Good morning and uh welcome to the board administration and education finance committee. I call this meeting to order and ask for the roll call please. >> Call >> Mr. Appel >> here.
>> Mr. Appel present. Dr. Armstrong here. >> Dr. Armstrong present. Mr. Berkens >> here. >> Mr. Burkin present. Mr. Ga >> here. >> Mr. Ga present. Mr. Castillo >> here. >> Mr. Castillo present. Miss Champon. >> She's here.
>> She's here. Miss Champon present. Dr. Clark. Dr. Clark present. Mr. Harris >> here. >> Mr. Harris present. Miss Holloway. >> She's present as well. >> Miss Holloway present. Miss Melering,
Miss Meering, present. Mr. Mars, >> here. >> Mr. Mars, present. We have a quorum. >> Thank you. First item, please. >> The consent agenda is ready for approval. Adding item 6.1. >> Have a motion, Miss Melerin.
Mr. Appel. Any discussion? Hearing none. Seeing none. Any objections? Motion passes. Second. Your first item is on page 10, item 3.1, consideration of of the minimum
foundation program formula for 2026 2027. The recommendation is to approve. >> U motion for the MFP formula. Miss Shampine second, >> Mr. Castile.
>> Um yeah, Dr. Um, >> yes, sir. Uh, Mr. Burkin, first of all, I want to thank you um for your leadership over the last couple of years on uh the MFP. I think you've done a really good job of of holding uh open
meetings so that individuals can better understand the MFP, understand the components of it. Um, you know, I was asked um yesterday uh if I felt like the MFP was simple enough uh to be understood and my response to that was
that I don't think simplicity was the primary objective when the MFP was initially developed. Now obviously um you know the the simpler something is oftentimes the the better that that is. But when the MFP was uh first developed
uh decades ago now, it was developed by uh national experts um looking at at the funding funding formula. And so I've also shared with individuals that you know I don't view myself as as a protector of the formula of a defender
of the formula. Uh it's just our responsibility to make recommendations uh to the board on the formula. We do that. you make decisions on the formula um and then we deliver in terms of the mechanism of the funding from the state
to the local systems. Um I I think that uh Mr. Burkin, you have done a a a good job of of being open to reviews of the MFP and conversations with President Champine. uh she is, you know, committed that she is also u interested and
engaged in continuing to review uh the MF the MFP formula. You know, over the last I guess six years uh of being in this role, I've I have never recommended uh an increase in level one funding to
the MFP. uh and and there are certainly individuals in the room that have been upset that uh or disappointed that I have never done so, but I did not feel that it was the appropriate thing to do. Uh and one of the main reasons I I didn't feel it was the appropriate thing to do was because the state had received
4 billion that's billion with a B uh dollars for um from the from the federal government for COVID recovery. And so uh those dollars were utilized in school systems and and utilized uh well in so
many ways as evidenced by so much the academic recovery uh that that we have seen. Most recently those those dollars have gone away. You know that over the last few years we've made um MFP recommendations to the legislature that
have not uh been approved. Uh oftentimes they weren't even considered. And so as we thought about the development of of this particular uh MFP, we also knew that in the governor's executive budget, um thankfully uh he has already included
some of the items that we have previously requested such as uh funding for high dosage tutoring. And so there is a $30 million item in the governor's executive budget for highdosese tutoring. There is a $17.5 million item
in the governor's executive budget for differentiated compensation which covers things like um being able to uh pay teachers more if they work in a challenging school environment, being able to pay teachers more if they have a certification that the market deems uh
is is critical and necessary. uh being able to te pay teachers more if they take on uh responsibilities of mentoring other teachers um and or merit pay for teachers who are doing a really good job with with academic outcomes. So that
item is included uh in the governor's budget and also uh the funding that we have previously requested for internship and apprenticeships uh that $2 million is also included in the governor's budget. So since that is in the executive budget, you know, we did not
see a need as an agency to make a recommendation to this board to request it to be in the MFP because it feels as if uh in terms of at least an opening bid to the legislature, uh those those dollars are there. Over the last few years, um
multiple governors have included stipens uh and multiple legislatores have improve included stipens for teachers. And so last year alone there was roughly $200 million uh for stipens for teachers, you know, and and it's hard to
argue that teachers in Louisiana haven't done anything but a fantastic job over the last few years to continue to get better uh gains uh for students. And so we're so uh incredibly thankful for the work that that the teachers are doing.
But since there is a ballot measure in May uh that will allow the public within the state of Louisiana to consider a permanent uh one-time pay raise while also paying down retirement debt. We did not see a reason nor did we feel that
there would be an appetite uh legislatively to include a pay raise in this particular MFP. So what this request does is it holds base funding the same uh in level one. U I have yet
to recommend an increase uh in in base funding. Um what it does do however is it looks at the supplemental dollars in level three. In 2008, there was essentially moved to a $100 per student
supplemental u uh amount of money in the MFP for operational expenses such as utilities, um insurance, diesel, cleaning supplies, and that that number was set at $100 per student. So over the
last few years we know that we've seen inflation increase or we've seen inflation um but we have looked back at since 2008 what has that number been not compounded inflation but just the real actual number year-over-year uh and that
has been 47% increase since 2008. And so I used Mr. Morris, uh, artificial intelligence even, and I went back and I looked at if if I were looking at 2008, um, and I considered what has been the
the increase in Louisiana for utilities, it's been about 25%. If I looked at the increase in facility insurance, it's been somewhere between 300 and 350% increase. If I look at healthcare
insurance, it's been about 150% increase. If I look at diesel, Mr. Mr. Harris would tell us about that, but that's been about a 20% increase. And if I look at cleaning supplies, that's been about an 80% increase. And if you run a school every day, you know that these
are real items that you have to finance for the operations of your school. And so, it's hard to argue um against the fact that since 2008 until today, those operational items haven't increased. And so what this particular MFP does is it
takes that $100 per student and moves it to $147 a student which rep represents the real inflation during that that period of time. I'll also call out uh to the board that the overall appropriation
for the MFP versus what our total request on the MFP is going to look like uh is going to have a difference. Uh in fact, due to student population loss, due to the fact that that we have lost individuals across the state, uh we're
seeing about a 12 to 13,000 or we're predicting about a 12 to 13,000 student loss uh for next year. So the estimate on what the MFP was going to be, which is in the governor's executive budget,
uh versus what it's actually going to be is about a $42 million difference. So, your traditional public and public charters throughout the state of Louisiana um will see about a $42 million uh difference next year. Uh negative difference, less dollars. Um
once you apply uh this operational shift which is about 29 million uh you're looking at at traditional public and public charter seeing about a 12 to$13 million uh difference next year less than what they are receiving this year
which you know you have fixed costs but also you have costs that can can fluctuate based on students. So you have less students, there obviously less cost to educate students, but some costs remain because they're fixed. And so while there will be a a 40 40 to 42 43
million decrease to traditional public and public schools next year, um if the board approves this particular MFP, that will be lessened to somewhere around 10 to 12 million. Um which, you know, reflects the the real inflation, but also it reflects the fact that um
they'll have less students to serve. So we feel like we feel like this is an appropriate uh formula. We've we have uh been in contact with board leadership uh throughout the process of developing um this particular uh recommendation. There
are also a couple of just technical changes. One is uh relates to eco point of shan which is a state sponsored school and the other is just a technical change relative to the placement of the resident teacher uh changes uh as well in the way in which we fund resident
teachers. So Mr. Burkin again thanks for your leadership. Uh I'm here Miss Cino's here. We're happy to to answer any questions that you all may have about this very important uh formula um that you know you have a responsibility to
make a recommendation to the legislature regarding and in fact before I close I'll just read to you from the constitution and the constitution says the state board of elementary and secondary education or its successor shall annually develop and adopt a formula which shall be used to determine
the cost of a minimum foundation program of education in all public, elementary, and secondary schools. Uh, and keep in mind when we say public, we're we're referencing both traditional public and public charter systems. >> Thank you, Dr. Brimley. Um, just again a
reminder to u this body that as Dr. Brimley just stated, we are required to have an MFTt formula delivered to the legislature no later than March 15th in this uh year. March the 15th is on Sunday. said we are
required to have that to them by Friday. Uh the committee met yesterday. Uh the MFP task force committee met yesterday. Uh we did have a quorum and we did vote on the proposal that is before you and
it passed without any objection. Um is there any comments from the board before I go to public comment? >> Yes sir. >> I have a few questions. Um Dr. Brumley simple one do we have data on the the 12
to 15,000 pupil decline of whether that's out migration or birth you know birth versus death demographics or is it movement between public and private schools. >> Yeah.
>> So uh we do have some degree of data on that. We we obviously know that that despite some some recent shifts, Louisiana has lost population over the last few years, only southern state in fact to have lost. Um, we're not really
seeing well to to speak to it very candidly in the way in which I've spoken about this issue to the legislature, we have seen over the last 10 years rough roughly a a four to 5% decrease in
public school population. We've seen over that same period of time about I want to I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I'd say a 10 to 11% decline in private school education. So to me that that speaks to economic conditions in the state more so than it
speaks to quality of private schools or quality of of public schools. And so um we we have seen on both of those sides both public and and non-public a decrease enrollment. And in fact the non-public side has been about double the decrease in terms of a percentage as
the public. So, of the 12 to 15,000 decline, whatever the number really works out, um it's going to result in an MFP contribution to the districts, but not the local participation amount. So, in other words, they're going to have a
fixed amount on local participation, probably based off of millages, um but a declining population to to have to teach. Yeah. Um, yeah, because your your your local
your local taxes, whether they're sales or millage, aren't necessarily tied to a student population. They're just tied to the income that's coming in or the property value. >> And we don't know the impact of that. Right. >> So, >> um, and then the last question I had was, do we know of the total dollars
that's we're asking the legislature to approve in this resolution? And I'll just make up a number, five billion. I mean, that's that's probably not the number. How does that compare year-over-year, say the last five years? I mean, is it
about the same or is it growing or what what does it look like? >> So, the the last few years the the legislature has not approved an MFP formula, so it's reverted back to the previous formulas. So the only the only shifts really have been in terms of the
way in which that formula responds to the population of the systems. >> But but what is the what is the request? In other words, the resolutions over the last five years that emanate from Bessie, how does how does this year's compare to those? That's what I'm
>> Yeah. So the difference is um this this is less than we have previously requested um in terms of the MFP itself, right? >> Um because in over the past couple of years, Bessie has recommended
half of this operational increase. So whereas we're we're we're recommending 47% essentially now, the last few years we've recommended half of that. Um, and then over the last couple of years too, we've also recommended to include in the
MFP the tutoring money, the differentiated pay money and the internship apprenticeship money, which is not in there this year. And the and another reason why you see numbers uh of public school funding have having increased the last few years is because
governor andor legislature have approved the teacher stipens the last few years and those have those have been at a value of about 200 million a year >> and of the four bill was it four billion you said was co money >> four billion yes sir
>> but that's over years >> that was over several years yes sir >> so that money is gone now. >> Yes, sir. >> So, what what filled the vacuum? What in other words? Yeah. >> Where is that vacuum get? >> Well, the the co the co dollars, you know, first of all, we we we had a a a
really good rate on that. We were over 99% uh expense on that. So, we didn't return much of much of much of those dollars, which was good. Uh and then we had also created the website, our comeback website where the public could go in and look at that spending at every
individual district. Um we encourage school systems over the course of that time to really be looking at academic return on investment. You know, you're you're a you're you're able to have dollars for things that you may not have had dollars uh for before. And you need to be looking at what things are working
versus what things aren't working. And um you know, some systems did a really good good job with that. One of the things that we feel like worked really well was the tutoring. And I think we put just on the state side, I want to think I want to say we put something
like $150 million into tutoring over four years through the through the pandemic the the uh pandemic funds. And so when that went away, you know, you know, we did see as well as systems and as well as various advocates uh the need
to sustain that particular model. And so when I was in conversations with the legislature and and around the tutoring dollars, you know, you saw some proposals that were 200 million to provide tutoring and and I finally got asked what's the minimum amount amount
that you can lift this program. I said I can't lift it without 30 million. And so that's essentially where that 30 million number came from. So just I'm I'm again being very overly broad, but if you had $4 billion for the last say four years, which was co money, that means on
average we've in general in Louisiana, education in general has lost roughly a billion a year since that money's gone. >> Yes, sir. >> So, and we've backfilled and picked up those important appro funds for appropriations for tutoring and so forth
and so on. But to me, there's a mismatch somewhere that uh schools are just not being fully funded because we lost the billion dollars. >> Yeah. There's there's no doubt that schools are feeling the impact of of those federal funds going away. >> Yeah.
>> Um so, you know, what what we're just trying to do is look at constitutionally what is the responsibility. Uh and it says a minimum program of education. Understand that. Yeah, I understand that. >> Okay. Well, thank you very much. Sorry, Mr. Go.
>> Uh, yes, just a couple of questions. Um so this form this new uh formula consideration uh seeks to increase uh state funding by roughly $30 million
uh in an environment where we are uh decreasing uh student population. Um so I'm I'm I'm I'm still trying to trying to understand the logic behind I I I I know that we are trying to uh revisit the formula to
address uh inflationary issues. But how are if we were to compare um inflation versus the number of student loss and then to equate for example
um the amount of money uh that we uh maybe using the word save might not be the right term but save through not through student loss. How uh h how does
it how do the numbers compare? >> Yeah, good question. So, the total amount that the MFP the total amount will be about $42 million less next year to public schools and public charters.
If this particular formula is approved which uh relates to the inflationary impact of the operational dollars um the loss will not be 42 million. It will be more like 10 to 12 million. Um because
you'll you will schools will make up some of that difference simply by the board recognizing the inflation around their operational expenses that have not been accounted for. And then I I um I know that uh uh President Cameron
uh the reason why he um rejects the increase in Gator dollars is because uh at least his argument is that the state doesn't have the money. Um so if we if as a state we don't have the money to
fund gator alligator dollars uh how do we have the money then to fund uh an increase of 30 million in environment of decreasing student population. >> So I want to I want to just make one correction to that in that there will
not be a $30 million increase to the MFP. In fact, even if you approve this, there'll be roughly a 10 to 12 million decrease to the MFB. Um, the other the other important concept that you bring forward is is LA Gator, which you know,
we have we have supported for for many years. Um, and so in our executive budget request to the governor's office and in coordination with them, we recommended um I believe 88 million for
LA Gator. So our our request to the executive branch in in in conjunction with them was to request the 44 million that exists today, give or take, plus uh a a new 44 million to double the size of of Gator to roughly 88 million. And so
in the governor's executive budget for the year, it considers all of the needs of the of the state for the functioning of the state. Um, it includes that $88 million for Gator, which would double the size of Gator. Um, and it includes
the funding uh for the entirety of this MFP proposal that we are recommending today with the exception of there will be an additional $12 million give or take that would not be needed due to the loss of student count.
>> Okay. All right. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay, let's go to public comment. Um, we have Larry Carter Jr. with the Louisiana Federation of Teachers and School Employees. Uh, wishes to speak
information only on this topic. You have five minutes, sir. must be recognized. Louisiana >> over the past two days. ranked in the top five states where
those games happen because in the world they did not work a false all those.
Let's look at 20137. But by 2023 that gap had grown 5,93 the national average from 7,31 16,1
That means these 23 24 fig are the latest available from they do not reflect the more recent action by the presentation has continued
Python outside Alabama and the Mississippi house for $5,000,000 at the same time electricity concern
for every adult and support staff often those same for all of this comes after years of added mandates training
duties and ongoing fighters. have already recognized that school employees have been going to celebrate the game and Louisiana said not everyone
the whole team and the whole team school. My job here. >> Thank you, sir. So, there is a motion on the floor to
adopt and approve the MFP to go to the legislature. >> Yes. Yes, ma'am. >> I have a question. Sure. Um, I would like to motion to that, but can I amend that motion to also send a resolution uh
from Bessie in support of the areas that that's in the governor's budget on high dose tutoring and the other two as well as in gator or do I make that two separate >> two separate >> two separate okay >> so we'll do two separate motions on that
so we'll um the first one is regards to the uh MFP being sent to the legislature. Is there any objections, Mr. G? >> Yes, I like to uh vote to reject the MFP proposal.
>> Okay, so we have one objection. So, do we need to do roll call? Roll call vote, please. For the record's clear, we're voting on the motion to approve the MFP form. >> Yes.
>> Roll call on that. Roll call to approve the MFP motion. Mr. Pal. Mr. Pale. Yay. Dr. Armstrong. Dr. Armstrong. Yay. Mr. G.
Mr. G. Nay. Mr. Castile. >> Yes. >> Mr. Castile. Yay. Miss Champine. Yes. Miss Champine. Yes. Dr. Clark. Yes, >> Dr. Clark. Yes, Mr. Harris. >> Yes, >> Mr. Harris. Yes, >> Miss Holloway. >> Yes,
>> Miss Holloway. Yes, >> Miss Meering. >> Yes, >> Miss Meering. Yes, Mr. Morris. >> Yes, >> Mr. Mars. Yes. >> Do I get a vote? >> Do I get a vote? >> Yes. >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Mr. Burkin. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Okay, that motion passes. Thank you, Miss Shampine. >> Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would also like to uh make a motion to send a resolution to the legislature uh in support of the $30
million in highdose tutoring, the $17.5 million in the U differential pay, and the $2 million that we've requested that is in the governor's budget as well as for the resolution to uh say that we support the GATE program.
>> We have a motion stated by Miss Shelpine. Is there a second that Mr. for appel. Any discussion? Does everyone understand the motion? Are there any objections to the motion?
Hearing none, that motion passes. Thank you. Um uh next item, please. >> Your next item is on page 11, item 4.1, consideration of LDOE contracts greater than $50,000. The recommendation is to
approve. >> Motion, Miss Halloway. Second, Miss Melerin. Any um Dr. Brumley, do you want to give us an update on this one, please? >> Yeah, I'm actually going to ask uh Mr. Bradford to come to the table. uh you do
see before you um you know you have a contract there with Louisiana Tech University, one with um one of our support uh institutions that helps us with some of the federal policy. But if you all recall during uh I know Mr. Morris uh Mr. Til, Miss
Holloway will recall at the beginning of the pandemic um we were experiencing a situation where when um parents or other members would call into the agency or email, they weren't necessarily um being able to get uh an expeditious response,
so to speak. Uh and part of that was just existing systems that were in place and part of it was the pandemic. But we made a change and we went to a contracted uh answering service um which has really made all the difference the last few years. And uh I think some of
those data points uh that Mr. Bradford are going to share are really important. And I'll even tell you guys that sometimes I call that I call that call center myself just to see how they're doing. Um and uh they've passed every single time I've made a call. But, uh,
Ken, I know you have some data points you probably want to share about the call center. Um, and they they actually operate, Miss Meerine, they operate out of, uh, the Louisiana boardwalk there up in Boer. Ken Bradford, chief of staff, Department
of Education. Um, as many of you know, I was an assistant superintendent here for a decade for 10 years until 2022, at which point uh, I moved upstairs into an operational chief of staff role. First thing Dr. Romy said when I got in that new role in February of 2022 is we need
to fix the call center. At that time in February of 2022 we were getting about 7,000 calls a month in the call center. 800 of them were going unanswered and the average wait time was 37 minutes to to get a response. So uh we had a small
staff at the time uh internally doing the call center of of about 10 staff members. We could typically keep it staffed around four or five positions because it was a civil service position. It was a very lowpaying position about $11 an hour and we couldn't keep people
in it. So, uh I I I met with civil service. I met with department of administration. I met with uh office of state procurement said, "Look, I need help." And they said, "Well, look, here's the deal. We have already in place for the state of Louisiana a master agreement." And that means
there's a contract already in place and state agencies that are what we call a PPU uh which is a public procurement unit. We can join into that contract and everything is already negotiated. It's fair market value and it's approved by
the state. So we did that at that time. So we we've gone from 37 minute wait times to a6 wait time uh seconds 6 seconds. when someone calls it is picked up. Uh
we're doing about 7,000 calls a month. Uh again 6 wait time. Uh the center is is is in Boer Parish on the boardwalk. It's staffed with about 15 people through this this uh Young Williams
contracting agency. Uh they maintain a 99.99% uptime. supports uh languages of English, Spanish, and Vietnamese. All of the calls are recorded and they are archived for 5 years. So if we have to
go back and say, "Look, there was a call. This is what occurred on the call." We we can do that. So it's been of great benefit to the department and the citizens of Louisiana to be able to get this rapid response. Uh matter of fact, I did like Dr. Brumley this morning. uh stepped outside about a half
hour ago and I dialed the number 1 1877-453-2721 picked up uh immediately uh I was given a prompt. Do I have an early childhood question? Do I have a special education question or do I have an other question? I clicked other. Uh immediately the
representative came on and was ready to answer my question. So with that, I'll just pause and see if you have any any further questions about this contract. Ken, if you don't mind, share the total amount of calls that come in one one more time just so everyone can get an appreciation of the amount of calls that
come into our agency. It it it fluctuates, but the average number of calls is just north of 7,000 per month. And again, those calls could be a lot of those are deal relative to early childhood applications, but it could also be for special education or it
could be just a parent calling saying, "Hey, my son or daughter, do they need to have English 4 to graduate high school?" Certainly. Okay. Any other questions, discussion on this?
>> Hearing none, any objections to the motion? >> Seeing none, uh, next item, please. >> Your next item is on page 22, item 4.2, consideration of federal, state grants, and allocations to LEAs, type two
charters, type five charters, approved non-public schools, and community- based organizations, competitive, and other. The recommendation is to approve >> the motion. Mr. Harris, Miss Armstrong, any discussion on this?
Any objection? Seeing none, that motion is adopted. Uh, next, please. Your next item is on page 34, item 5.1, consideration of AG funding cycle activities, approval of
fiscal year 2026 2027 allocations for individual AG statewide grant programs. The recommendation is to approve. >> Yeah. A motion, please. Dr. Clark, Miss Champine. Any discussion?
Any objection? That motion is adopted. Next, please. >> Your next item is on page 159, item 7.1, consideration of revisions to bulletin 119, Louisiana school transportation specifications and procedures regarding
school bus speed limits. >> So, uh, on this particular one, uh, the department has not made a recommendation. Uh if you look on that last page in the booklet, it does say that um the driving
speeds, the maximum speed for school buses shall be in accordance with the Louisiana revised statutes under title 32 motor vehicles and traffic regulations. Um so do I have a motion to approve Miss
Holloway, Miss um Champine? Any discussion on the bus school speed limits? School bus speed limit. Um seeing none, uh no objections. That motion is adopted. Um next, please.
>> That concludes your agenda. >> Have a great lunch. We'll see you guys at 12:45. Thank you.