heat, we don't run the air conditioner, we don't run the all the lighting in the
building. and utility costs also. >> You know, here we're still running everything where it's at, right? >> But if we didn't do it, that would be something that So, anytime we turn on the lights to have someone come and use our building, well, it costs us money. >> And we don't want to be in a situation where we're taking funds from teaching
staff, right, >> to to cover a a a group activity in the gym. >> And maybe this is for another conversation for another day. I'm just from from a PN P&L perspective, where do you delineate? where do you divide what's part of school operations and
what's part of usage, you know, rental operations? And you're right. I mean, if if it costs money to keep the building open, keep the lights on, uh, uh, for these events, uh, one could argue those additional costs should really be attributed to or should be allocated to
the user's expense. And so, while I see us $837,000 expenditure bucket, is that really the actual cost or is it really $2 million? I mean, I'm just curious because there's a cost of running this at night versus
if we didn't do any of this, we would we be saving a million dollars. You know what I mean? >> So, kind of can I add on to that because I think it relates. My question is um similar to like like the government has the mileage rate for your car, right? If you're going to drive somewhere, they
reimburse you like 71 cents, right? It doesn't cost that much for gas, but it's it's thinking well, now it might, but [laughter] um but it's thinking about, you know, the wear and tear on your car. So, long-term use. So, obviously, when we have thousands of people in our gyms
or what or a theater or whatever space, the wear and tear is something we need to take into account. So, is that built in? >> No, it's not. We are not covering all of our costs, but we are so far from before we weren't covering any of our costs. You look back four years, I mean, there
was nothing. So, we slowly cured it up, [laughter] but at least we're in a better position than we were a few years ago. And and I think you're right. I mean, there's a little bit of where how do you calculate the wear and tear because four years of of this these activities could warrant, you know, an
extra four more years of the longevity of that equipment for whatever it may be. And just like how you bring a vehicle into an auto automobile shop, they charge shop supply fees for like what is this for mechanic for the electricity and stuff of that nature. But yeah, I I mean we're probably not
there yet, but I'd love to someday and maybe for us in the future to really understand what is the actual cost to run this if you had if you drew a line and said, "Hey, if we didn't do any of this, how much would we actually save?" And then that's that that's the delta. I
mean, that's it is what it is. Okay. All right. I'm going to move on to the last official slide. Um, we are not um I went to both um Director Hullman and Superintendent Bowman. Um I am not proposing um any rental fee increases
for this year. We had those last year. Um yes, to Director Thompson's point, we are not at you know cost uh neutral cost yet. However, we are we are making steps. We are there are ways that we are adapting how we do staffing. Um how
equipment is, you know, how things are donated. We're adapting and finding better ways to do things. Um so there are a couple of minor things that are in the addendum. Um we didn't have a fee on there. Example, if someone just wanted to rent the parking lot, a for-profit
wanted to rent the parking lot in the summertime for a huge, you know, bicycle um, you know, 20 mile race and they wanted to park all their cars there overnight. So, we didn't have the parking lot fee where a lot of districts do um if there's nothing else going on. So, we added that. So, very, very minor
items. There's one minor staff fee change and that was for kitchen staff because the rate that we were charging uh for kitchen staff um was not what market rate we weren't making a cost neutral rate there. Um and then just as
already noted the update to the joint powers agreement was the other big huge update for this year um where our team took on all the scheduling for all district fields where before um our team only did high schools. So now we have all elementaryaries and middles and um
custodial on grounds did take on operations of all um fields um again whereas before they did not have elementary and middles so we are in a we call it a 1 to threeyear cycle with those user groups we have active conversations with them days like today
we talked to them several times um just with all the rain last night um to ensure that we can get all the fields up to the standards that they expect that you expect that all of our staff expect. So, uh, linked at the bottom of your in the presentation is, uh, just the copy
of the updated, um, addendum, um, with those couple of minor changes added to it. So my last question is is again as a community member I'd love to know uh and if you can validate that we are not
taking taxpayer dollars to fund all of these operations. Uh because the facility use expense the facility use revenues is covering >> all of it or majority of it? >> The majority. >> The majority. There's a probably a little bit that overlaps a little bit, but
>> I don't think we're in a place to increase fees again yet. >> Yep. >> Um because we'd have to have more in order to cover it. >> Okay. So then that's the second question. What is that delta? Because what I don't want to do is is tell tell a community member that yeah, I am
taking $5 out of the $10,000 that we get for each student to pay for the operations of of facility use because we're not bringing enough revenue to offset the costs like that. like that doesn't make sense to me cuz I'm taking money out of a classroom to make sure
that a tier one person can use a gym after school. That that's that's what I hear, right? >> Yeah. I can't give you any hard numbers exactly where that >> that's the cross subsidy for this program where it boils down to. Now,
just to be clear, >> so we've had this discussion for years and years. Uh, and um, previous boards had exactly the opposite perspective on this. So, I just want to make sure you understand as administration, we've tried to get to that costneutral point
and that was direction by this board and uh, we believe that that is the right track to be on. Um, but we also have relationships we're trying to maintain with our users who are across our community who are big supporters of our
school district and we don't want to antagonize that either. So, I just want to say that >> well essentially >> collectively >> I mean I think one [clears throat] thing we've heard in terms of the increase of fees that came for a lot of different activities is how that then goes to the
families, right? So it's not that I mean it gets paid by our community in one way or another. And um I think you know one I know we heard from one group where they were really trying to minimize the cost of their activity. was supposed to
be kind of a free activity and when you basically increase these fees then that goes to the families and cuz they have to and so >> like you're saying Michael it's a cross subsidy in some ways that we're saying these activities are important for our
community members and how are we as a community supporting our kids so that they have things to do after school and before school and >> which is fair I mean because you're you're right it ends up going to the community members who want to pay for um
uh to use this. But again, it then [clears throat] the the opposite effect of that would be then the kids who are not participating get that much that much more dollars less because we're off because we're offsetting them >> revenue, right? >> Because we don't have the revenue. So then it goes back to then let's be super
clear and candid like how much does it cost to run user activities and let's just just just like whether we agree or disagree just align that uh and be transparent. We are in the whole a million dollars and and and and accept that out of our $300 million operation
we are going to absorb a million dollars for um uh the extra cost so that we can maintain the relationships in our community. I mean, we think that that's worth it. And it's and so that's the number we want to get to. While I I'm fine with seeing the revenue of 720 and
the expenditures of I'm sorry, the the revenue forecast of 872 and the expenditures of 835, but if the expenditures is really 1.8 million and not 837,000, then we're we're we're not being transparent of the actual cost. And so we're using a million dollars that we
maybe maybe some board members don't want to. So those are my thoughts. >> I agree. It would be helpful to know not just I mean for what you're saying and for us to um perhaps there are some [clears throat] kind of options for
building more revenue in some ways. Um I know oh I was just gonna say I know there's a difference in cost for the class different classes right and is there any I guess I I see this and I'm wondering are there opportunities for
increasing usage that you see or do we feel like and this would be more increasing usage for the class 2 class 3 um or are we kind of maxing out our facilities? >> Our facilities are maxed. We have people on weight lists in almost every building
almost I would say at least nine months out of the year. Um an important thing to note um is that and I touched on it only very briefly but 5 days a week and at least 9 months out of the year 6 days a week there's not
just class one class 2 cluster in the building and that's it. We also have school district sponsored activities. There might be a concert, a play performance, there might be a high school activity. So now you have different different avenues, whether
it's an activities where they're paying for an activities fee or it's a, you know, a middle school choir concert that is a district sponsored that is now held on a Saturday afternoon or Sunday night. And there's so there's a lot of different variables that go into how much does it actually cost after the
bell rings on a Wednesday to run the building when 17 you know 14 to 17 spaces are you know buildings are being used. So Bill and I have talked in length about how can how how granular can we get and what's important right now to ensure we
can focus on and then move to the next step. I think to to hearing that all the facilities are maxed out. I think going back to our meeting with the city council we had a month or so ago now, >> you know, I think that's a continued conversation like how how do we partner
with the city to create these spaces that the community clearly is is in demand. Um but the school district can't be the only um you know player in town building these facilities. So thinking about how to how to part how to partner in in
recreational space. >> They could build a $50 million facility next year if they wanted to. I mean >> Mhm. >> community center. >> There you go. >> Yeah. I mean like >> they don't need a boat. [laughter] Do it. They just go do it.
>> Are there other questions or comments? >> One thing um is it still Sorry. >> Go ahead. >> Sorry. Someone else said something. Um, >> okay. >> Is it possible? I know we did just increase costs for attendance for
events, but is that a possibility to I mean, I just paid $1 to get into a event at a different district before I came here. So, is it a possibility to increase by a dollar or that kind of thing to just generate? That's not that much. I don't know. >> So, I I don't want to speak for uh
director or superintendent Bman on this one. So, I'm not going to [laughter] >> based on um but >> those aren't those are those are district activities. Those are not the the users or the class one 123 users that are charging those fees. Do you
know what I mean? >> Yes. Just is revenue. >> But it's a good question to ask. >> You know, is it re it's just if we're if we are cross subsidizing where are there opportunities for >> Do you want to answer? >> I'll just say it. We we certainly can
consider that. Um, as you recall, uh, maybe a year ago, we talked about ticket pricing and we made some adjustments and there was quite a conversation around that and I'm just using that as my guidepost for any future recommendations. So, right now we're not
recommending increases there. So, uh, we can go back and look at that for sure um because there may be some opportunities there. That's helpful. And the only other thing I would say is if we do down the road consider I mean I guess what I've heard
from various user groups is like a longer runway would be helpful if they just given how um they budget so they're budgeting well ahead of a year and a so longer runways would be helpful for >> if we change the fees
>> if we change fees. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> Okay. Anything else? >> Yeah. I I'll end it with this. My my last my last conceptual recommendation. Again, this boils back to uh these respective categories where we're
generating revenue like user fees and even athletics and uh activities programs. How are we quantifying but more importantly uh documenting the revenue that's coming in and then associating what are the expenses that are that are that are part of it so that
we've got a uh uh kind of like a user fee P&L you have an athletics direct athletics and activities P&L and and so having that visibility I think helps me better understand do we charge more for football tickets
if our activities and athletics expenditures are significantly higher than what we bring in revenue. Uh again again because at the end of the day do we do future board members want to take money out of the classroom to cross
subsidize and how much is acceptable is 5% 10% out of the classroom funding. Do we want to I mean we talk about you know class sizes we talk about 7th hour we talk about all these extra teachers and we can't get them because we're cross subsidizing $5 million for activities
and athletics. is that something we that's acceptable for us and in in our community maybe. But in uh in future scenarios maybe not. And so having that data I think would for me would be valuable to uh you know to approve a budget potentially say hey yeah that
makes sense. So >> does that make sense for others? >> Yep. >> Okay. >> All right. That's my two cents. >> Great. Okay. Thank you for being here tonight. >> Thanks guys. Have a wonderful night. >> All right. With that um we're going to turn it over to Director Holgrren. um for the next three items, correct?
>> Yes. >> And all three of these items will be on four. >> Four the budget. >> Oh, yeah. You're you're doing the four items, but the next three items will be on uh next week's board meeting, the 26.
>> Yes. >> LTFM, the LTFM, and the um >> the 10-year LTFM plan, and the tech equipment sale. So, all three of these things will be put on um the board packet um at our next meeting for um consideration for approval. So, keep that in mind as we're discussing. Not
letter E. However, when we get to E, that is not that will not be on the board packet. >> Hey, before we start, do we have a choice in any of these things that you're presenting? >> A choice? >> Well, I'm going to say yes, but not really. >> All right. [laughter] >> Okay. Do you want I just I just I mean
let's just >> you want to launch into the 917 plan. [laughter] I >> thanks for the update. >> No, I I I mean >> I do want to qualify that statement just uh because I I I I am uh sensitive to that and um the the challenge we have
here is is um two things. One is we have some statutory obligations that we have to meet. So that's the first thing. The second thing is um and I'll direct it at item item C on the agenda, the 10-year LTFM plan. So the that's iterative and
you always have um inside of that 10 years because we have to update that cycllically. Um you do have the full freedom to to weigh in on that, but you're limited by the amount of money that we get in order to execute on that
LTFM. So just want to qualify those statements by uh by that because obviously you charge administration to shape these things and yes we are looking for your uh input and guidance on that within the cycles of the uh
modification windows that we have here. So um if there is something with our 10-year LTFM uh yeah we want to hear it we we can execute on that. on the 917 LTFM we have less because that is our
intermediate. We're a partner and that's far more defined and we're within the structures of them. Now, Director Baker does represent this school board with 917 intermediate and [snorts] um I'm certain has knowledge of the 917 LTFM
plan. So, that's another mechanism of um opportunity for this board to weigh in on what that board is doing. So, I just want to clarify that. >> All right. Should we start with letter B, director? >> Yes. We'll start with letter B. We'll talk about um LTFM. Again, that's
long-term facility maintenance. So, these are maintenance items that aren't ongoing, not with something we do on a yearly or a you know, monthly basis. This is a over the years maintenance. Now, um, LTFM when it came to district
917, they hadn't used a lot of this mechanism to get funding for the projects that they had because you see um, from 2027 to 2028, you're seeing a relatively large increase into their expenditures. And that's because in the
past, a lot of these projects, they did with their general fund and then they just dumped it into our tuition costs. Okay? So now what you're seeing is a shift to LTFM which helps us because it shifts a little more money onto the levy and frees up dollars in our general fund. So even though it looks like an
increase, which it is an increase in in this levy portion, it frees up money in the general fund which helps us in the long run. Um a couple things they've did here. Of course, they do have more projects planned for um fiscal 28. And
you see they kind of the same areas we we have put our money. We have pretty big number on roofs, big number on HVAC, and that's really where most of our maintenance costs lie. Right now, last year, they set aside $250,000 for some future roof. That's
>> But now they're they're actually using some of that to try to buy down the 28 years. So instead of seeing an increase there of 944,000, we're seeing I mean a total of 94 944, we're seeing a total of 642. Um so they're using some money that they set aside for the increase. Okay.
Uh, just [clears throat] conceptually, you said that they're shifting it over to LTFM as opposed to just being a general fund expenditure. Are aren't we limited as far as what we can use for LTFM? So, are we just shifting this over to a pot which then leaves us less money
for us to use on our own >> fun? This doesn't this does not affect the limits for our >> there's a separate limit in lease levy separate in LTFM for the intermediate districts. >> Okay. So even though we levy for it, it
doesn't cut into our limits. >> How do they determine who pays what percentage? >> Actually, we'll get to that. >> Okay. >> So why weren't they doing this before? >> I I don't know. There's a different set of um >> finance guy administration. They
>> he and I had a conversation when he came in to that job. Um but I'm not trying to take any credit for what they're choosing to do. uh our conversation was around looking at and peeling the onion back on other opportunities and he's
been very vigorous at that. Um the the next slide and just for example you see on their health and safety is a very small portion. Uh so they are using LTFM through the health and safety program too with a lot of PPE
um and some small management pieces. Um overall again you're seeing that total of uh minute 6 I can already read it 669 >> 64 >> um but99 >> the next slide you see some purple bars
we've we've gone around our our costs um now the way that they delegate or um allocate cost to their member districts is by two two pieces they look at net tax capacity against every single every
single um district and then whatever ours is out of the total that percentage that's 50% of our cost. The second 50% comes on the number of students that we have. So the bigger districts of course pay a higher percentage. So you can see
um for us where we have a 23.68% when we look at the net tax capacity and that actually is the largest largest piece on that side. when you go to the um the second side with the with the students then we have Bloomington paying paying
more than we are. So it's a it's a shared piece and it's been this way for many many years where they've split this 50 50/50 >> is this their calculation or is this a state calculation? >> No, it's it the the district made that choice many years ago and I've shared it
with you know the member districts and it's this is what they've chosen to do for a long time. >> Okay. And are you align are you aligned with this approach or is this I mean is it advantageous for us because how many students do we actually send and if we're if we're spending significantly
more >> well like I don't want to pay a high subscription fee for like 60 kids. We have many students. I don't have the number for you. Actually, Michelle does have I'm looking at that of the number of students that get served in district 97, but it's it is considerable. There's
programs there that >> we would not have enough kids to be able to run it here. >> Totally fair. >> So, that's that's why we use an intermediate, right? We have a small number of students that need service. So, we take the students from all the districts to make one classroom. But if but if we're for for every kid that we
send send if it's $15,000 and Bloomington sends a kid and it's $10,000 that doesn't seem fair. >> So [clears throat] I guess that's what I'm trying to get to. That's all. >> Okay. Well, I I don't have that number. We'd have to do some more looking and trying to get a cost per child. >> Yeah. And just because we're the biggest
district doesn't mean that we have to pay the most if we don't send the most amount of kids. >> Didn't you say it has something to do with how many students you have? >> Yeah. Half. Half of the cost is determined by how many students we have. This other half is how much net tax capacity we have.
>> Yep. >> We currently have 82 students there. >> Got it. And then how many total students do they have there? >> Oh, I don't have that. >> I mean, >> well, the other question to ask is weight list. And what you're pointing out, uh, Director Thompson, is uh, kind
of a struggle that's gone on within the members. And um I go to a superintendent uh meeting. I think we're quarterly these days uh where this this conversation's gone on. I I would ask Director Baker. She's got a lot of
experience with the board there. Um but there's been a lot of conversation around what's fair, what's not fair and um it's like anything else when you make a a formula um bear is applying the formula equally
to all. >> Um so that that has the the predicate that the formula is properly derived. Uh, and I think that's where your question lies is is the formula properly
derived? Um, I think it's worked for us mostly. Uh, I wouldn't say it's perfect, but there's probably the gened formula is probably not perfect either. Um, so I I don't know if Director Baker wants to
say anything about it in particular, but cuz I'm sure you had conversations on this. I I think it's served us well. It's not been great, but it served us well. >> I would imagine that the other intermediaries are using the same model. >> So, I think that's part of this too is
they have a coalition right amongst their >> Oh, I don't have any issues with the program itself and and I'm glad we have a pathway for our students that go do this uh and and take and participate. I think the question is again if if you're running a business, what's the cost of
running your business? how many people can you actually fit in your facility and and and run it and then like divide that by the number of students that you can have and that's that's your cost and plus a little bit of margin if you want to add on top of that. So, but if we're paying
more of the cost then again that continues to that continues to like hey we're taking money out of our general fund we're taking money out of our classrooms when we're subsidi cross subsidizing South St. Paul West St. Paul in Grove Heights. Uh again, I'm not
saying we can't do that, but it's a question we should be asking ourselves. Do we have the financial budget to offset everyone else's costs? So, >> yeah. Director Baker, do you have anything to share?
>> I think that um there's a lot of things that go into the formula and also go into programming for students that go to a setting for facility. And when you think of 82 students, you think, "Oh, I can divide that pretty evenly and we should be able to absorb those
students." That's not how it works. You're thinking about students that need um two adults for one student. So, that's very common in a setting for and so then they'll have like those students need individual classrooms. So, you may
have three students that need six adults over all of those kids just to meet the needs that are there. So that would be what um setting 4 is doing in the in that type of capacity. And we really like the last time that we had this
discussion, we absorbed um the PACES program back into our um our setting and that was a big big shift for us as a district. And we um we had a difficult time like staffing those programs. we still have a difficult time staffing
those programs and then um having the space that you need to provide for that type of um a population of students. The other thing that I just want to touch on briefly is the waiting lists and um I know that's really really hard for
districts and 917 has been very purposeful and working to bring down the waiting list but to bring down the waiting list you have to number one have space and number two have staff. Um, and so they are experiencing the same types of things as anybody else is trying to find teachers to staff those classrooms.
The other issue that you run into when you have a student that's all of a sudden like, "Hey, I have a student. I need you to put this student in a classroom." The way that you move students and how you move students into programs matters. And there are things that impact safety that impact um
regulation with that student population. And so for example, if I have a classroom of three students and I'm deciding I'm going to move a student from Lakeville into this classroom of three students because I've got to make space. I'm a setting four. I'm have one disregulated student that is now causing
everyone in that classroom to be disregulated at a very extreme rate because we already have higher needs than everybody else. It's a big deal. So when the Farmington District comes up to me and says, "I need you to move this student into that classroom, too. I really need to wait like four weeks before I move that student because I've
got to let the staff and the students come back down before I add a student in. So, it's not like they want to say no to us. They also have to consider the safety of their staff and the students that they're already serving. >> Yeah. But I think what Brian's getting at is, you know, have we done the
analysis to say, you know, what's our total cost? Because we're just looking at LTFM right here. So that's just the the maintenance of the buildings. But what's our total costs, you know, for those 80 students or do we have 100 students that could be in there, but we have 20 on the wait list. And would it
be more economical if we just provided the services here? You know, I'm >> telling you it wouldn't be. >> We wouldn't. No, >> it wouldn't be. It would be >> number one, we don't have the space. We just did a levy to make more space. And I'm telling you that you may have three students that are in that classroom right now that would need three
individual classrooms and six adults. There's we just there's no way that we have the space to provide it. >> Yeah. Well, and again, I'd say you'd have to look at the different factors like, okay, are we going to lease space, you know, or use other space that we're currently dedicating to other things.
So, I mean, it's a it's an interesting question. >> I just want to look at their books. >> I think we might be >> that's I mean like I mean if it costs a million dollars and we're paying 500,000 of it and we're sending 82 kids but they can but and but we're we're cross- subsidizing 400. Like that doesn't make sense. That's all I'm asking.
>> I'm wondering if um I don't think this should be at one of our board meetings, but I think it'd be interesting if the intermediates and by I know there's many, but maybe the twin the ones that are the twin cities. >> Yeah. >> Well, there's isn't there like >> there's four intermediates then there's
then there's multiple co-ops. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Um well, if the four intermediates did like a webinar for board members to just talk about the history, how they were formed, why they were formed, what the like >> Dr. I'm not saying we have to organize
this, but I think >> I think it's I know intermediate school because I happen to have a spouse who worked in one for a decade, but it is a really unique thing and it's hard to understand all the programs that are offered and um and so I think that would be help. I don't know if MSBA could
organize this or, you know, we could make a request because I don't think it's just our board probably that's curious about what happens with intermediates and how they were formed. Um, and it could get at some of these questions. >> Yeah. I mean, I'm I'm not saying that the formula is wrong. I'm just asking that are we paying more than than what
we need to and who's checking their books other than them themselves. And if we're going to use a formula that 50% of the cost is going to be based on whoever has the most amount of student or the most amount of uh uh tax net whatever
net >> yeah like that's going to be us because we've got a we got a large base and so even though our our account is lower so for example Bloomington has roughly the same well they're a little bit higher but APU percentage we're 23 and
Bloomington's 19 but if Bloomington has 200 kids in and we've got 82 like >> I think one thing to remember is the money we're talking about here is all levy money. So if we save 5 10,000 well it just means we levy less. We don't get
more for the general fund. It doesn't get shifted right. We can use it somewhere else. >> But then so just so that's fair but then our tax c then our our taxpaying community has to pay less for for a student that's not in their district. But we check the books. Like every
member district has a school board member that sits on that board. So none of us are going to say my district gets to pay more. Like we check the books as part of our board meeting. Like we have a same board meeting that we have here where we go through all the finances and the he gets up and presents to us just
like they do here and we check all of that. >> We could ask I mean it's a good idea. I don't know if they want to do a webinar like that or Dr. Faber has come to our board before. um he's asked to come again. >> He could come present to us start there. People have questions. >> I think we could ask a question like at
least for the LTFM, what is the cost per student enrolled? >> Yeah. >> No, you can't do that for program because each a program costs very different based on what the kid needs, right? But >> I think that's a valid question. So, >> just wanted to be fair.
>> Yeah. Okay. >> And you want to keep going, Bill? >> Yeah, I'll keep going. [laughter] Stop. >> I just want to touch on the other other two pieces just because they're part of our levy coming up. It's not something you have to take action on tonight. But when when 917 sent the information out,
we'll just touch on it. If we go to the least um lease building area, again, it's split the costs are split up uh the same. You see that the lease is going up for them uh about $100,000 from the year year before. And we're we're seeing
there about a what 40 40 $40,000 increase in our in the overall building lease cost u for the district. And when we look at safe schools now safe schools that's that is the same for every district. It's $15 per student in our
district that we we generate we collect and then we give it to 917. And every other district has the exact same thing. It's $15 per student for their um safe school dollars and then they're pushed on. >> So, um >> is this a state? Is this something we
have to do? >> Like like is this a state statute? Again, we're we're we're paying more again because we have more kids versus who whatever kids are however many kids are going based on whatever school that school should be paying for those kids.
Does that make sense? Or am I this money is not used for programming. Okay. But it's for their it's for their facilities. It's for the safe pieces of their facilities. It's for counselors. It's for um RSOs and so forth. So it's it's not in the classroom.
>> No. And I'm fine with I mean I I I have no concerns with contributing to that. What I'm at I think where I'm trying to get to is that because we've got the most amount of students, we pay the most amount. And if we've got the least amount of students attending, we're still paying the most
amount. And so >> this is a per people. >> So you need more nurses if you have more students. So if we're sending more students, >> but we're but but we're not sending more students. That's the issue. If we're only sending 82 students and they have the capac I don't I'm not >> compared to the compared to Randolph,
>> right? >> They're not sending 82 students. >> Well, I don't know. But well, let's say Bloomington is sending more >> and and I don't know if they are or not. And I don't and I'm just making a number up. Let's say the capacity is 500 a,000 and we're sending a 100 kids, right?
Yeah. 82 and and so if we're spending $15 per students that are enrolled in our school, right? that that formula doesn't make sense to me because we're paying more for that for that for 917 for safe schools when we should be
paying whatever the 82 whatever the cost is for the 82 out of the thou out of the thousand that that's does that make sense >> not a thousand >> what I don't know what the number is I'm making a number up >> that we are >> maybe parallel to Bloomington but we
have to have the most students going or around the most and if we have the students going, I don't mind paying the most dollar, whatever the dollar amount cost is. And so if they if we if we arbitrarily make a number up, it's $25,000 a kid uh a student. If we have
82 students that are going, then it's $25,000. We shouldn't I shouldn't be char we shouldn't be assessed $15 for 13,000 three. What what is the what do we what's the number? 13,000 372. >> Remember it's people unit. >> Yeah. Right. People units. So, but we're
paying more just because we have more kids, even though we might be sending the least amount of kids to the program. >> But I think at this point, we don't know that percentage. >> We don't know that percentage. So, we should probably find out what that is. >> I mean, logic would tell us that we're sending the most or maybe a little less than Bloomington.
>> It's probably pretty it probably correlates to your general enrollment, >> which is probably Bloomington's probably first. We're probably second. >> And are we paying But are we paying more or are we paying less? And if we're paying less, then I'm fine. But if we're paying more, then >> [laughter] >> anymore. May this is just a question to
be asked. I mean if if if because if we don't ask these kind of questions then we keep spending money that we don't have to maybe >> but I don't think we have a choice here in terms of >> I think there's also questions of like and I'm not saying like just because how something's done it continues to be done
right however if the four intermediates are operating with this model and we're the lone wolf saying no thank you they don't need there's plenty of business for them without us so I think there's also this balance of relationship ships of of being fiscally responsible to
Lakeville, making sure this opportunity is available for Lakeville students because we need it and partnering with all these other districts to make it happen. So there it's complex how this relationship, you know, it's not just about Lakeville's relationship 17. >> But but again, if if we're the one
paying 30% of the budget and if we choose to walk out, well then guess what? Then the whole thing crashes because no one can afford it. I mean, I'm not again, I'm not saying we were paying 30% of the budget, but it it is a fair question to ask that it's a good program. We need the program. Are
we are we being is is it is the cost not cost effective, but is is it fair for us? >> Sure. >> That's all. >> Director Baker, is this information that is available to me or uh members? I mean, is this something that you guys can talk about behind the or
>> I already know that we are either number one or number two with the amount of students that we send? >> Okay. And I also know that it's not it's been discussed before on how to reduce our numbers that we do send to 917. And it comes back to um
you have to have space. I mean, we could we could definitely have um our Tesla program here, but they do pay lab, which is a whole section in a room all in itself. We have we don't even have a PA lab. We'd have to like buy one. We'd have to buy the curriculum. We'd have to
buy all the parts. We'd have to train all of our staff. Then we would have to have a place to put it in our building to where all of our students could access it. and we don't even have a facility to put it in where you have kids that are 18 to 22 that would be accessing that type of curriculum.
>> I mean it comes down to not only space but being able to program for those students. I mean, it's not unheard of because district 196 took back all of their setting four students and they run their own setting 4, >> but it might be worth like looking into that and seeing how much it actually costs and how it is how difficult it is
for them to staff it because now they have their own setting 4. They're out of space and they're also doing an inter intermediate district to take care of the students that are now over and above what they can they can handle for their capacity. So, now they're doing both. >> Yeah. I don't I don't see us re reducing
uh or discontinuing the relationship with 917. That's that's not the issue at all. I think all I'm asking is financially are we paying our fair share and that that's it. And you know, you make a good point. Maybe we should do an assessment and say, hey, what is the level of effort to stand up our own
version of 917 and we make a little bit of margin on the top from whoever wants to join our program. I mean >> these are all interesting ideas, right? that that I think >> to offset the user the user fees. [laughter] What what I can tell you about
enrollment is based on uh MAR's reporting for 917, we are the highest enrolled um and it fluctuates obviously and they use October one count. So uh you know today as Michelle shared 82 uh but every
district shifts so as of the October one count we are the biggest user followed by Bloomington, Burnsville, Farmington, South St. Paul, Hastings. West St. Paul, Inver is there, do you have do you have a total count just out of curiosity?
>> Uh, approximate total 540 to 566. >> 540. >> All right, I'm going to do some maths on a calculator. 560 just because I can't do it in my head. >> So, so 82 out of 560 is 15%. So we while
we may be the highest we just shared we're the highest and we have the most kids which is great but that's only 15%. So 85% is being used by everybody else and so the question that all I'm asking is that are we paying 15% of the cost
and if we're not then maybe we should have a conversation about that. >> Yeah. Uh and we'll we'll dig into that deeper. Uh >> I mean if it's 25% of the cost then it's like >> but I think I think the chair's point is is probably something not to dismiss and
that is >> or intermediates if we want to go out on our own so to speak cuz we don't want to bear share in the manner in which the formula is designed or uh we can't get the formula
modified which I think would be a maybe a a more appropriate course of action. Um, going it alone means find a building, do the TI, lease it, uh, and then find the staff and take on the
burden of administering that as well. So, I think those things have to be weighed against what you're getting for say 15% and that your likely relative share for for um Lakeville might be high compared to say Randolph,
>> but it what's the trade-off that you're getting? And then we're a public entity, not a private entity. Um so we should steward appropriately as you point out, but um the difference there being service and
trying to provide that for a very high needs uh students in in our community and families who are struggling with that uh that challenge. So just want to make sure we're framing that uh
appropriately. Great. But I think we have some questions to move forward to 917. Does that work, Director Thompson? >> Yeah. I'm just What's the percentage of Lakeville Lakeville's share of their overall costs? And if it's
>> of the LTFM specifically >> of their entire operation because if it's less than 15% or if it's more than 15%, we should ask why. That's all. [snorts] >> So for next meeting, we need to approve the 917 LTFM plan or consider approval. Yeah.
>> So, you want to know the student service percentage? >> No, I'm going to approve it because because it has to get done. >> We don't have a choice cuz because if we don't then their operations is going to get >> but it is a conversation with that as a board if it's important to you guys how
much are you spending overall? Are you okay spending 25% of the budget when only 15% of the population is your kids? And and if you're okay with that, then that's that's on you and that's fine. I I just I I'm just curious. Maybe it is 33% one-third. What if we are paying
one-third of their entire operations and we're only contributing and we're only sending 15% of the kids. >> So, I think it seems doable to find an answer to the LTFM percentage. This the all the programming cost. It depends on
our students that we're sending might be the highest need kids versus Randolph might be the lowest need. And so, it it can't be just a flat percentage. So I think for this purpose we can >> director Baker or is that not true? >> Well the services that provided through
917 are not just related to the students that we send but also the service providers that we use from that because we don't have an aiologist on staff for any of our deaf hearted hearing students but they send someone over here to do that. Right. >> They also like have um a physical
impairment teacher. We don't have one on staff. So any of our students that have physical impairment, they get their services through 917 even though they're attending our district. So it's not just the students that we send, it's the staff members that we utilize because they have a very specific skill set and we don't have enough students in our
student body to have that person on staff. >> So I think I think it'd be more doable to find the percentage for LTFM and have it be more of an applesto apples comparison. >> Oh, I I'm fine without that student services >> for the next meeting.
>> Okay. Yeah, but I think but the LTFM should be part of the broader financial P&L discussion of like what's going on. >> So, okay. >> But if it's not important to you guys, that's fine. I mean, I only got one vote. >> I mean, no one else is
>> has concerns. I think what this highlights for me and I I already mentioned this is that starting on this board we get were given no information not not because of Lakeville but but by MSBA or or anyone on what is an intermediate and
who's a member and why were they I think that's a kind of a foundational piece if if you're a member of an intermediate. And I know a lot of school districts aren't part of that, but I think that would be really helpful training to better understand the finance model, the services provided
and and why these were created. So we can we can request that of our association. >> All right. Anything else on this bill? >> No, that's all I got. >> Would you like to move to our LTF? Yeah, we'll talk about our update [laughter] in a little while. Again, um long-term
facility maintenance. You know, it's there to preserve our structural integrity of our school facilities and maintain an opt optimum environment that supports the needs of Lakeville students, staff, families today and in the future. It's important to know we can only use LTFM on district-owned
buildings. So, anything that we have leased, we cannot use these funds for. Um this building's a good example, right? Um, it has to be attached to our building per site. So, like I said before, if you take our building, you turn it upside down, everything that
falls out, that's not LTFM. But anything that stays in it is LTFM. I can use LTFM dollars to, you know, the boiler stayed in or the water heater stayed in, whatever. You know, I can use LTFM to take care of that, >> but not like a chair, >> but not a chair. Furniture we cannot.
And that's that's always a frustration because there you know we need we have furniture needs but we cannot use these funies for furniture and our capital dollars are very very limited compared to what we have here. >> Um of course we're here to prevent further erosion of our facilities and uh
again they're deferred maintenance. They're not routine not maintenance items. And we can only restore like for like so. So we if something needs to be upgraded when we're fixing something I can't use these dollars to do that. We can only replace the same >> thing.
Okay. >> Not exact same like similar >> like if I have to change this carpet. It's not going to be exact same carpet. >> No, but I mean like projector you'd get the mo the >> LTFM item whatsoever. That's all technology. They're not eligible for
LTFM. >> So even though it's screwed in >> Even though it's screwed in, [laughter] they have these little caveat, right? Just like in the in the in the auditoriums and high schools, if a the lights on the stage go out, >> I need new ones. I I have to use capital dollars for that.
>> But if a if a light goes out in the audience, I can change that fixture with LTFM. So, who made those rules? I I can't. >> So, >> but if there's like update in materials in terms of what would be wisest to use, I don't know. close to.
>> Oh yeah, if you put replace a door and there's a, you know, a better door. We're going to put a better door in, right? Forever. >> But I can't I can't put in a wall. I can't change the looks of a room. >> Sure. >> Take out a wall and use these fun. >> You can put in a more efficient boiler system. >> Yes. Yes. >> Absolutely. Good example.
>> Which we have done. >> Yeah. >> Along with airs. >> Just the size of them have to be the same. >> The amount of air that runs through them has to be the same. >> Okay. >> That's so stupid. There's a lot of things on track. >> Would the football field be considered an LTF?
>> Actually, yes. >> And we haven't used LTFM >> and the football stadium. I mean the the scoreboards. >> Not the scoreboard. >> Not the scoreboards. No, no, no. The turf. [laughter] >> Just the turf and the bleachers. Track. >> Turn that. >> So, not chairs, but bleachers.
>> Yeah. Isn't that funny? >> You should run a whole webinar on that. >> Chairs would be chairs would be an upgrade. [laughter] And uh It wouldn't be like for like because we don't have chairs there now. >> That's true. >> All right.
>> Okay. Um, so challenges that we see on a on a yearly basis with our LTFM, of course, is our aging buildings. Things just keep aging faster than we really can replace them. Um, scheduling is always a always hard. We can't, you know, can't delay critical repairs. lots
of times we're using these rooms or using a building and we only have these little three little months in the summer where we really do a lot of work in the summertime. Uh, of course, other challenges are rising costs. Um, construction costs are definitely inflating faster than inflation itself.
Um, so we get fewer repair projects done. We have growing growing backlog of things that we need to take care of. Um, of course, and then a challenge is to balance competing needs with district sites. You know, each building wants their their piece what they want their piece fixed first and we have to try to
prioritize and do what we can do. But the needs will always help place the funding that we have. Now, some examples um in this plan going into next year. U Crystal Lake Education Center. Um, again, this building is used very
heavily and it's used 12 months a year. So, at first we were looking at lots of our buildings, we'll do it and we'll phase it. We'll do a piece of the building because we only get those 12 weeks in the summertime. We phase it two or three years and use pieces of the building. But in Crystal Lakes, um, because of their heavy use, we're going
to just take it down once, move the kids just for one summer and then bring them back. So, we're going to repair replace all the interior surfaces. We got an oil tank, old oil tank outside that's got to come out. That's going to come out. Um, the HVAC system is being totally replaced. And of course the front
parking lot. If you've driven on that parking lot, it's pretty bad and it's time to time to fix it up. Um East View along with Oak Hills, they're getting um interior services. They're their bathrooms are getting new tile work. It's going to look fabulous when we're done. But if you've been in there, it
needs some work, right? Um and Kenwood Trail, let's actually talk about phasing. This is our third year in Kenwood Trail and we'll be finishing up for the air handlers in that building AC in the fall, right? Yeah. Okay. Now, in your packet, we did put
some pictures in here just get an idea of how rough some of the stuff is looking. You know, our cabinets are delaminating. You look at the boiler rooms. We got corrosion. We have things that really need to Well, the building's built back in the 80s, right? So, I mean, we're pushing 60 years old on on
this building. So, most of it's original. So, it's time to fix it. You said that you're going to take Crystal Lake down for the summer while you do this. >> Where are you going to put summer programming? >> Going to Hi View. >> Hi View. Okay. >> No, no, they're not. I'm sorry. I always say that and it's not right. Over to
Orchard Lake. >> Okay. >> You just gave me a heart attack. [laughter] >> Sorry. >> They've been working for months now to like slowly pack up the building. Um they talked about at the advisory meetings quite a bit. Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. We've, if you go by um Crystal Lake, you'll see several containers outside that we're filling up every day, taking our time to make sure we're ready when school's out that we can start work immediately because it's going to take some time to take care of that. >> That's great, though. >> So, it Yeah, it's going to it needs it
and it's going to look great when we're done. >> Um, if you want to cut down to slide 15, you'll see the detail then for uh fiscal 28 and 29 where our budgets are. And again, if you look, um, we really are trying to catch up on our interior
services surfaces in our buildings. We have lots of carpets, lots of wallpaper. Wallpaper's falling off the wall. We're just trying to get after it and to get it taken care of. Um, are are there some things in here that can be pushed back from the middle
school and kind of do that as part of the middle school? >> They do. That's a very good example because we've been working with uh W as they're starting to put the plan together. So anything that we have in the near future that we are planning to do to these buildings, we're going to do it at the same time. So when these buildings are down, we're going to get
it. So a good example is over at Kenwood um next summer that we were we had their their parking lot ear to take care of. So we're going to do it that summer a year early instead of having it under construction two years in advance. Okay.
Very good example. So, um, in all three of those all three of those, um, middle schools, we're going to be doing the same thing. So, anything earmarked for them in the next couple years will be done during that project. >> And, and so we normally, so I see this with the budget and and just for other
board members, do we normally spend about roughly $20 million every year? >> It it it's growing a little. We started, you know, when we really concentrated on the LTF about right about the time I got here. It's like we have to do more and we the board at that
time agreed to put more money um into it and as that has gone forward the inflation has increased a little bit. So we're seeing four four or five% increase on a yearly basis. So that's why you're seeing that change. So we're trying to buy the same amount on a yearly basis. Of course every year that cost a little bit more.
>> And is that why we have to get a loan or we do a bond for $20 million is it every two years or every year? Well, yeah, we we we do the borrowing on a bianium basis for the bigger projects and they all run through our >> through our construction fund, right?
But some of it is done a as you go a year. So fund one has about $6 million in it, okay, to $7 million and then fund six and 101. So that's why you're seeing the the 19 million total. >> It runs through two two different funds.
The $20 million bond goes to those two funds. >> So, >> no, that all goes in fund six. >> Okay. >> And half of it's for this year. Y >> half of it's for next year. Okay. >> These two years that we have listed here, that's where the borrowing is going >> along with the money from the general
fund. >> Okay. >> So, going forward, um, we have we have to present a 10-year plan to the state of Minnesota. >> Yeah. Just I I just also want to be clear that um we're we're prioritizing uh needs. We're not we're not into any
wants. >> Right. >> Right. And um [snorts] I had the opportunity to do this in a school district that had buildings much older than ours. Um, and you get
that that synergistic effect of as it gets older, it breaks down faster or your cycles get shorter. Um, and there's limiting factors on what you can do with those buildings until you're at a point where cost of repair exceeds value of the property. We don't have that problem
in this district. Um, but the 20 million is it's it doesn't allow us to keep up, but it it keeps us from a worse scenario. So, so then from the needs and the wants, um, I believe we
might you might have showed us this last year, the total aggregate value of the things that we need to get done, was it roughly was it $80 million? Is that what I recall from last? >> Yeah, I can I can get that report again for you. Um, yeah, it's it's actually a
bigger number than that. >> Okay. >> But so we keep trying to work on it. So we keep we keep our buildings relatively the same shape. So >> and as we go and this is a 10ear plan, right? But tomorrow something might break. Oh, so we're we're going to change a priority on that and pull it
forward and we're going to move something else back. But we're working within the confines of dollars that we have. >> So when we look going forward, you see we have detail uh through 29. Um, after that on our 10-year plan going going into MDE, we have a 3% increase figured
in on our health and safety portion and then we have a 5% um inflation rate on the actual maintenance portion going forward. >> So, if you had a hund00 million worth of needs of things that we actually need to get done, uh, but but as a board, we
elected not to include that as part of the levy for for last November. And so when we spend roughly $20 million a year, how much of that $100 million actually decreases or does every year it's it keeps increasing because we're just not caught up yet? Or does $100
million actually get down to like 90 and then the next year it's it's 80. But I'm just I'm just want to be mindful like if if it's $100 million and we need to fix it now. And again, we we elected not to include that in the levy, but are we is
$20 million each year enough to actually take that $100 million down to like at a reasonable number? Okay. Well, going forward, >> are we plenty? You know what I mean? Yeah. >> Going forward, our plan is tried to be the same. So, every year it's going to be another $100 million. Okay. We're not
we're not bringing our need down, but it's not getting necessarily worse. But there are a lot of areas that we're not touching that it could touch. Especially when we talk about our outside facilities for athletics, when we talk about, you know, football fields, baseball fields, softball fields, those things are the things that that we're
not touching. We don't have the money uh for that in this plan to do any upgrades, not upgrade, but to repair them. So, they were the same. But eventually the football appeals get so bad that they will make it high on the priority list of the $und00 million
backlog of things that we need to fix, but we don't have the money to fix it. But we can only spend $20 million a year tops. Now, if we keep taking $20 million bonds every two years, half of it is eventually going to be interest payments, meaning that we're only going to be able to tackle 10 10 $10 million a
year. >> But that's remember running probably about 2% of what we pay. It's not half. Well, but if we keep taking out loans every two years, eventually, you know, 10, five, 10 years from now, they're all they're all going to they're going to catch up to the next board. They're
going to catch up to the next board. But, okay. So, $100 million worth of backlog needs that need to get fixed. We can do about $20 million every year, but the next year there's another $20 million worth of stuff we still need to do. So, we'll never
>> We need $100 million levy. Is that what I'm hearing? It's the board's prerogative of how much money we spend. So, we can spend more. The issue is it's going to touch your taxpayers. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We're not we're not asking for that at this point. So, let's not throw
that too far out there. [laughter] >> We have we have uh other needs as well that are related to students and staff in the buildings. So, um, yeah, let's >> Bill, thinking about >> rolling, [laughter]
>> um, >> I think in line maybe with this is what is our strategy to do minor repairs throughout the course of a year to prevent the need for like a all interior
makeover at what like I hear that we need to do that in some buildings. My kids go to Oak Hills and perhaps there are areas. I think it looks I mean I still think it's a very presentable school how it is right now. I'm not saying we don't need the repairs, but at
what point do we I guess how do you prioritize like what things are? >> We sit down as a team. Is there? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We sit down as a team and look at our we prioritize what's there. But we
have a 30-year plan. Okay. These are the things we know are coming to the end of their life. Okay? But when we get closer say, well, we'll go another year. We'll not go another year. And we prioritize where those things fit. >> Okay. So to fit within what we have. >> So it's it's actually kind of painful
sometimes knowing we need to do some things that we just can't. It's going to have to wait another year. >> Sure. Okay. >> And keeping the building safe, warm, cool, all that's first, right? Like Bill was talking. the HVAC projects take on so much, you know, >> but like Oills, like that carpet that
you're on, that's 20 20 plus years old. >> So, it's you lift it and it's like powder underneath there, right? >> And then you got, you know, the wallpaper stuff is is not as bad there. Like at Lakeville South, for instance, we're you know, the guys are using staplers, right? To be putting that up
now, you know, just to hold it up. >> Okay. >> So, but we got to prioritize what's the most important. >> Sure. So, we do like some short gap things, DIY type things we call them. >> And we're doing that all the time. >> Right. Right. Okay. >> And then like also to keep some of this equipment going, our maintenance staff
has really been doing a good job keeping that rolling, too. So, like say, you know, we got, you know, a an HVAC unit that's 5 years overdue when it was supposed to have an end of life. We're making it go that much farther. So, that part, you know, we do every day out
there. Do we call that extended life? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Do we have a savings account for this particular budget as well when you've got an emergency or does that come out of the general fund? >> Well, um a true emergency. Yes. If we
didn't have enough money in fund six, we would have to use fun. But yes, we have a fund balance that rolls in fund six. It varies a little bit by, you know, what we have going on, but there's always two $3 million. >> Okay. Okay. >> So, like when there's a flooding or whatever
>> contingency cuz that happens. >> That happened this year. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So, >> okay. Great. Other questions, Matt? >> Do you have a pretty competitive bidding process for all of these projects as well? I mean, what is the the standard procedure that we use?
>> What what we have done a lot um is cooperative purchasing. So we have different co-ops who go through a bidding process with the state of Minnesota. So different materials, we already have a bid price on it from the state of Minnesota. So that's where we
go first cuz we can we can control the quality of what we're putting in our buildings where otherwise if we just go low bid, we're not getting the quality and we're replacing them sooner. Um but you'll see what you'll see though when we do the the large projects coming up here with the middle schools, you will
see a big bid process. So you'll be approving the bids uh coming forward. Um and so that's anything that's over $175,000. So a lot of this some of these projects and we got some big projects too, but lots of projects under that. So we use that cooperative purchasing all the time and we get a good value for what we buy.
>> So like longevity too, Matt, when we get that contractors in that do that and then they stand behind it too. So then we have that part. >> So it it works really well for us. >> So So that process is more through the state. Do you do we do we ever venture
out outside of that to like local Lakeville trades companies? >> We use the smaller projects. We use local actually as much as we can. We want to use our local people and if we're under that $175,000 we can go and get quotes, match up the quotes and go.
>> And we do that all the time. I mean >> we spend $20 million a year. We we have a lot of we do a lot of quoting every day and a lot of um issuing contracts. I mean, not nothing against painting, but like painting's painting and and I don't know if we >> some of it's better than others.
[laughter] Fair. So, okay. >> Okay, great. So, this will come before the board also at the >> There'll be a resolution for you to pass on both of those. >> All right. Good idea. >> Okay. >> All right. Moving to tech equipment sale. >> Yes.
>> All right. [clears throat] They'll show tonight. [laughter] Nope. I'm jumping in on this one. >> Oh, yeah. Oh, sorry. Um, Bill's going to uh pass around um a few documents for you and I'll go through uh this and Bill
will add in as as needed. Um so, in alignment with um some state statutes, we had to conduct a formal competitive bid process >> to sell to sell some of our surplus uh technology equipment.
Um, we just recently are doing a staff device refresh. We have a refresh cycle of every four years. And so we have a lease that we um purchase our devices through. And it's a 4-year lease. And
that's our um refresh cycle. So every four years we um uh have devices on hand that we have to dispose of properly according to state statute. And um state statute tells us that we have to go
through a request for bid process. And so that's what we engaged in. And if you're following along on the the first page, our um our process was that we put out a request for bid. We advertised this in the Sun This Week and the Dakota
County Tribune and all vendors submitted their sealed bids um by Friday, April 24th. Then on Friday, April 24th, we opened those bids um with the tech uh tech team, some members of the tech team, and then we had business office uh
people there as well. We opened those sealed bids and then looked at each one of those sealed bids based on the criteria that we set up. So part of the um this document you have it shows the the public notice language that we used
in the newspapers and then it also shows the technology inventory that we included in the sale. You'll see that we had quite a few MacBook Airs and MacBook Pros and then our ninth generation iPads and then some Dell computers as well.
So, as a district, we received eight total sealed bids that we looked through and we evaluated those bids on multiple criteria and one of the criteria outweighed the rest of the criteria and that was the guaranteed purchase price
of the vendor. Um, so the vendors when they give us a bid, they'll give us a guaranteed purchase price, but then they also when they accept the devices, they will actually grade them. They'll give them a grade of A through D. And based on the grade of each one of those
devices, we could actually end up getting more money than what that guaranteed uh vendor bid was. So, the the vendor that we selected uh is called Total Technology, and they gave us a guaranteed purchase price of
$571,000. And again, it can certainly be higher than that depending on how they grade our devices. Um they uh they grade it based on the condition, if it's still working, if there are scratches, if
there's if there are stickers on them. Um those sorts of things, inventory stickers or stickers that people just put on the devices because they have to go through and they have to remove those stickers. Um, so we are recommending
that you um uh uh approve the device sale and that um at our next board meeting next week, this will be on the the consent agenda to approve. Um the
finance uh the dollar amount that we get back goes back into our um technology fund so that we um could continue to pay for staff device lease. Um that helps support that. And then um the total
technology will actually sanitize all of the computers according to NIST standards. that's um in the technology world that's the highest level of um of security and any devices that are nonresellable
resellable for them they will actually uh recycle those in accordance with ISO standards. So, our next steps are once this is approved by you next week, then um we would work with Total Technology
to begin device collection and removal the week of June 22nd. So, are there any questions? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, are we required to do this sealed bid process? >> We are according to state statute. >> Okay. So, you can't just do like an open
>> No. And then my other question, I mean, I see that we have deductions under exhibit A of the contract for missing items or issues with items. Do we have staff that are going through these different items to make sure that we're, you know, they're in as good of condition as we can put them in before
we >> do? As we are um collecting the devices from staff and we're handing out the new devices, we are taking note of those pieces and our staff is doing what they can to remove stickers or to do some of
that work so that um we can get the the most value for those devices. >> Sure. Tracy on I don't know what page this is but this buyback code is the 816,000 their estimate of what after they grade
them what it might be >> it could be okay yes >> but obviously I see down the guaranteed >> yes and that's what we um looked at the the criteria was the guaranteed number um but we could get a lot more than what we anticipate and yes you look through
uh the rest of the packet um on page two you'll see all the different vendors that um put in a skilled bid and what their guaranteed price was. And then you'll see the contract from Total Technology. >> Well, I've got lots of questions, but
let me I'll just I'll try to narrow it down to like three. Um the buyback process that that makes sense. I mean, for where where I work at, we get new laptops every 3 years. It's just guarant you just have to do it. Now, that's also because, you know, where I work,
everybody's on their laptop 8 hours a day, but teachers are not on their laptops, I would assume, 8 hours a day. And so, replacing laptops every four years seems maybe um too frequent maybe. I I I don't know. And there there might be some where if it's a typing class
might make sense, but replacing a laptop every 3 four years uh and they're and based on how often they may may or may not use it, that's a separate question. Well, the software update problem kicks in. Uh 48 months is actually you're at
36 private sector >> and there's a reason for that and it's all tied to how it revs uh and how um support works. We were at 60 months as a school district uh and we figured out
that uh that causes us that problem in particular. So um >> with software updates, >> Yep. We got rid of desktops across the system. We, you know, we're we're trying to be an enterprise operation but be reasonable and 48 months uh proved to be
the sweet spot. Um but for that reason, not so much for the utilization reason. And software revs and with AI, I think it's going to accelerate. It's not going to decelerate. So just that that's a perspective I want to make sure we're considering in this.
>> Well, and I want to correct too that The teachers are on their laptops all day because the laptops connect to the smartboards where they're presenting the material to students. So regardless of them sitting in front of the computer, the computer is used to run the material all day long. So >> Okay. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Um so so the second question, these iPads, I thought we passed a levy where we bought a bunch of iPads and it was like 100 bucks. >> Oh, we did. That was um student devices. >> Oh, for student devices. And so can we don't are we going to use them again for
staff devices or is that is that something different? I I guess what I'm seeing is that are we do we need to buy almost 3,000 devices next year because that sounds super expensive. >> Yes. [laughter] It is it is okay.
>> Um yes um our staff have a uh computer device and they also have a iPad. um those who want the iPad will um take an iPad. And we do that because when the students are working on an iPad and the
staff is working on a um Mac, sometimes um it doesn't uh react the same way as what a teacher would expect. And so it gives the teacher an opportunity to actually see it through the eyes of the student and um be able to replicate what
the student might see on their iPad. >> That's fair. Then are we buying our own and we're not leasing for the next four years? We're leasing. >> Okay. And and these are the ones that we bought four years ago and now we want to correct get rid of them. Okay. And then the leasing, how much is that per year? >> Um
>> for 500. Yeah. >> It's not that much. The payments payment uh right now is around 2.5 million >> for >> all our devices in the distance >> for for the for the staff or >> for the staff and the students.
Well, we don't need new equipment for staff. >> We'll talk about that for next year. >> That's next year. Students are next year. Oh, >> so they got to renew theirs again. >> Yeah. >> But hopefully should be the same cost, right? >> The budget's next. >> Yeah. >> Huh? >> Budget. >> The budget's next. Yeah. But but what
I'm hearing is that we also need to buy 3,000 to about 3,000 devices next year. And so >> and what I'm hearing from you is we're going to go through a lease route that budget discussion. Well, the the lease route allows us to get them all at one time. I don't have enough cash to buy
them all at once. >> Right. Right. We don't have money in our general fund just to boom, >> hit it. For an example, we'll talk about in a minute, but when we look at the devices for the students coming up, it's a buy million dollar. >> Yeah. Buy, right? >> So, we we don't have money to do that.
So, we'll lease it, spread that cost over the four years. >> And we can afford it then. And we're the same thing for uh staff devices, laptops and iPads as well. >> It just helps us to budget much better. >> That totally makes sense. Um the last
question that I have is like if I could buy a laptop for 400 bucks, like that seems like a good deal for me. Um but can do we never ask parents with senior I mean we've got 2,000 juniors and and seniors. I'm just curious. Or do you have to go through the Minnesota state
statute says sorry you can't sell them to kids? >> Oh yeah. Um uh that's a a great question. Um so um as part of this process um one of the pieces um that we asked the vendors were if they were able
to offer the devices for sale to our staff members or to our community. Um we don't want to engage in selling devices to families because then they think they might think we're the tech support to for those devices that we sold them. And
so some of the companies do have the opportunity to um have a buyback type thing where you can't have yours but you can buy one that they have up for sale. Um unfortunately this company does not do that for us. >> And and so then my last question I'm
just curious is is uh the unit of these uh Apple MacBooks are like $443. Uh like I cuz I I don't even know like what what retail is this? Like for example, are these Mac Apple MacBooks Air 13.3? Can they are they are they going to go around and resell them for
$1,000? And are we getting like because we went through the bid process and we're forced to only accept $443 per device. I'm just cur I don't know. >> Can't really do anything about it. >> I know. We can't. Right. Right. Well, >> I will say that we got a very good bid price. >> Okay. All right. >> Yeah.
>> We're very pleased with this. >> Very happy with that. Yep. >> We probably want the chips for >> and the copper. >> Other questions? >> Okay. So, as Tracy mentioned, this will come also to next board meeting for
consideration for approval. >> All right. Last one. Bill. >> We're going to go through the first flush of the budget. kind of give you a a overview of what we're working on since we started here back in January.
Um so you'll see our our budget process. U we're getting close to that June timeline where we have to have a budget in place for fiscal 27 before we get to June 30th. So we're going through that process now. Um you look at the next slide, you can see that um our fund
balance um does continue to grow. Um, as you can see though, it's decelerating and again we've talked about it many times. The state of Minnesota gave us 2.6%. But when we look at and you can know how our how our um union contracts are
built that we have those steps in there that that hits that hits us about a percentage point over what goes on the matrix. So that's why we're always seeing a little bit more cost um than what we bring in from the state of Minnesota. And that's why from time to
time a school district has to do some type of an adjustment to make sure we don't go down. Okay, just so highlights. Um we look at the factors of the state revenue. Um the state gave us 2.69% uh for next year. It's $22 per pupil
unit generating here about 26 to almost $2.7 million. Um EL cross subsidy. This is something brand new in the last um legislation um where we actually get a payment of 25% of any EEL costs that we have that we
that were not reimbursed for. So this 400,000 is something new um for this year which is helping us out um quite a bit. Uh >> is that regardless of level of EL service? So just anything >> any cost any cost that's EL is included
in here. Um special we're seeing an increase for next year about 600,000 getting generated. Um but the next piece is that cross subsidy. If you remember a few years back the state of Minnesota um was trying to fix or at least help
fix the cross subsidy and they had moved that percentage of the cross subsidy up to 46%. And now this year they're moving it to 50%. So you see that generates us about a million dollars that we didn't have before. So that helped you helping us out immensely. A million dollars. Um
so we're not cross our crust subsidy has shrunken by $1 million. >> Um but then of course on the negative side as you know special ed transportation state of Minnesota decided to give us 5% less. That's about a $400,000 change. If you remember the
last few years, we had a grant from the state of Minnesota for MTSS. That is ended. So that 125,000 is no longer a revenue item. Student support money that we've been able to use for counselors and so forth. Um they actually pulled back some of that fund. So we're down
about $50,000 um in that area. Moving on to the next um the next slide. This just kind of a review of where our levy is for this coming year. And because last year, if you remember, we were because of because of our shrinking
enrollment and the adjustments we had to put in place, we were actually down about $2 million. So that's pushed back up here about 1.3 in that unassigned area really is our our our levy. >> So Bill, you said shrinking enrollment. So you got my attention. Um >> Okay. I I shouldn't say shrinking. Thank
you. >> I say um slowing enrollment. We do have more students. It's just that we're we're not seeing that 2% which we saw 3 four years ago, but we were seeing 300 new students on a yearly basis. Now it's closer to about 100, >> right? But that was on a predictive
analysis that we had to we overstated, >> right? >> Well, when when you're trying to predict enrollment, I mean, you have your history to look at. On the front side, we we don't have anything. So we we use a cohort survival method which is this is what's happening in the past and we
make some assumptions that it'll it'll continue in the future and and our issue with the levy was well we are trying to to project what those numbers are two years before we get the money right so then we get to the time frame well now
we're short the students and then when we got to give the money back so exactly what's happened >> so that's why tracking the actual on a very tight iterative basis is key and essential especially when you're
talking about levy and you cannot overstate that number uh because there will be an adjustment. So, so at the city of city of Lakeville meeting, they
said that they have roughly 650 units that they anticipate that they will approve this year. Uh, and it takes 6 to9 months to build a home. And I believe the gentleman said that they were on track to do the same as they did last year. And so I'm curious. Uh I
think I thought I believe the formula was like 1.3 students per household or something like that. >> Oh yeah. >> In a single family. >> In a single family home. So that alone right there should put us closer towards I can't do math but like 900 kids. >> Well I can do math and um
>> that's 1,000 kids. So I'm like where are they where are they going? Well, so we are uh we have accounted for all the development data that Elco Market, Credit River, and Lakeville have in the system and [clears throat]
um we we are again triangulating using three demographic methods and using our internal as the priority method because we have the history and not deviating from that. So if it's wrong, everybody can blame me because but I I've been
right almost every single time and I trust that uh and it's not me, it's the staff internally has been right and I have trusted that and I would ask you to do the same. Uh we will be close. Uh I as you know we we adjusted our number
a year ago because I felt like it was overstated and I think I'm right and not because I'm arrogant but because my staff did the the deep dig and we did the triangulation of demography on this. So um
we're not shrinking. We are growing. We're going slower than I think this board was initially uh given numbers on. >> And for whatever reason, I'm not even going to get into that. I'm just going to tell you that
if you don't have the development numbers from the sources which is now we are building a database internal to this school system that will give us that data where we don't have to depend on others to get it and be even a a level
more accurate into perpetuity as long as we maintain that database. Um so that we don't have this problem and that we are we are um the level of precision is you know three or four orders of magnitude better than it's been in the past
because it's it's very difficult to get hit with adjustments on your levy >> because and because it doesn't happen in real time. It happens a year two later. So, so when if the city says that they've got 600 to 700 permits that they
are going to approve this year for housing development and if we're using a 1.3% um you know students coming into students coming into our into our into our district uh but your projections from what I saw earlier I think I I
think from last year it's like only 100 kids are being added that that math doesn't make sense to me so I'm just you know what I Because if if they're adding 600 units of of of housing and we're going to, you know, ballpark 1.3 students per housing,
that's 900 students over the next 12 months. Uh when those houses get developed and then if we're only projecting and some odd kids going into this coming fall, seems we might be short. But I'm I'm sure there's logic.
>> What What does short mean? Well, are we expecting more than 100 kids because we've got all these homes that are being built? >> That's the >> We won't be financially short. So, that's the first and most important thing. We uh our plan in terms of space for our kids. This levy was vital to
that and and we have planned appropriately for um the the level of precision we're able to achieve here. We won't have a problem there. Um so, I'm not sure what you mean by short. Well, what I mean by short is if we're
projecting about 100, low 100s for this coming school year in the next three to four months. Uh, and with all the homes being built, are we really expect are we really going to get 250 or 300 kids because of 600 units have been approved by the for from the city of Lakeville?
>> So, we'll see that in enrollment. I'm sorry. >> No, no, no. It's okay. >> We'll see that in enrollment and we track that um like a hound dog. uh because we have the systems in place to do that and we're able to look at by class size
or course how we're looking with regard to that. So that's not going to creep up on us. >> Got it. And there is no financial ramifications for us by having >> if we're under projection versus higher projection. >> If we're under we're going to end up with more money. >> Yes. Got it.
>> Yeah. We we actually get paid for the students who come. >> Yes. Yeah. Okay. >> Well, and what I'm not sure about is were all of those single family? I feel like there was some mixed >> like apartments. >> So, we we look at it by type of housing
and we we ascribe a weighted value to that based on historical utilization. Uh, and that's what I'm talking about the staff work that my staff does. We know what that is. We have those numbers and I feel very confident um that if you
wander or stray from those numbers in a manner that overstates it, you are setting a condition for a situation that we actually frankly ended up in. Better to better stay on historical averages and if you
exceed that great just be ready for that. but not overly ready for that. Like don't don't ask for more than you need. >> Yeah. And so then if we don't if we need to hire additional staff because now it's July and August and like oh we got
an influx of 50 kids. Uh I can I I'm going to make an assumption it it may be harder to staff that position just because >> a negative. It will not be harder. We'll see it coming and we'll know because again you can project your financials on
that and and you're able to to to handle that. What the other way is the problem. >> Yeah. Okay. Good. Okay. Um so overall when we look at our general fund revenue again with state
sources we're seeing about two 2.68% 68% increase of property taxes there at just under 9%. Our federal sources, you see a negative -4.2. Again, it's a relatively small number. This number always is matched every year though. If we spend more, we get more and vice versa. It's
always a it's always bound 100%. So, this is not a not a problem or an issue. And then our local or rather you seeing a small increase there at 300,000. Um, a big piece of that is now that we do have a a fund balance, we have some funds that we can invest shortterm till we
need it and we're seeing some more earnings there and that's really what's driving that number. >> That's the other financial sources. >> The other financial sources now is back to the lease. >> Okay. So for for iPads for the students for next year the state of Minnesota our
accounting rules is when we go into a new lease we've got to account for the full full cost of that particular lease and we'll see that in a minute. You'll see the cost in in that area go up but we also show it here as increased revenue. So it just balances out. The
number is the same. Okay that estimate is at $5 million um for that lease for next year. So that's why you're seeing a $3 million increase here, but it's balanced out with the cost on the back end. >> $5 million is the total cost for the full term of the lease for all the items.
>> They want us to account for it in the first year. Okay. >> I can't explain why they want that. It confuses a lot of people, but that's what that's about. >> Okay. And when you see the statements at the end of the year, the financial sources, other financing sources
actually sits in a whole different area. It doesn't sit in the revenue. Is it three years or four years? I forget. >> I'm sorry. What? >> Four years. Yeah. Okay. So like 1 point 1.3 million per year. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um so then uh the next slide I
just put this in just for a as an overview. You can see that state sources we definitely get most of our money from the state of Minnesota here at almost 70%. Our property taxes there at 27%. Um, of course we have some local our
other local um dollars and the federal again very small piece. Federal really is only two pieces. It's it's a a piece of special education dollars that we received is about $2 million and uh title our title programs. So that four that three point whatever it is. Can't
remember what it was. We just looked at it. But that's that's our federal dollars and that's what they're for. Moving down to expenditures. Um, looking at our salaries and wages, you see the increase overall there, 2.43%. Um, which is very reasonable. We what I
would expect. Um, employee benefits, of course, we talked about this. That's the insurance piece that increased immensely going into next year where some of that some of that is on our side is up toward 12% in some units and down around 10 in some others. But overall, we're seeing
there 9 and a half%. Uh purchase services, we've seen a 2% increase. Um pretty normal on a yearly basis. Uh supplies of materials here a little bit higher. Um capital expenditures, again, you're seeing that $4 million increase. Well,
that's entirely due to the lease that's planned for next year for the other that's some insurance pieces and so forth are relatively small now. So you see our our expenditures are up about 6% where the revenue was up about
less than that. That's why we see that narrowing narrowing of the increase in the uh fund balance. >> Okay. So I filled up my gas tank today and it was like $91. >> Oh, it was 91 and and and I don't have a
fancy car. It's just a quick but um is that impacting like does that impact us now? I mean because over the past three four months I mean I don't know what size charge does >> there's just an article about >> are you filling with diesel >> no I wish I had Tesla now [laughter]
>> just so you know the electricity generated for a Tesla is still fossil fuel so you got that problem >> yes but anyway that >> yeah that one's that one that one's very difficult but we're looking at current pricing and we don't know when that's going to go down or if it ever will go
down. So that's been built into the budget. Okay. We we have an escalator clause in the transportation contract where we share in that increased cost half of committee, half of us any pricing that's over $3.50
a gallon. So you see that fuel now is running around 520, but you take the tax out. We don't have to pay the tax. So it's about $5. So we're sharing in a $150. So it's 75 cents a gallon for the district right now. and and you're forecasting that dollar amount for the
next school year because we could have we don't know. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> We need some things to get better out there. Yeah. I say >> so again uh just just a a pie chart just showing how the the programs split out. You can see that general educ general
education of course is our biggest piece. They're at 90 $90 million and our special education they're running at 45. Um instructional support really in the you know for the classrooms they're another almost $30 million. So by far our
majority is going into the classroom. When you look at that pupil support that's really most of that's transportation by far. I think that budget's almost $12 million. >> And what one? Sorry. What else? pupil support. That's almost entirely uh transportation.
>> $12 million for transportation. >> Thanks. >> But what would it cost to get our own buses? [laughter] >> It's going to cost more than 12 million. >> You don't want you don't want to do that. >> We get the maintenance and those tires are expensive and
>> we don't have facility. This is no good. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Then I just uh gave you a fun overview. So we can just talk briefly here on what's happening in the other uh funds. our student nutrition ex um remains strong. You see um looking at another little bump actually up in that
fund balance which we really don't necessarily want and we wanted to stay about the same. We're about in the right spot. Um community service as you know they've been uh running a little short. Um they're balanced small increase to their fund balance to try to repair that negative negative number that they have.
Uh our building construction fund again we just passed the levy. We'll be borrowing some money. I have 50 million in here. We're looking at taking that 130 39 and actually splitting it over different time periods so we're not paying so much interest. So we'll do 50 um this year probably you know 50 the
next year and then we'll finish off the third year with a with a third borrowing >> so that we're just not paying interest all the money sitting in the bank. Okay. So that's why you're seeing that. Anyway, that's why that fund balance is going up. um debt service fund remains approximately the same which it should
and we just we collect tax money to make the bond payments. Um our trust fund again that's almost entirely scholarships stays about the same on a yearly basis bring in and spend out you know what we get. Now the internal service fund um of course this
is our insurance fund. We're projecting, you know, in 26 as we finish up this year, um that negative about a negative half million dollars. Um looking at what's happening in that fund right now, um actually the revenue is performing a little better and our expenditures are
also a little bit better. So hopefully we won't see that. But of course, most of our >> summertime, >> yeah, most of our, you know, expenditures really get into summer. So we really don't know. Okay. Um but looking at a going forward into 27 being a balanced budget that year. Uh not
seeing a big increase to fix it, but we'll continue to work on it. But we'll know a lot more here when we get to July on what's happening. So just a quick overall um the district finance continue to improve. Um we're not moving as fast,
but they we're improving. We're we'll be now up over the bottom side of your policy at 7 and a half% and we'll keep pushing to uh try to get up to that 10%. Um certainly is the goal. Um rejecting at this point um of June 30th of 27 to
be 8.8%. So I feel very good about that. Uh but of course it's subject to change especially due to hiring. We're still hiring. We're not done. Um when we put these um budgets together, I I do try to do be very conservative. So if we have
open positions, we're still trying to hire for for an example. We look at the health side. We do put a family health tied to that position just to make sure we're not short >> cuz I'd rather come in a little lower for you at the end of the year than at the front end. So >> because if an employee chooses not to,
then that's potential savings for us. >> Depends upon where the staff comes in at that there's potential savings as well. >> Correct. Got it. Got it. So, this would be Now, again, there's going to be scenarios where some staff are going to come in higher, so it's going to offset those that might come in a little bit
lower, correct? But it's it's Got it. Okay. Um the the savings the the the amount that we have in our savings account is was it 15ish or so or something like that? I'm not >> Oh, yeah. And the unassigned, you see here, you can see here we have a projected fund balance next year of
almost $28 million, but the unassigned is going to be, you know, down around about 1670. Uh what do you do because you have that invested what do you do with the with the earnings of that investment? Does that continue to stay in the >> Well, it shows up. It shows up as Yeah,
it's unassigned. It shows up in your revenue y on the other. >> But are we spending it is my question or or are we leaving it in the unassigned so that that can kind of like grow on its own? >> It's just part of our revenue. So we take our total out. We don't take our total expenditures. Yes. And our fund balance is growing. So I guess you can
argue yes the interest is there growing the fund balance. Yeah, >> but it's it's everything. We everything put together. We don't >> we don't uh take it apart. >> It's not dedicated in that fund. It's >> But aggregate >> it impacts the fund in the end anyway.
>> Yeah. Yeah. >> Like compounding savings until we get to the point where we need to get and [clears throat] like don't touch it now. But again, there's good work out that way. >> We do get a little more just cuz our fund balances are >> Yeah. you know, and now, you know, we're getting interest rates three and a half,
4% on a regular basis. We feel good about that with the market that's out there. >> Other questions or comments? So, this will come back to us again. >> I'll I'll bring it back to the next we we'll go we'll have the book in draft form for the next work session. So,
we'll go through more in detail, >> and and then we'll approve at the end of June. >> Okay. Perfect. Yeah. >> Yeah. I had a question. So, I believe it was last August, you know, the board had requested um the district to do a zerobased budget exercise, you know, on
various expense categories. I mean, where are we at with that? >> We we did go through the process in certain programs. We had um certain programs were picked like the administration, the district office area. Um,
it was technology um what we and oh and teaching and learning of course >> and what we really learned is as they brought forward the things they believed well I say believe they know they need right it's we know we need more things.
Um when we looked at those those costs um we could see where we have some places that we should invest some more money but there was no place that we could take money out of our budget. So there was no way to beat that up. There was there were just there's a little
increase in teaching and learning if you look in their area but it's not huge right but we have some some more curriculum that we have >> planning to do. >> So I mean will there be reports produced to the board? I guess I mean just coming out from the, you know, the levy push,
you know, the push back we're receiving from certain people is like, well, the school district's just not using our funds wisely, you know, and so it'd be nice to have something that we could say, well, look, here's how the funds are being used. You know, we're analyzing this and to make sure that, you know, every dollar is being used as
it should and there's no excess here. >> What's up? funding. >> I know, but for the it'd be nice for the district to be able to provide some more transparency to kind of >> we did the exercise and this is what we thought that we needed. Uh this is where the money is going. This is how it's
being used. Here's how much more that we think we probably could use, but this is what we're this is what we have. >> Well, I can get a a physical report to the board uh on that exercise. One of the things um well I I'll get your
report and at that time we can talk about what our budget is and what it is not. >> Um can I just clarify Bill is this the first time in a while that we have had the expenditure exceeding the revenue
or the pay general funding percentage? the first time >> in a while >> in in a while. It's yeah, it's very it's very close. Um but yeah, they say it's narrowed quite a bit. We have some money that is in some restricted areas which we're going to
use. So that's why the unrestricted number is still going up a little bit. We're using some of the other funds. So like I say, eventually a school district are coming down and adjustments have to be made. There's no other way. We don't
any way to generate any other funds than from the state of Minnesota and by the by the enrollment that we have. >> So there's nothing on the expenditure side. So obviously we're always needing more than we have. But >> correct. >> Like this is the first time we've seen this. >> Yeah. But I mean that's what we talked
about when we were doing, you know, our largest contract with the union, the teachers union. It's like you can't overspend otherwise it trickles down and it's just going to burn you somewhere else. Um, and we do have a funding problem from the state which
no one seems to want to address. >> And a big problem from the federal government with special education. >> Hey Carla, are you referencing? >> Yeah. See, >> the general fund, the the revenue of 220 or what are you what are you looking at?
I was just looking at um up top in terms of the general fund revenue um the 11.6 versus >> when you look at the total when you look at the fiscal 27 budget revenues 2 226
million >> and the expenditures at 225. >> Yeah. You want to go down to uh fiscal year 27 fund over. >> So is it is it narrowed? Absolutely. >> Yeah. But we are we do have more revenue than expenditure. >> Okay. >> Okay. Great.
>> Brian, do you have more? >> Yeah, I think that Well, yeah, two so two questions. One, uh, with these with with this upcoming budget. Um, any material changes from a staffing point of view? I know that we added some staff last year from counselors. Um, anything
uh any material changes just out of curio if you know cuz I I keep hearing we don't have enough recess adults with 300 kids outside playing during kindergarten and so does this budget solve that or it doesn't it does it does not >> they they receive the same number of
hours per 200 that they did last year. >> Yeah. Okay. And so nothing really changed in regards to staffing going >> hearing that from staff from parents from >> principles. Well, just a couple maybe one. Well, two now. >> There's a presentation in it. >> Yeah. Yeah. Like these kids are wild
during recess and then and the grand >> maybe wild is being dramatic. They're >> they're having a good time. >> But there's what? One adult, maybe two adults outside. Anybody? >> No. Right. >> All right. All right. Well, if it's not
an issue, if it's not an issue and if it's not in the budget, >> it is an issue. It's a financial issue [laughter] and um I have to cut somewhere else to fit that uh to add more in there. Um
we haven't finished our enrollment processes and the priority goes to staffing our teachers in our classrooms and special education, general education. Does that mean down the road we can potentially do something? My
answer to that is uh I'm always looking but I'm always looking 10%. Have to balance that. So um >> I think our board has also made very clear like some of these the goals right
around the data that we're looking at around academic performance that that that takes more resources than we have right so we can make a laundry list of probably hund hundreds of things that would be beneficial to invest in but seems like we've been very clear that we
want to increase this is a big priority and so I think that's where most of the resources are So let the kids run wild at recess, >> right? And I don't think that's the issue. I think the issue is that they run wild and it takes them an entire class period to unwind >> is what is what I'm hearing. Yeah, there
are there are second and third order effects and impacts uh and and they do uh impact the the academic uh environment just like having you know in some cases behavioral issues in the classroom that you know we we hear uh
complaints from parents about situations that occur that way too and that's part of that's due to what you have in terms of staff and capability there too. So um >> the the cost of adding another recess person and I don't know how much it is uh and and you aggregate that and say
well what is that impact for what's the impact of for the 500 elementary students coming back to class and if they get an extra 20 to 30 if not 40 minutes of academic learning because they're back in that stage or I I don't know but I'll defer to you guys if if
it's not on the list to add then it's not on the list to I think there's many things, right? So, I think that's that's a maybe a bigger conversation about priorities. >> And seventh hour, are we adding a seventh hour this fall? >> A negative. [laughter]
>> Guess we're not doing that. >> That's got a big budget uh uh price tag to it, but we do need to talk about that and we are going to the board uh I think was real clear about talking strategy. uh most of the conversation
centered around future bonds for growth and basing that and uh we also have talked a lot about uh a long-term academic strategy. So we are taking that to heart and uh I think very
soon here I will come to the board with here's here's our plan to address that concern by the board. Um and you know then that conversation I think starts to be had in in a broader context uh for our school district. So it's not
forgotten. Uh it's we we want to do it very deliberately and do that uh communitywide. >> And then my last comment uh and and it's not maybe it's not budget related or or
maybe it could be uh Lakeville North they're from uh last weekend and my son was had a chance to participate. Uh had a um he had some friends over and there was good discussion which is crazy around all of [snorts] the students saying we need
more academic seminar time and and they're like we're fine if we got rid of wind time. We we're fine with got rid of cougar time. We need to be able to go to a class if we're falling behind. And so, uh, while it doesn't impact the budget,
but it's something to think about. >> I just I have a comment on that, too. Um, because it's something I've been watching, uh, quite a bit as far as our data goes from, uh, the past 14 years that our special ed numbers have continued to increase. If you go back to
2010, we were at 14%, now we're sitting at around 18%. Um, when I look at the staffing as far as our special ed numbers across the district, if I look back to 2022 and then kind of where we are right now, we're staffing about the same. When you think about like our
percentages increasing that much, you would expect the same increase to um to happen within uh the classroom, our FTE for what we're doing for special education. And I only bring it up because I do hear a lot um of chatter um and receive a lot of emails from
teachers based on case load numbers and special education and um if the district or board is going to discuss, you know, what's our cap or what's our um our our top dollar on some of those things. And I just I think about like we we do want
to have more time for students that are falling behind. We do want to have um we want to see academic progress with all of our students, not just a certain population. And if we continue to increase our special ed population, but don't increase our FTE to make sure that we're providing those supports, um then,
you know, statistically we're not going to make progress in those areas. So, um just something to keep on the back burner there as we think about staffing. Michael, do you imagine like both of these points which are important will surface through the process that you're
developing? >> Yes, absolutely. That that's exactly uh what we're on. Um and I think that's correct me if I'm wrong, uh Emily, but I think on our agenda next week we're doing a special ed update. >> We are.
>> So very timely. Director Baker, >> I keep the data. >> All right. Should we move on to policy conversation? Okay. So, we have two policies tonight to work through from our last meeting. We have the first reading. Uh we'll
start with policy 512, which is school sponsored student publications and activities. Um thank you, Principal Murphy, for joining us this hour. [laughter] >> Watching. >> I know there were a um handful of
questions from the board through that conversation. I don't know, Michael, if you want to start there. Um, or what what's the best point of attack? >> Yeah, I want to start there. Um, and I I'll try to
I'll try to uh address the questions. Uh I did ask principal Murphy to uh come here but um we we'll start with 512 and and I'll I'll have an overarching statement that um based on how so MSBA
has made a recommendation with regard to uh this policy and the other one that we're going to talk to uh talk about uh again today. And the context of that is these are policies that they recommended to us um in our in our audit to have in
our inventory of policies. So um this one in particular, we don't have publications like uh we don't have journalists that are doing school newspapers for example. Um, and so while
while the uh policy recommendation uh by MSBA is legitimate and and important, I also think it's important context to know that uh we we aren't operating with that in our system right now. Okay. Um,
so what types of activities fall under the policy? And it states it, I think very clearly at the beginning, uh, words to the effect of production of school sponsored media and activities while at the same time balancing the school district's role in supervising student publications and the operation of public
schools. And I just shared with you, we don't have those publications. Okay? And then it pertains to uh, grades 6 through 12. So, you're talking secondary in our school system. Um, and I uh went through
and looked at what do we have that um would qualify in terms of a journalistic uh um activity and we don't have those either. So, what we do have um and the policy uh
does reference um things that are academic in nature. So like in our program of studies, if you have a class that's media related or um publication development related, those aren't part of the um the policy and neither are
yearbooks. So I think a lot of times when you pop in your head, you say, "Oh, yearbook, that's a student publication." Um, so I I want to just make sure we're talking about that within the context of the policy as it is articulated
um in in the draft that you all have. Um, one of the other questions was who reviews controversial content? Who decides what is appropriate? Um, and I'm going say two things. One is uh I think I have a relationship with our principles and it doesn't matter if it's
related to this or other potentially controversial issues where I think they feel very comfortable picking up the phone and calling me when they have an issue or concern that would rise to say somebody's written something or done
something that is obtuse. Um but what our practice is in our system it's a tiered assessment. So in this particular case as you read the document um it would be a school advisor
followed by the school principal and I'm 100% sure that if there were an issue the principal would elevate it to me the superintendent. So there's not going to be um some freelancing going on
with regard to any kind of statements that might be provocative or um outside of what is outlined in the policy. And I think the policy did lay out some very specific examples uh itemized in there. I'm not an attorney, but um to me that's
that's very uh legal kind of language that we would want to obviously be enforcing and that as a principal and a superintendent we would be focused on that. Um and would talk to attorneys if necessary and of course I would talk to
the board chair as well. So, um I think that's kind of the chain of of command or tiered response to uh escalating a situation that might uh or could develop. Who's designated as the student media advisor? um principles designate
uh typically it's a a volunteer staff member, but it also could be associated with content where you have a uh and and maybe uh um principal Murphy can talk more about that process. But typically the principal is going to designate and
they're going to use the standard criteria that we use for uh clubs and those kinds of things where we're trying to uh match a staff member, typically a teacher with um with that uh are there
rules and guidelines to make that determination? Well, it starts with judgment, but advisory position uh practices that we have long established in our school system. Qualified staff volunteer is the way I would describe that and that that individual is
beholden to all of our policies as a staff member and for sure the principles are as am I. Um is authority only at the teacher level? Uh no. Again, I'll just say if a adviser is having an issue, they're going to escalate to the
principal and I'm believe the principal will escalate to me and I will make sure that there's a conversation at a minimum with the board chair as I have always done. How do ID 194 brand guidelines intersect with this policy if at all?
The keeper of the brand so to speak is uh district communications department. Now, we do have um some challenges and I've seen them evolve over time in this district um where, you know, we used to have this Apple with uh Lakeville Public
Schools. Anybody remember that? >> Mhm. >> Um and then we transitioned to the current kind of branding uh device that we have now. And we have uh uh when we do presentations, they're all kind of set the same way. And we try to brand
ourselves that way. And um you know you can look at the all for 194. It's got our branded colors. So u I think where we get into some gray area with this is not so much with student groups per se but more with um with u well I guess
with some student clubs and with some uh social media and with our boosters. And we want to be we want to have a good relationship with all those those groups. But the keeper is is uh district communications. And um so I think the
way I would articulate that is that our district branding such as logos uh can be used by student journalists because that's what this is referring to in the um in the draft document for policy 512
um at the discretion and with the permission of our communications director. And so that would be our our method to kind of keep some command and control on that and represent our brand. And any student publication or media produced by a student journalist would
be explicitly identified as such and not attributed to the district per se. So you get into those kind of um bleed over lines I would say. Um, and I think if I were like a private company, I'd be
really protective of my brand for all the obvious reasons of what can happen there. U, but as a school district, we represent students and we represent other groups that want to be associated with us and we want to be
permissive but uh have positive control of that. So, I I think those were the questions um that that were shared with me and hopefully um those answers are at least an answer. Uh whether they're satisfying or not, I don't know. Um, but
I really think that the important thing to know and to focus in on is and I I have um a sensitivity to this is if there's controver controversial content, we do have a methodology to confront
that and deal with it. Um that it does not omit the school board, but I have to work with the board chair um whoever that may be um in order to make sure that you are informed. But obviously we want to work it at
administration level uh as quickly as possible. And we do know um you know some things can blow up. You know social media is a real thing. I I feel like um I've got some experience with it um in this school district because social
media's been around a while and it's it's a challenge because the communication outpaces any decision cycle that you have because you're reacting in a lot of cases uh to something somebody did or said whether it's through a journalistic process or
the more wild west that social media presents to you. and we've refined our our ability to deal with it as an administration over the years. But by no means are we perfect. I think the important thing is that the lines of communication and my approachability is
as um open as possible to support our principles and to support our staff in the buildings when situations do arise. So um I will >> before we get into continue conversation, thank you for that. Superintendent Bowman and Principal Murphy, if you have things to add,
obviously, please um jump in. Um I think our understanding from our conversation with Terry from MSBA was that this is a required policy. We need to we need to address the missing required policies um required by state statute as soon as
possible. As I read this, >> is it required? >> I didn't think it was required. >> I believe this one is a required policy. >> Mandatory policy. >> Got it. that when I read the when I read it again the second time after our meeting, it it deeply emphasizes um
students first amendment rights. Like that's what this policy is really about is is protecting students first amendment rights. Um and so I want to be cognizant of that. Given that like do do either um superintendent with the cabinet or the principles do you feel
like this version is correct or would you make any alterations to it at this time given our current you usage of this of publications? >> No, we've reviewed um neighboring districts also have reviewed this within the last year or so and it looks very
much in alignment with theirs. Um, so I think you know, Superintendent Bowman did an excellent job describing this. Um, those questions I think is exactly what we've discussed. Um, and the policy supports that. So I I'm comfortable with it.
>> All right. Did you have your hand up first or >> Yeah. >> And then Paul, >> sorry. And I it is uh it's 121 A.80 80 that says we have to have a policy um on this subject or similar to
what the statute says. Could you just clarify again, Superintendent Bowman, what what this actually applies to? Cuz I wonder if we're almost like too broad for our needs. >> Um cuz you said yearbooks. >> Your books journalism. >> No, that that's excluded. That's what's
excluded. It's really about I I mean when I read through it and I try to think of what it is that it's focused on, it's on just what the board chair said uh the the first amendment rights of a student who's doing journalistic
functions and um you know to me I go back to school papers or whether that's an online school paper or a printed school paper that's the only thing I can look at and say okay that that would be But we don't have that.
>> So, so do we even do we need this length of a policy where we just say we have a 512 policy but like we don't we don't use a five we don't do anything. >> Well, what I would say is so that's today and tomorrow could be different. >> And so because it's mandated uh I would
say we do and we want to be comprehensive and we want to be I I think we have two attorneys sitting here at the table. Um, we want to be um thorough and make sure that we are covered in in
anything that we would do in the future. >> Uh, Paul. >> Yeah, please. And if I recall the conversation last time, uh, and Michael, you're right there. It wasn't about a newspaper. It wasn't about uh a publication type thing, but I I think
there was a a radio or a a podcast or something. at at South is Was that true, Sean? >> Yeah, there's a the broadcast media course that um we teach the students do like a reporting news station show that they show during our advisory period,
Cougar time, uh once a month and it's just, you know, stories. They might do a story on the girls basketball team, interview some athletes, the coach, etc., how the season's going. um or they might do a story on um questioning me
about the length of a lunch period um and the need for a longer lunch period or something such as that. So yes, they there is a um a TV broadcast that we do in our class at Microsoft. Yeah. >> Thank you. And then I think the
conversation went into um those kinds of things are very benign. But I I thought the conversation went into there is free speech of course but in the corporations I worked for and I I
think some other people might verify this. You couldn't, you had free speech, but what you couldn't do is use the brand equity or the community goodwill of the particular company and let's let's say it's the school district
instead of a company to bring forward a point. And the best example of that is is political whether you're left, right, or in the middle. What if there was a podcast
where um it's presidential year and somebody from one side or the other is using the school brand and community goodwill to pitch a candidate? Um, do we argue that that's free speech or do we
argue that there should be parameters about how you can use the school as a platform to get your personal opinion across and I think that's where we were looking at should we have some some boundaries
in the policy for things like that. Now, now I know the principles will keep on top of that, but still should there be parameters inside that policy. >> Mhm. >> So, in the policy here, oh, sorry, super
in the guidelines, I think on the second page, letter A, this is where I think it really hit me what this policy is really about. And it's it's what you said, Paul, the first amendment rights. It says freedom of speech includes freedom to express political viewpoints. So that
is explicitly stated as protected in this policy. Um that is required by federal or state law according to MSBA. >> Yeah. And uh US Supreme Court case Tinker versus De Moines kind of set the standard across the nation with regard
to what students can do. Now staff different matter. >> Yeah. Um, and I I I understand your point, sir, and I I I I would not dispute what what you're saying. I just know that I've dealt with this in other
um context, but still a political context. Um, but I'm pretty sure that the Tinker versus De Moines set the set the standard. I'm not pretty sure. I'm 100% sure uh around what students what
we can do or versus what students can do um in terms of their free speech and their their rights and abridging those is now you're getting into potential litigation liability issues. So under the circumstance that you described
>> um Tony and then Brian. >> Yeah. Um I kind of thinking along the same lines as Paul and what Superintendent Bowman um brought up um about the chain the chain of escalation um how it would go from
the student adviser to the principal and then up to the superintendent. Um I'm looking at the definition of what is a school sponsored media. Um there's there's two things that that I would like to add here if I could just
describe because I want to differentiate what is essentially an informal um you know an informal journalistic endeavor uh by a student from what is a school sponsored journalistic endeavor. Um because if
we're we're talking about a school sponsored media that to me is more formalized within the school. the school is responsible. School is eventually liable if there's a problem. Um, and so, uh, and I think we can kind of do this with with, you know, kill two birds with one stone by just basically itemizing
that chain of command within this as far as by the school sponsor media is by adding just number four in there saying in an endeavor approved by the principal. Um because if a kid gets uh you know a
student is encouraged by a media by media teacher uh to make a newsletter, make a podcast, you know, do one of these uh side things and runs a foul of the policy. Um even if it's just an
informal podcast or newsletter, um the school could potentially be on the hook of the the policy because of that. And so dividing that line basically saying okay for a formalized school sponsored media it has to be approved by the
principal and that includes that would include the principal in the chain and that way it it draws a harder line as far as what is a formalized media um school sponsor media and what is not formal school sponsor meeting. It's
>> kind of like a checkin balance. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, Brian. >> Yeah. And I guess I feel like we're talking I think the scope is I think we're talking a lot about a much larger scope than maybe we're were that is
necessary because again if 512 is a required policy for the state and 512 is very focused on if you've got a journalistic uh program in your school, your journalists have the right to write whatever they want to write. Period.
Like that's pretty much the the the nuts of that is how excited >> except [laughter] all the things that have been outlined in there that >> well except for one through 10 >> except for one [laughter] because if we don't have a we don't have that here then I don't understand if
there's a like we can have these these conversations but we don't have that and when we choose to go down a path where the school district is sponsoring a journalism division or a department or a thing and or a or a or or social media
journalistic page, then we can build that for now. It's like I guess we're trying to solve something that we don't we're not we don't have. You know what I mean? I mean, >> are you thinking like the model MSBA policy is fine for our situation at the moment? >> The the MSBA policy is fine for school
districts who have a journalism department and they have and they send that out. We we don't have one of those. >> No, it's not a it's like a student newspaper. But we don't have a student newspaper. We don't have any of these things that 512 would really cover, >> but we're still required by law to have
the policy to do it. >> They may decide to do it tomorrow and and post something and then >> they have the right to post something, but that is not a school sponsored thing. >> What What about the broadcast? The student broadcast >> is that I don't I don't know if that's considered this or not. >> Well, it's a course that's in our
program of studies and there's, you know, guidelines with a teacher that's specializes in this. And I think the what Mr. Bowman explained um if there was anything controversial that adviser is very well verssed in journalism cuz
it's their college degree and they would run it by the principal if it had to do with anything that would be construed as controversial under the you know you can see the is it defamatory, threatening, harassing, obscene, violates law or
district policy. All those things are listed. Um, >> but do those students have free reign to No, so it's not then it really doesn't fall under this category. It's because >> Yeah. >> Brenda >> Sean is the is the broadcast it it's not
a district sponsored publication. It's part of their course. >> Correct. >> Right. And they are they being graded on it? Is it part of the grading system? So, in my opinion, just off the top of
my head, that [snorts] wouldn't be a student publication because it's part of their coursework. It's part of their classroom graded coursework. It's not like a student paper. It's not a separate um
uh student group or a school sponsored student group. Does that make sense? Well, I mean it it says school sponsored media, not publication, you know, which is broader than publication, I think. Um, and it doesn't state that it has to
be necessary necessarily sponsored in that way. Prepared, holy, or substantially written, published. >> I don't see that broadcast. Yeah. >> I mean, so if we have, you know, hey, this is the Lakeville South broadcast and you have students on there. I mean,
once they say something, you know, that goes over the air, then it's too late, right? >> Well, it's not live. >> Oh, it's not live. >> Oh, okay. >> No, that's the teacher supervises the class. they tell >> they edit, they do stories that are edited throughout the week and then once
the final ads are done. So students work on editing, they're working on production, camera work, all those things um that you would do for for a broadcast media course. Um students have different roles and then they have a teacher who's trained and the teacher edits and reviews
>> part of a class >> and then it's you know >> so the class ends and then the thing ends. >> Okay. Yeah, pretty much. >> So, I mean, I'm I'm with Tony. I'd love to see under school sponsored media, you know, must be approved by the principal
in advance in order to constitute school sponsored media. Um, I understand that we have staff that'll, you know, teachers that might be, you know, advisers here, but, you know, the further you get away from anybody with accountability, you know, the harder we're going to have time controlling it,
you know, whereas a principal, you know, if you're responsible for it, um, you're going to watch a little more closely and be a little more careful with what's going out. I I guess I mean what I heard from principal Murphy is that these adviserss
are well verssed in this to basically identify any troublesome things that they would bring to our principles >> and that's typically um the way I've had it explained to me and again I'm not a legal expert um however um they don't
want that um because then it it puts us in a liable state but the the aim of the policy is to protect students free speech rights and and what they can do. But um there's a there's a an order a sequential order that the person's in
the classroom working with the students that's the principal is not. And so if they see something as a teacher, they would report it to the principal. Then I might run it by Superintendent Bowman uh if I had questions or Brenda and and um
and make a decision from there. Um, what I've heard, um, if you do put some oversight with the principal in there, you're you're opening yourself up for more liability. Um, and again, I would I would defer to our legal team and to
look at any other board policies that have that in there. Um, but I think that's a slippery slope because obviously um, that's a lot of um, stories to be run by a principal um, if it doesn't go through the teacher first. Yeah. Well, I I think too and I think we
could ask our legal counsel that question. I in F3, the section you're talking about, Tony, it says that um it's under the supervision. It's not approved by the student meeting. So approved takes away first amend can take
away first amendment rights. Right. If you say no, you're not allowed to say that. And so I think that the word approved should be discussed with the attorney, too. Yep. >> Yeah. I I don't see an issue with this with putting that in the definition here
because under section 2B uh 2B1 basically it says students producing school sponsor media and activities shall be under the supervision of the faculty advisory and the school principal. All we're doing here is just making it formalized within
the definition of what's a school sponsor medium. Um, we're just baselating. >> Can we just add under the supervision of a student meeting adviser and principal >> instead of appro to me the word approved is >> but it but it's going to be screened. I mean has to be screened otherwise it could
>> supervising is not screening >> but otherwise it could vi who's going to make sure it doesn't violate you know for yes right >> I mean that's what your supervisor is doing >> and I'm saying you know to put a little more teeth in it have a little more accountability it's like principles over
the top of the supervisor >> and it's just making it consistent between the two clauses >> but then I just want to be clear does that mean that because I think how I might interpret that if a school principal is supervising an adviser who's supervising a student is it's a
chain where not necessarily everything has to be approved like we're saying by the principal. Is that how we all understand this? Cuz what I wouldn't want to do is have everything have to go through >> right the principal >> every broadcast be reviewed by the
principal. more like well if the student advisor is not feeling comfortable they bring it to the it's a chain of command >> and that's why I had it originally as the line in an endeavor approved by the principal so he's proving a project or
whatever it is you know there's there's like you said a level of accountability there's there's a a an actual formalization of the project of whatever is going on because if it's an informal what what I really want to do is I
really want to differentiate as it was pointed out social media is so prevalent and it's so easy to create informal publications >> informal newsletters informal podcasts informal but just lots of different
things and I I I really believe there has to be uh a differentiation and a formalization of what is a school sponsored media item and what is not. >> So you're saying like if South wanted to
create a newspaper, the principal would approve. Yep. We're go ahead and create a newspaper. >> No, I don't think it would happen that way. >> I'd have something to say about it. >> I mean, the issue you're running into is if you're going to open up the forum, you're opening up the forum, right? And
we saw that before, you know, and then who's going to pick? That's what we're saying. What is the school activity that's being approved? And then who's who's determining what's allowed to be spread out there? Because you're going to get students. You could run into students who are saying, "Well, they broadcast about this. Well, I want to
broadcast about this." And saying, "Well, you're discriminating against me because you're not letting me say that." You know, so somebody has to be, >> you know, the adviser would do that. The principal would do that in the point of controversy. The superintendent would would weigh in. But when it comes to the
free speech element of this, the Supreme Court's already ruled on this team, >> right? >> Yeah. >> We're like belaboring this policy that >> something we don't have. >> It's we we're it's a problem we don't
have. We're trying to fix something that's not a problem. Why wouldn't we just go with the model policy? Well, but but if if we hear from our administrators in in 6 through 12 because that's what the policyy's about that no we need to look at this because there's there's big issues coming up
because of things like you're mentioning Matt then the board looks at it and adjusts the policy like why I guess my why are we spending all this time on this? >> I I don't think it's something that we really need. We don't need something as well. Let me rephrase that. We don't need something as robust as this. We
just need to have a policy. uh the state statutes and and Terry was very clear. We don't they don't they don't care what's in the policy. You just need to have a policy. And so when we talk about school sponsored media, I think we got to be very clear what that means. Cuz
when I think of school sponsored media, could that also mean when the uh a social [clears throat] media post of students for a basketball game is coming up like South versus Apple Valley and they post something on Instagram with with with the athletes. Is that
considered school sponsored media or are we defining school or is this policy defining school sponsored media as official publication, official newspapers, official websites, official whatever. And if that's the case, then
we need to have student journalists that do those things. And we don't have any of that. Like we don't like like we don't have a student journalist in our high school, do we? No. because we don't have a newspaper, we don't have a media site, we don't have any school sponsored stuff, >> right? But that that doesn't necessarily
mean that in the future something wouldn't evolve. >> Totally agree. And then at that time they can rock to then they can do >> Right. Like Sean, I my my misunderstanding was I thought there was somebody with like a sound booth with a mic like what's in the corner there in
the in your school broadcasting out. I don't know where I got that idea, but that's what >> Yeah, you're you're you're pretty close. Well, I mean, it's we have that, >> but TV center, it's a class. It's called broadcast media, >> but it's still kind of it's it's still a controlled it's a controlled
environment, if you will. Correct. Okay. That's the difference. I thought it was just N. >> All right. >> So, Sean, you looked at other districts. They have this policy almost verbatim. >> Yeah. And I think you know what we're kind of discussing here is something called prior review where a principal
would um review things and it's a slippery slope from everything I've um researched on this and actually um you know Governor Walls uh signed something in May of 2024 um that protects freedom of Minnesota's
public and charter school student journalists and I think it kind of pertains to why many boards have updated on this and I I've I've read it's called the Minnesota's new voices law and so I've kind of read through that um and
the dangers of having prior review as a principal uh and the liability that that can put you in uh because it violates some of these freezes of speech. Um so obviously though if we have a class and it's you know very structured with curriculum um I would expect our teacher
and they do they do a phenomenal job of this um anytime any story line may be you know considered controversial or whatever they'll run it by me uh and they do that they have for years um and um because like I said they're very well
trained in this and we don't have to Brian's point um an issue because we don't have, [snorts] you know, like a live radio show where students are doing their own stories and it's school sponsored. We just don't have it. Now, do some students go rogue
and do things like bar stool cougars, which you've seen many high schools across the nation do that and it becomes very inappropriate. Yes. And that >> it's not school sponsored. >> It's not school sponsored and it's something that we investigate for harassment and bullying and um we address though all the same. Um so, but
ours are very controlled. They're curriculum based. Um and um yeah, they've >> I I would be curious what other school districts are doing who don't have a social uh school sponsored media division or department or whatever. And
and if they if they're if they're putting 512 out, cool, then fine. But if if they're if they don't have a journalism department, they don't have a whatever and and they've got a condensed shorter version, I would I think we should explore that. and we're creating a policy for something we don't even
have. >> What if we ask MSB that question if they know of districts? >> Yeah. >> That have a different one if if they're not doing this type of activity and then we could ask our attorney about the principal review kind of given >> but I also want to be cognizant of us
hearing from our one of our principal saying that doesn't feel like a comfortable right position to put him in. >> Y he he just said that. So I don't that's where I feel like us putting this in policy because we believe something but our principal saying that is not a right
>> I just don't know that that's a practice that I've seen and it's called [clears throat] prior review. I've discussed it with because I have had the same concerns that you have all brought up when I first became a principal um and um with you know and back then we had a newspaper
>> and it used to be um distributed during lunch >> um cuz I had a situation I had a you know um a parent that was upset about an article boss student. And so this was a young teacher I was working with and we had these long conversations. Uh he knew way more than I did about, you know,
freedom of speech and and journalistic practices and all that stuff. And and he had brought up um prior review, which is what the the legal term is that they use for administrators, you know, um reviewing First Amendment rights. And
it's a slippery slope. And I have not seen in what I've researched from other districts a policy where a principal would have that responsibility of prior review. Uh and so I, you know, I would hope that we would run that past legal and um best practice, you know, before
we would implement something such as that. And it's not like I'm trying to get out of work or anything because believe me, I want to make sure that our our stories are, you know, are wellrun and very um you know, basically everything that's listed here that is
not happening. Um and they give you the examples um of what can happen. So >> So we could ask our attorney about for knowledge, I'm not saying about prior review. We'd ask MSBA about other
potential models. Yeah. I mean, I'm not >> Is there anything else we need to address in this policy? >> Well, I mean, the statute itself is a lot >> shorter than what this policy is. Um, >> you should read that. Did you read it? >> What's [laughter] that? >> Did you read it? I didn't read.
>> I mean, it's not very long at all. And it says I mean, the requirement at the end says you have to have a policy that's must adopt and post on the district charter website consistent with this section. Um I I do think Amber to your point I mean
the statute does allow them to say whatever I don't want to say whatever they want but gives them a lot more authority >> students >> yeah freedom of speech which almost makes me say do we even want to have school sponsored media
>> I mean the distribution says handing out free copies selling or offering copies for sale accepting donations for copies um you of just posting and displaying material, placing materials in mailboxes. It's like we don't have it. And so if the
policy says we need to have a policy, let's just have a policy is saying that you have free speech if we have publications, but we don't have public. I don't know. >> That's what this says. >> I know, but it's like five pages. >> So I guess I I can appreciate that MSBA has done their research and homework and
has put together a model policy so that districts don't have to reinvent. Yes, >> I understand that this is probably more than we need given the fact that we don't have these activities. Um, but to your point, Superintendent Bowman, if we if we do have one tomorrow, I mean, and to Matt, to your comment, I mean, I
would be excited if students came to a principal and said, "We want to we want to create another newspaper again." Like where my husband works, they have a newspaper that students produce. It's awesome. Kids are learning how to interview, how to write in that style. And I think we go to like the extreme negative things that could happen. And
of course, those are where these guard rails of the things you can't say and the checks and balances are in. But this is like incredible learning that student like I don't want to take away a learning opportunity from a student because we're afraid that a student might say something because that could happen anytime.
So I that's I guess I feel very passionate about giving students and kids every opportunity to explore their passions and um we need good journalists in the world. So so that that's a different topic. >> Love that.
>> Good journalism. Um, so I guess one one way we could go is >> completely scrap this and and create a more truncated thing if MSBA has others or and we can find out or we can find
out amending it to the um prior review. Thanks, Principal Murphy, for the term. Um, >> so want to tackle this like we've Is this the second time that >> No, this is not second reading. Second reading would be at the next board meeting. >> Okay.
>> So we could bring back this information. Um, and at that time if people felt like we should amend the policy, we could make that amendment recommendation. >> Are you going to bring it back to a working session or are you going to bring this to the next board meeting? >> The plan was to bring it back for second reading to the next meeting. However, if
the board felt like we need more time, we could table it, too. So, >> I mean, we have nothing right now as far as the policy is concerned. So, yeah. Does this change this status quo? Not really. I mean, we're in the same spot, even if you adopted this, >> right?
>> So, >> so homework is ask MSBA and ask our attorney. Are there any other homework assignments for this? >> Okay. Okay. Oh, go ahead. Can we can we
h ask the attorneys to just confirm that um school sponsored media is specific to like journalism like newspaper articles or newspap newspapers or digital or non-digital just because I don't if we're if that scope is now wider and
then I'd love to know what include what's included in that because again if you if you've got uh athletic program managers posting things on social media saying there's a football game. Uh, and you because they post that they post things like that. Is
that considered school sponsored activities and can they post whatever they want to post? >> I mean, when does >> it's done at the uh supervision of a student media adviser? It would be >> and it's not. >> What's that? >> It's not.
>> But according to the definition, it would be. So then are we not >> under the condition that you just described which is not >> because those aren't >> that there's a question for example the football games I see tons of Instagram
posts and so are they school sponsored media or is this particular policy and the state statute specific to student journalists that are tied to a newspaper which we don't have and if that's the case I'm okay with the scope but if the
scope of school sponsored media is much larger again then it's we should have conversations are we no longer going are we going to allow Instagram posts for football games are we by by the high school managers who post them or are we not
>> so your question is when does some when does a product turn or when does a I don't know what the term is product for when does a product turn into a school sponsored >> social media yeah a school sponsored media and the definition of media is it
is It is it uh audio, is it print? Because you go into the high school uh you got, you know, banners of stuff. >> It can be it says in here, it can be written, published, or broadcast. >> But but like Tony said, it has to be under the supervision of a >> of a media
>> of a student student media adviser. So if it it's not that it doesn't meet the definition, right, >> in the statute. >> Yeah. >> So it's and >> so then then that wouldn't be covered. >> Mhm. >> Or that would be outside the scope of this particular rule. Correct. Okay.
>> Cuz the football manager probably isn't. >> I I'm not a super. >> Probably not. He's under not underneath the student media advisor. >> Okay. So, we'll do that homework between now and next Tuesday. And then one last one. Just get I'd love to get the def I'd love to get legal definition of what they view as a student journalist.
>> Uh you have to look at the statute. >> Never mind. This already there. >> Yeah. And the statute would control anyways. Y. >> Okay. Good. Okay. Thank you, Principal Americ. Yeah. Um, okay. The other policy is 6 60 6.5
and I'm going to turn over to Tracy to walk us through recommended edits for this. Correct. And paper copies. If you want to I didn't staple them. So, if you want to grab the chunk, that would be great. >> Okay. Um, policy 606.5 is around library
materials. Um, based on what we learned from Terry Morrow when he came to visit us, um, we learned that this is a required policy and much of the wording in here is following state statute. So, there are limited areas that we could [snorts]
uh actually make changes to. Um, as part of our work around this policy, we brought in our subject matter experts, our digital media specialists, and our teaching and learning team um to review and recommend the edits to this policy.
And we also reviewed the state statute that aligns to this and um we looked at the the language on the policies of some of our surrounding districts. Not a lot of our surrounding districts have adopted this policy yet. So we had to to
look for that. So [laughter] >> yeah. >> Did we did we ask Terry Moral to highlight in red the content that is from the state statues? >> Um I have I I've done that on my own copy. So do you want my copy? >> [laughter]
>> So you we have a question I can ask cuz when you say most of this I'm like all right then >> which parts >> which part and I'll just add that I think we this was on our agenda last meeting and if you remember we didn't have Tracy there and so moved it to this
meeting >> there are many things within this policy different from the one we just looked at where the district needs to insert practices andor terms and so that's Why I think you see more red line in here. >> Yeah. >> You know,
>> depicted >> green. [laughter] >> There's a lot of things that we totally makes sense. And then and then we could and and not for you, but like later I'd like to see a version where what's in red that is from the state statute that
we can't really change. >> That makes sense. But you've got your version. >> Okay. I can get copy. >> Yeah. Um can I ask how would you like this to go? Would you like me to go through the entire policy and then um discussion afterwards or do you want me to stop at each section?
>> I don't think you need to like read each sentence, but I >> Yeah, follow just where >> I think I think just where your recommendations and changing of their policy, not change, but what you were added. Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. Um in our general statement of purpose, uh I'm going to bring you
down to line 29, which uh I'm sorry, um line 33. And this is an example of a note that um Chair Cameron was just talking about that the school board can choose to revise this portion above. And uh the recommendation that the uh
committee that came together um has added is on line 29 which is um talking about per Minnesota state statute 134.51. A public school library must not ban, remove, or otherwise restrict access to a book or other material based solely on
its viewpoint or the messages, ideas or opinions it conveys. And the reason why we added this statement was because we wanted to clearly articulate the central purpose of this policy which is ensuring that library materials are not removed solely because of a disagreement with a
viewpoint or an idea. This policy um overall generally reflects this principle, but we felt that adding this language provided more clarity around what the state statute was asking us to do. In the review of other districts,
they also added this um direct uh quote from the state statute. Uh so then striking line 33 uh the note that allows the school board to choose to revise the general statement of purpose. As we move down into the
definitions, we are recommending on line 64 to strike the note that the school board could add a sentence um around what the district's libraries are referred to. Ours are called media centers or libraries, so we don't feel
that is necessary. As we move down in section B, line 69, the library collection consists of the library materials made available to students. We recommend adding and staff
because it broadens the intended user base of the library. Our staff do use the library on a regular basis too. As we move down uh line 88, we are recommending to strike the note there
that talks about that we can change the term library media specialist if we don't use that in our district. We use digital media specialist in our district, but the license required by these people is a library media specialist license. And so we were okay
with keeping that language throughout. As we move down, line 93 talks about the responsibility for selection of library materials. And line 95 says that the school board recognizes the expertise of
the district's professional staff who would be the library media specialist on staff. Um on line 112, what we are recommending is to add that the selection of library materials is
not only the responsibility of the library media specialists, but we want that to be in cooperation with school district administration. And we are recommending that so that the responsibility doesn't rely solely on just that library media specialist in
the selection of those um of those library books. As we scroll down in that same section to line 128, we are um recommending that we strike the note that talks about the
Minnesota uh legislature adding that piece. And um just so you are aware that whole section above is exactly from state statute. The responsibility of selection of library materials from line
93 all the way to line 126. That is directly from state statutes. So, Brian, if um you were wondering that piece, um as we go down into line 131, which is
the selection of library materials, our library media specialists felt that this read exactly uh the way that we have it in our library procedure manual. So, word for word, they agreed with every portion around the selection of
[clears throat] library materials. Therefore, on line 172 through lines 182, we um recommend that we strike those notes. And what those notes are telling us is that our school board
could um it says the first note is saying that you're encouraged to ask our um resident experts. And then the second note is saying that um you could choose to adopt similar selection criteria for
classroom library materials. Um our recommendation is that our classroom library materials fall under policy 606 which is around instructional materials not library materials. So we've uh recommended to strike those lines.
As we move down to line 184, the um it is stating that the library media specialist would consult sources and specialists experienced in library materials um to um help them develop that
collection. and the note that's there, we recommend striking that that the school board may choose to identify specific sources and specialists in this paragraph. Our digital media specialist team is highly qualified and they can uh
they are reaching out to state um state groups and um uh other experienced library media specialists to help give them feedback on their library collection. Um, something that isn't highlighted for
you is D in this section. Uh, library materials that are outdated, inaccurate, and no longer useful for curricular support. Uh, it says may be removed. And one of the pieces that we are recommending is um at the end of this
policy, we added a cross reference to u ISD 194 policy that we have already on how we dispose of uh library materials. So we just wanted to add that cross reference. The other section is on line
200 gifts and donations of library materials. that is also a cross reference at the bottom which talks about donations and um gifts to our school district. So we we I just wanted to highlight those uh pieces for you.
On line 218 we move into reconsideration of specific library material. Now none of this is in state statute. What state is asking for us is to have a reconsideration process in place. And so
a lot of the notes on here that we're um crossing out are we are basing our reconsideration process on what we already have established for policy 606. And so um here line 229 there's a note
that tells us that uh the school board can decide whether to allow a building principal to remove library materials. We're asking to strike that. But as you go below on line 245 here, we are talking about the building
principal andor the library me media specialists has the authority to agree to exclude or restrict specific library material only for the minor children of the individual who who has submitted the request, not for any other students. If
a resolution is reached that concerns only the children of the individual who made the request or that does not affect other students, the issue is closed. So this is a process we already have in place that we make sure that if a parent
does not want a student to check out a specific library book, we note that in our um library inventory and that student will not be allowed to check out that um uh that material. Um this is suggested to encourage localized
non-systemwide solutions to um somebody who is uh asking for reconsideration of library materials and it reduces escalation of uh the reconsideration of library materials as well.
on line 251. All we're asking here is to change that to number four since we um added a number three as we move through that reconsideration of um specific library materials um process that uh that we're going to
set up. We go to line 270 that we have uh recommended to add the use of challenged resources shall not be restricted during the re-evaluation proceedings. This was added into the other school districts policies that uh
we reviewed. And the reason why we're um adding this in is just because somebody is asking for reconsideration doesn't mean we should take away that um that library material for everybody in the district. As we move down in number two, which is
on line 273, this is talking about who are the people that um we want to have on our reconsideration committee. Uh and we agree with all of the people that are listed here. On line 283, it says one
library media specialist. We are just asking to strike what's in parentheses uh because we do have a library media specialist. And then on line 286 it says two members of the school district community. We are asking to
strike that and add two members of the teaching and learning advisory committee. And we are asking for that because we have a teaching and learning advisory committee um who are the committee members and staff members who come together to talk about and uh
advise our teaching and learning department. So we would like to um use them in a um in in this manner because they are maybe some of the people who are more um they've gone more in depth around our teaching and learning
practices. So we think it it would be a great recommendation to use people from that advisory committee. On line 292, we are asking to strike the note there that is just talking about that. You can go ahead and uh change the
list of committee members if you'd like. As we move further down around line um 315 and below um this section is talking about that uh the school board can
decide whether to allow an appeal of the review committee or if the review committee's decision is final. and our group that came together to talk about this. Again, we want to model it after
policy 606, which brings together a review committee, and that's where the decision um rests. We think that it's um important to um respect the decision of that review committee because um we want
to make sure that we are creating a consistent structured review process and um we don't want to have repeated reconsideration of the same material over and over or people just bringing it to the next level. Um, we talked about
that school board sets policy and it's that review committee's job to apply that policy to any type of materials that are asked to be reconsidered. So, we are asking that we strike from lines
uh 317 I think that is all the way down to um line 340. and then to state or add on line 342 that the decision of the review committee shall be final and binding on the district and shall not be
subject to further appeal. I think there was something I missed on line 296. Uh we are um recommending that we add a date or within 20 working days that the
review committee would um discuss the um reconsideration because we don't want to say to somebody, "Yes, we'll reconsider this, but we'll do it a year later." We want to make sure that we have some parameters around that that are reasonable for us as a district to pull
that committee together. Uh the the next section on le line 345 talks about the challenge report and there is a note there on line 362 that we are recommending that we strike. Um,
this is saying that the the language in the challenge report is verbatim from the um the state statute and all that's asking is for us to if we do have a uh reconsideration that we have to report
that to uh the Minnesota Department of Education. Um, on line 364 it's talking about uh prohibition on uh retaliation. And on line 369, again, that um that
wording is directly from state statute. So, we'd like to strike that note on line 369. On lines 376, we are asking, as I talked about above, uh we wanted to add uh Minnesota state statute around contracts
in donation of surplus equipment. Uh because we want to make sure that we're following legal guidance on how we remove books from our library and then how we accept donations of any types of library materials. and then adding uh or
um uh striking on line 383 under the cross references changing MSBA or MSA MSA model to ISD 194 because we have both of those policies 524 and 606 and
then excuse me adding on line 386 ISD 194 policy 706 which is the acceptance of gifts and how we accept donations. questions. >> Thanks for walking us through that questions or comments. >> All right, [laughter] thank you for that
very thorough Matt. >> Yeah, I think there's a I don't know if it'd be a gap or just a inconsistency in the policy. So section 4 D are you on? >> Sorry. Uh 114.
Now, the school board may decline to purchase land or shelf or remove access to library materials legitimately based on that has the criteria below, but there's nothing in the policy that talks about the school board actually having any sort of oversight or appella review of any challenge
on any of those basis. I believe the school board ultimately approves library materials, correct? >> Um, that does say that in there. Um, we never bring li all of our library materials like we tell you about. That's correct. >> Yes.
>> So, what what do you think we should say there? Like the >> Well, I mean, if they're going to if we have the authority, which we probably do by statute. >> Yes. >> Shouldn't there be an appelllet review option that goes to the school board for final say? >> I I I'm in alignment with that. I mean,
with role 342, uh, that the review committee is final. I'm not aligned with that at all. Um, while I agree we should be in the policy space, but we're also approving a $320 million budget. We approved curriculum. Uh, if there are uh
I I I don't like the phrase final and binding. It just tells me that school board, you know, we have no part in this. That that's how I interpret that. Now, again, maybe that's not the intent of that particular line. Uh, and we have the ability to go back and update the policy and we just go back and just remove 342 then. But uh but the but the
issue is that no um the staff are employees of the district and school board members are residents residents of our community and
and if I'm told by a an employee of the district that I my voice doesn't have a say in in these kind of materials that doesn't sit well with me. And so it is up to in my mind school board members and your responsibility because you're charged in charge uh
you're charged to educate your students and your community and you're voted by your community members and and and that has a huge part in in in the education process in my mind. And so that that's just a two cents. That's all. Go ahead.
>> Yeah. I mean it and again this could be a touchy subject you know politically hot to and I almost say why not have the people that are accountable to the public be the ones that are making the final say if there's an appealable decision right why why not have it be on us ultimately I would [clears throat]
also say the statute you know 134.51 does reference a governing body means a group of persons that oversee the operations budget policies and other administrative responsibilities and here it's talking about a library but which would seem to be us you you know, we're overseeing the policies. Um, you know,
which we can create the policies and the model policy again it it kind of leaves leaves it hanging. The school board may decline to purchase lender shelf or remove access to library materials legitimately based on so it it insinuates that we have a role but then
doesn't provide us a role in the process. And yeah, I I I agree I with Brian on the, you know, we're gonna appoint and again, it's the superintendent, so the superintendent would be, you know, accountable to the board, but
still it does kind of seem like we're just delegating it off. >> The review committee would then supersede the superintendent based on how I'm reading this. >> Yeah. I mean, if they if they say no, >> yeah, >> then it's unappealable. >> Okay. I I would just I disagree that the school board should be making that
decision. I I think the review committee is the one that knows the material better. If you want a school board member as part of the review committee, I would be for adding um a letter and saying that there's like one school board member on that committee along with school district administration or
principal, two teachers. And if you want the superintendent as part of that committee, that's fine. But I don't think it should come down to the school board making the determination. And um I agree with Matt that it is a very political hot button issue as far as
books and um what's used. And I think my reasoning is that um when when elections happen sometimes, you know, people are more political on a school board than they should be and they would use that political clout to
either pull or remove items from their library or it could be used in that manner which would not be as I would say correct. But um that then would leave the committee as more of a diverse group of people that would prevent that from happening. Carly,
>> um, just to clarify because I I know this is a new policy that not a lot of our surrounding districts have in place. What but I do know that people challenge books and things like that for their individual students. So what is what are we doing right now in terms of this
review committee? Um, because there is a review committee, correct? Mhm. >> So is essentially is what you're proposing right now what is in place in terms of our current um not our policy but like the way we
approach it. >> Yeah. So in policy 606 it it does not define who's on the review committee the way this does. Um but we have put together a review committee that the makeup is similar. um that those people
would be called if there was a challenge. >> Okay. So like you're saying in because I know a lot of this you're saying kind of strike because it is in policy 606, >> right? >> So you're saying that really this is not 606 is more where there's
the discussion about the review committee and what the approach is with regard to review of books and things like that. >> Yes. >> Can I ask a question just related to that? How often does this happen? Um, we haven't had it happen at all. >> Okay. Knock on >> we see we see more with individual
making individual accommodations for um because parents have a say obviously um in what their students are accessing. And so we see that again we don't see a ton of them but over the years that's probably the most common area where a
parent has a concern. Um and that's that's a much that's an easier process than this is. This is we're talking of a districtwide something versus an individual accommodation. So, we make individual accommodations all the time. >> Have a couple of public comment that
way. That's right. >> Yeah. >> Well, and I think I'd be a little bit more in line with Kim's concern about us looking at every book or any challenge book if it wasn't for AI now that can process through a book just like that, you know, cuz I don't want to read every
book that somebody challenges, but we don't have to nowadays, you know. Um, I would caution us. AI is not I mean read tons of articles about accuracy. So I would prefer >> Tony I'd say it's pretty accurate. I mean for searching terms and concepts. Yeah.
>> It's accurate up to a certain ending on trained on. So it's like that would be relatively new. >> Sure. And that also doesn't subtract like a a particular board member's view on certain things that would influence
how they might view or like how a board on the whole would potentially act. But but the policy provides the consideration like these are the limited circumstances because again even on politics we should have books on a wide array of politics and a wide array of viewpoints but you know when we're
looking at pedagogical things based on age appropriateness cuz I think that's the challenge in a number of cases at least that you see online and maybe it doesn't happen here but uh that's something where the board should be able to discuss it openly and say like well what do we think you know and if we
can't And that's a problem. >> What like when people when I mean it sounds like it doesn't happen often, but like what are parents uh asking to like not give their kids and in like I'm confused.
>> I think the most common are is in the health area. >> Oh, got it. >> I would say that's the most common. >> Sure. And again, it's not it's not all it's not a ton, but it does happen that people have some objections to standards
related to health. National Geographic can be like in elementary or like I mean [laughter] >> certain kinds of education around health your body [laughter] >> body seriously >> I don't know
>> how could you elaborate on [laughter] this >> Brian what was your childhood >> how would so right one I feel like my personal opinion is I appreciate a committee that would handle this. I mean, I realize
it's not happening much, but if it if it did, I don't think the board should be and I I personally would want to read the entire book to I mean, I appreciate AI, but I think if you're going to evaluate if a book should should be in a school or not, it should you should
actually consume the whole thing yourself. I don't think board members are wanting to read every single book if that were to come up. But Kim, I appreciate your idea about adding a board member to the committee potentially and wondering what other people like Matt in particular because
of your comments earlier like what you would think about that. Would that help satisfy kind of this or would it bridge this concern? >> I mean I still think it leaves the gap in the policy which the policy just doesn't that 4D doesn't necessarily make
sense. Um, >> can I ask that is from state statute? >> Yeah. >> And if you have like a committee that's made up of so many different people across the district, it would then make sense that that would be the final. >> Yeah. Cuz
>> because otherwise then it leaves it open for them to continue to complain about the same material. And then you also have the connection of like we have board members on the teaching and learning committee. So you you already have that board member connection. So there's already a board member that would have some input on that when it's
brought to the advisory committee. And then if you put a school board member on it, then that leaves a pretty wide range of opinions and topics on it. I just I get what you're saying cuz then it sounds like well what if I disagree with that and they have viewed that that book
was okay or something but then we have to have a point where we can end it otherwise it'll be a neverending cycle >> but the parental the parental aspect of this really I think is is the >> which they can do you can do it for specific
>> but let's just play what if >> if we took that policy as is. >> Yep. Somebody could still make public comment in front of the cameras and say this book is whatever. >> Yeah. >> Um, as elected officials, which we all
are, >> can't do anything about it. >> I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> No, I'm sorry. We're good. >> No, I'm saying we couldn't do anything about it due to the policy. >> Yeah. >> Well, that's where I'm going. >> Yeah. Okay. That's where I'm going. >> But then I also I can play your devil's advocate, too, and saying I don't want
you to make the decision for my kid to read the book. And if you don't like your kid reading the book, then go through the process as a parent. How do you want to >> finish? If I may, I you know, let's come back to the parent and the parents rights. That's where my head goes with
this. It doesn't go what committee, what policy, whatever. If if a parent really has something that they feel is controversial or inappropriate for age or go down the list, you pick it. The point is is that
if we snuff that out in this policy when they talk to a group of teachers and administrators, they may not truly feel like the parental rights are given to that the parental rights
that they feel are should be theirs are being um oh I'm sorry I lost the word are being um You sir, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. This is my Webster's dictionary. Um,
and and again, what happens if somebody truly isn't satisfied? It doesn't really end here because again, my point is they could make public comment, hold the book up, read the book, whatever, again, in front of the cameras and everything else, and really create a controversial
situation. So is does this policy give the c cathartic experience to the parent? So does it because it cuts them off on page three or four that after
they talk to a group of teachers, a committee administrators. So throw a board member in there, the board member's outnumbered, right? How does the board member How does the board really have a >> So Paul, >> I think your misunderstanding it is the committee is to take the book completely
out of the library. The parent still has the review process to keep their child from checking out that book. >> Yeah. An individual family can always restrict any book for any reason at any time. >> So they still have the parental authority to do that. So that's where I'm like, I don't understand like as a
parent, I can still do that. What I can't do based on this policy is say that your kid can't read it either and your kid can't read it either. >> But how are parents actually removing the book from the library? >> But how are parents going to know the the 400 books that are in the library? They're not going to read them. And so
the only way that they find out is through another parent or the kid brings it home and they're like, "What are you reading?" Like that's inappropriate for whatever for whatever reason it may be. >> Then they can opt out at that point. Maybe this goes to the earlier policy for me and that is and Brian you kind of
said this. I feel like we haven't had an issue ever. And so we're like again thinking about what could happen and yes it could but maybe we wait until that one moment and be like okay this this policy isn't
working. We need to adapt this or this policy is great. It worked like it should and we agree with the process. >> Well I wouldn't say we haven't had issues. We've had parents that have chosen to have books removed from their like that their kids can't check out. We have had that process. We haven't had a
process where someone says, "I want this book reconsidered and removed from a library within the school." >> Right. >> So there's like two different things that are happening within this policy. >> But I guess in either of those situations, both processes are working at the moment. >> Correct. parents can choose to restrict
>> their student from that material and the committee is set up to deal with a scen scenario that has never happened in in one anymore. >> But the policy is to address the whatifs, right? And we were just talking about with that with the student publications, we're you know pushing a
policy to address what if we do have a you know a journalism thing. So that's the same thing here. What if there is a book and there is a challenge and that's and again you know the state statute talks about us having the authority as a school board why not have us be the ones that are accountable right you can have
you can have the other groups underneath us that do the initial review and you know make their decisions but having the final appeal come to the school board that is ultimately you know we answer to the public you know if they don't like the decision we make I mean I like Harry
Potter right and some people might not like that I like Harry Potter and they can vote me out for that, right? I mean, we're accountable to that where the employees are not accountable to the public in the same fashion. >> So, is your idea, Matt, that if a book were to come and appeal, every board member would then read that book regardless of
>> Yeah. I mean, that would be your respon your responsibility would be to assess the challenge to the book and then make a decision based on what the the policy guidelines are and what the statute allows and dictates a board to, you know, make its decision based on. And it
again it's a limited number of criteria. >> Do you start to then do you start to find common themes? Go ahead. >> I was just thinking about how absolutely counterproductive banning or removing a book would be because it's like you would want to prevent other people from
reading it. But by just by making that argument, everybody's going to end up reading it, including the people you're trying to appeal to. >> Yeah. >> So it's like completely counter counterproductive. But but you have to think about like transparency, right? That's why these things come up cuz people are challenging them saying
they're worried about indoctrinization of their kids, you know, pulling their kids from the public schools. So it's like same with our finances. You know, we're talking about that. Why not be transparent with it? You know, this is what we have. This is what we're doing. This is how much money we have. I mean, what are we scared about? >> Well, I >> I don't think we're scared about
anything. I [laughter] don't think we come back to in my opinion I don't I trust like it's kind of like how we put uh the authority in the superintendent for a lot of things that happen in the district that we are up here and we are
his boss but we basically say go do xyz on on behalf of the district and so we're not approving every decision he makes on a daily basis and to me this is you put a group of experts together to view the material and determine whether or not it's appropriate for the student
body. I think I trust that group of people more than I trust the school board to make the right decision about whether or not that's educationally age appropriate, all of those kinds of things. Like if I read a book that's a kids book,
I'm not going to say whether it's maybe I have an opinion for my child, but if I'm deciding the age for the book, I'm going to more trust the librarian expertise or not. So I I guess I feel like we as the school board are setting
forth an expectation for this review committee to have the authority to use their expertise to determine whether or not something's appropriate. But but we have the authority to do everything that that we've done have the the ultimate authority to say no, we're not doing that anymore or we're not we have the
ability to say no. This says it's final and binding and and that's the part where then we no longer have that authority. >> And that's it's it's internally inconsistent. >> It's consistent with that. Yeah. And I don't know if this Yeah. Yeah, we may not have a lot of issues and if there
are any issues, I mean, if there are books that need to be pulled out, throw that throw them in the consent agenda and then like here's a list of 10 and then whoever has concerns or issues, they >> well I mean >> cuz 4D is out of the state statute, right? The school board may decline to
purchase, lend or shelf or remove, so it's put on or take off. >> Yeah. >> Um access to library materials legitimately based on, you know, the the three criteria listed. So if that's out of state statute and then we later say that a different group of people, you
know, can make a decision without the school board, right? And say and that is binding. I mean, it's just internally inconsistent. >> It's just like we we we need to view this as curriculum in my mind. I mean, you guys are >> So it also says in that section letter A, the school board recognizes the
expertise of school district professional staff and the vital need of such such staff to be responsible for selection of library materials. So, you could argue that A and D don't align. >> Yeah. Well, we're not making the materials, right? But we do have the
>> authority to decline to purchase >> cuz we're not Well, I I take that back. Are we involved in the initial selection of materials that go into the library? >> No. >> No. >> But we have the right to intervene if we want to. This isn't saying that we don't
have the right to intervene. >> It says we do, but then it says somebody else can. And a different group can supersede that authority. >> Only for books that are challenged. >> Yeah. >> Not for all books. Only for books that are challenged. >> Those seem to be super important ones we should probably talk about. I mean,
there's a reason why they're being challenged for >> What if What if we ask MSBA or attorney about kind of the discrepancy math that you're talking about? Is that >> Sure. I guess I'm just I'm just I don't understand why. And what's the concern
with having a final appeal to the school board? I think because then what what's the point of the committee if the committee is going to say hey this is what our recommendation is and then it goes to the school board and we say no >> the committee maybe the committee is not in sync with what
>> my opinion is but again the board >> I don't think board members have the >> board is a representative of the community >> political is there my my personal opinion aligns with Carly is that the board typically does not bring expertise on grade level
age appropriate materials for library selection. I don't have expertise in that. >> Do you I mean you don't think you can read a piece of material and say, "Yeah, that's not appropriate for third graders." >> I'm not going to make that decision for another family. No. >> Um without expertise from the people who
do this for a living, who are trained. Um I think that is where an individual family, if they feel differently, can choose to withdraw that material for their child. Um, but that for me I don't I don't believe a school board
is has the ability to evaluate a material um through a lens of expertise. That's my personal opinion for an entire school district. >> I guess I would just disagree. I mean I
again we're all educated individuals. I don't know that it's that difficult of a decision. when you see it, you'll see it, right? And maybe it won't come up. [clears throat] >> I don't I don't think that I don't think we would align on that. I don't think people I think people have very
different opinions on what it constitutes controversy. >> Well, and controversy isn't the isn't the arbiter, though. I mean, it's >> it could be. You can you can challenge a book for any reason. >> No, but we can only remove it for three different reasons.
>> What are those? D1, D2, and D3. >> So, I guess I'd like to hear um interest in from the board on if you're looking for a revision to this policy or if you support moving forward with
the policy of written because we'll need to decide how we move forward for a second reading and maybe continued discussion or at a work session. >> I think that we we we pulled it from the from the last meeting. So, good point. Good point. It' be first reading. >> Yeah.
>> Thank you, Brian. Sorry about that. >> So, >> I would recommend that it go forward as it is, but it definitely seems that there are a number of people who are thinking of various amendments that they would like to make. >> Paul, you said you liked it right away,
but are have you changed my mind? >> I was I was I was that was tongue and cheek. >> The presentation, but just as just as like [laughter] just to serious, >> but just as like a starting place. Okay. Love it when I first heard this discussion as far as um the [laughter] point when it's brought before and we
start voting for it as a starting place. This seems like a very good place to start and as people wish to offer amendments, they can and garner support for that. >> Okay. >> Does that sound okay?
So the assignment would be to percolate on this and to bring forward amendments to this to the next meeting for a first reading based on kind of how you want the policy to look. Is that what you're >> And then it may be the case that any
suggested amendments get review from legal counsel if necessary or other types of things before we put anything in the policy. >> Yeah. Well, if we're going to bring this, I don't think we should bring it forward yet until we get A and D and the last
one result because it sounds it does sell and so maybe it makes sense to get that guidance and then make the revision and then bring that forward. And so if you if there's a window within that two weeks to get that information and
there's time for the revisions and then bring that one forward, then it's kind of cuz I don't I think bringing this back forward and then rehashing everything with what we're pretty much rehashing doesn't make sense. Let's just >> clean it up first and then bring that
forward and surprise rev. >> I think my my question is how do we how do we arrive at a majority of the board supporting aversion? And I I think unless I hear >> Well, I'll write a new version and then you guys can debate that version.
>> Can can I just add one point that >> just to what Matt said how like if if this is binding then it's done but there's a challenge report. I I think we're missing that. Like once a challenge is completed, then it has to be submitted by the school board to the
Minnesota Department of Education who then can like have questions about and have followup for that removal of that book. So just because it decides at the district level, it it still has to go on to another step in the process,
>> but it's binding on us. It's binding but not necessarily because the board of education may come back from the Minnesota Department of Education and say >> but we can't say no like we don't there's not a the board can disagree with that position and change the >> can't disagree with the Minnesota Department of Education. I know. But
>> so we can bring forward a re [laughter] >> we can bring forward a revised >> This might not get money anymore. >> A revised policy based on this >> shake our fist crap. >> Revised policy based on this conversation. >> Um to react to and and see where we
land. >> Sounds good. >> All right. With that, I think we are done for the night. >> Thanks everybody. >> All right. Take care. See you