All right, we'll call to order the Independent School District 152 schoolboard meeting for June 15, 2026. And we'll start with uh roll call. >> Volant present. >> Markwart present. >> Yorkland present.
>> Steph present. >> Vote present. >> All right, we'll stand for pledge. Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. >> Preview of agenda. Dr. Lunik, >> there are no changes. Recommend approval. >> Cassidy, >> I move to approve the meeting agenda as presented. >> Um, Scott, >> I'll second it. Motion by Cassidy, second by Scott to approve the agenda as
presented. Is there any discussion? >> Any further discussion? All in favor say I. >> I. Same sign. Motion carries and moving on to public forum as there's nobody tonight as I understand. >> That is correct.
>> All right. And moving on to the public comment related to school board renewal of expiring operating referendum authority. School comment related to school board renewal of expiring operations referendum authority is to author is to
allow public comment on the renewal of of expiring operating referendum authority. Individuals who wish to speak during the public comment period must be submitted uh in write in a written request by 3 p.m. on the meeting day.
The school board chair will call speakers to the microphone and recognize one speaker at a time. Each speaker can speak to up to three minutes and the public comment will be will not be uh recorded or live streamed. And do we have anybody for this?
>> No, we did not. >> All right. Thank you. Moving on to consent agenda. All items in the consent agenda are considered to be routine and have been made available to the school board at least two days prior to the meeting. Items have been enacted on by one resolution. There'll be no separate
discussion of these items unless a schoolboard member so requests in which event the items will be removed from the agenda and considered under separate resolution to the extent possible the school board member inquiries on consent agenda items are to be made directly to the district administration prior to the
time of the meeting. Superintendent Dr. Lun approval of the May 2026 May 26 2026 regular meeting minutes in the May 26 2026 closed session minutes 2026 2027 school district memberships
legal services designated official newspaper B news business and administrative services Dr. Damer June claims resignations change of contract and new employees. Uh resolution of authority of
authorizing payment of goods and services 2026 2027. Resolution of collection of NSF checks and leases. Resolution of investment of excess funds 2026 2027. Grocery and produce bids for
2026 2027 and dairy and bakery bids for 2026 2027. Keith >> move to approve the consent agenda as presented. >> Cassidy, >> a second. >> Motion by Keith, second by Cassidy to approve the consent agenda as presented.
Any further discussion? Any additional discussion? All in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. Motion carries. On a new business, we'll move uh actually annual operating plan 2026 2027. Dr. D.
>> Thank you. Um invite Cam Wingbach, director of business services up um to review the 2026 27 annual operating plan, which includes the preliminary and long-term facility maintenance plan for fiscal year 2027. >> All right. Thank you.
See if this works. All right. Start off um with the objectives today. Um the objectives are to approve the 2627 budget um approve the 10-year LTFM plan um project revenue and expenditures
for a two-year span and present historical data and use all of this as a tool in the long range um planning process for the district. Starting with the general fund, uh we have revenues of $128.7 million
increase um from prior year of $ 8.4 million um and expenses of 123.3 million which is an increase of 3.8 million um compared to the 2526 revised budget. Um
the main drivers for this of are um the voter approved tenure operating referendum that passed and um we received the it passed in the fall of 2025 and we received the the funds starting in FY27
and that generates uh around $4.37 million annually for 10 years. also the capital project levy, 10-year levy that generates roughly $1.5 million annually.
And then in 2627 specifically, there was a $1.2 million um lease levy adjustment that um I'll get into a little bit later. And then um the basic aid formula increased from
7,481 per pupil to 7,683 which is a $22 increase per adjusted pupil unit. Um so the net increase of all the fund balances is 5.38
million. Um total ending projected fund balance of 10.87%. 87% of our total expenditures. Um $1.2 million remains in our committed and u assigned fund balances to cover severance and postemployment
benefit obligations. Um and then a revised budget will be presented in uh January of 2027 or early February of 2027 to the board. So with all of that said, here's again just what I what I briefly said. uh
increase of revenue of 8.4 million, increase of expenditures of 3.8 million, total fund increase of 5.38 um and the ending fund balance of 10.87%. And this is with the assumption of no
reductions to programs or staffing um included in the budget assumptions there. So going forward here, uh we just have this chart that I I had last year. I don't have an updated one. However, um this kind of gives you a general idea of
of how the general education formula allowance um has trended over the years and where adjustment or where um excuse me, inflation has has um trended on the top line there. So, if you look at the
adjusted for inflation line at the top, um it would be roughly $9,192 for our our basic aid allowance. Um compare that to what it currently is at $7,683.
That's 1509 difference or 19.7%. So, so as you can see, um since 2003, it just hasn't kept up with inflation. um the last two years it is tied to inflation up to 3% however um that gap still
exists there so that is one of the struggles. Here's the total budget numbers um which I'll go into line by line and you can see there that $5.38 million increase in
our our revenue um and then our fund balance at the bottom there of 9.47 47 and are unassigned 10.87 and are restricted. So starting with revenue um line one you can see the the category on the left and
then I'll explain on the right what the the changes are. So, starting with property taxes line one again, that's that $4.7 million um annual operating referendum that was approved in fall of 2025.
And also in 2627, there we have a $1.2 million adjustment from a uh prior authorized lease levy that was missed and um recouped. It was It should have been recouped last year. It was missed
again and um it's collected now in FY27. >> Cam, can we interrupt it right now if they have a question or you want at the end? >> Yeah, you can answer question. >> Yep. >> I actually have a comment. I was just going to say that I appreciate the new format here of putting the numbers and the description so we're not going back
and forth as well as making it visually larger so that we could see it and see it on one page. So, appreciate that. >> That was the idea. Yeah, just to make it a little easier to read. Um and then yeah, if you have any questions, feel free to thank you to interrupt me.
Um so local sources include or that that wrapped up the property taxes increase, which is why you see that increase from FY27 from FY26 and then it goes back down because that adjustment um is no longer
there for FY28 and FY29, but the the operating referendum is. Um for local sources uh we have um tuition fees from um interest uh -ate reimbursements, local grants, fees from students, and
then the main driver there is the decrease of our medical assistance revenue projection just um based on the federal policy cuts and and um the reimbursement rates being a little more stricter. Uh line three here, GED aid. That's our
main line of revenue. Um our biggest state aid source, which is where we have that 2.69% increase on our basic um formula. We have an assumption there of 7,233
ADMs uh average daily memberships of our students uh which is slightly lower um from the prior year of 7266. Um, one of the items in that line three
there, general the general education aid is our compensatory aid and that had a uh we do see a $169,000 increase there. Um, that was one of the um Morehead did benefit from that for
the legislative session of the hold harmless provision. Um, so this is only a one-year fix, however. So that is uh something that legislators will have to do to fix how they um calculate the free and reduced counts for the formula.
Um, English learner cross subsidy aid kicks in in FY27 as well, which is roughly 300,000. Um and then for the the t the other state aid, those are our um local tax
credits that will be re revised um or adjusted in the revised budget. Uh the special ed aid and federal aids. Um special ed we see a conservative approach there using FY26 expenses. So
we don't quite know what those are yet. So, we're we're maintaining the aid um pretty conservatively there. And again, that'll be adjusted in the revised budget. And then federal aids um that's our title programs in um federal special ed
aid and that'll be um that's based on our preliminary award from the US Department of Ed and including carryover from prior year. Uh so line um 8 9 10 and 11 is our
student activity. These are this is a separate restricted fund fundraised by our student activity groups to be used for those student activity groups year-over-year. So that 700,000 just reflects um the base line that we
project each year uh as it varies yeartoear. but it should match in line with the expenditures. Um, operating capital, capital projects levy and LTFM. Uh, capital projects levy is required by
the state to have a separate fund balance. Um, so it's it's shown here as a separate line item from our operating capital fund. And um that again is that $ 1.5 million annual uh revenue over 10
years to support capital technology um safety and curriculum. Um LTFM, we had a previous year adjustment in 2026 which decreased our our long-term facility maintenance aid.
Um but that that goes back up in FY27. However, the the formula um does decrease as we have our overall district average building age being lower than the prior year. Same with operating capital. The average
age of district buildings is um included in that formula as well. So, here's the a breakdown of our revenue by um source. So you can see 79.9% or 102.8 million is our um state sources
and that makes up the majority. Property taxes um is 16.8% or 21.6 million and then federal is 3.3% or 4.1 million.
Moving on to expenditures, uh we have the administration and district support lines which are um make up of what you see on the left there. Um administration
is up about 246,000 and salary and benefit obligations are the reason for that. And then on the other end um we see a a decrease on the district support and mainly just due to staff turnover. Um and uh also reducing
some of those election uh levy costs that we had from the prior year. Regular instructional, vocational, and special services. Uh all settled at a 7.02%
u wage increase over two years. Um, special services, you'll see, shows a big uh $1.8 million increase there. And that's that's mainly just some reclassification things that we we had
for our um literacy coaches who are now in the the alternative delivery of specialized instructional services program, which is tied to the special ed formula. So they are listed in the special services um program there. Um
for vocational there was a a decrease there and that was again just a shifting of uh one of our um FTEEs who is now reclassed to uh the staff development restricted fund who oversees that program
as well as a youth skills training grant that we we no longer have in FY27. instructional support. Um we see a decrease there due to technology shifts um shifting to the capital projects levy fund.
So, some of those things such as our our software subscriptions for um classroom curriculum and um and I'll get to the capital projects levy what's included in there, but but that was one of the items there. Um
buildings and grounds um is up due to the energy costs and liability insurance increases um as that's included in that line. Um although the the LTFM upgrades help mitigate that rise in cost. >> Kim, I have a question for the
instructional support. So that's not people. That's just there is people there's there's technology staff development. Um there are some staffs some staff um coded there as well as uh services and
and media too. So, >> so is most of the decreased due to like technology things and not staff or is it less support people? >> Oh, yeah. That's for um the technology mainly. It got shifted to capital
projects levy. >> Okay. >> Which I'll bring up on the next slide. Thank you. >> Or two slides from here. uh transportation. Uh we'll see a decrease there and that's um through route optimizations there. Um bringing
level four special ed routes internally to the Vista Center and uh the student activities line remains neutral. >> I have one more question there too. Is the activity travel included in that under just activities? that that would
be under I'll go back to this regular instruction um well that goes there everything related to activities um is coded there by the state so I'll show you how the the activities broken
down on in a future slide here thanks but yeah that's where it's all included in that line so this would be just your normal regular route transportation um as well as field trips.
So that uh sees a decrease there due to that that level four programming moving into the Vista Center and then student activity. Um so here here's where we have the operating capital um
decreasing there as the revenue decreases. um some of those items shifting to capital projects levy and the bus purchases um being deferred to FY28. So the capital projects levy funding will target some of the the staff student
Chromebooks, the staff to staff Chromebooks and as well as the student onetoone Chromebook Chromebooks that would normally be um under that instructional support line are now being supported by that capital projects levy funding.
um as well as some instructional software which same thing was under that instructional support line now is able to be used for capital projects levy and uh we also have some security upgrades to some of the main entry vestibules
being supported by capital projects levy and then LTFM um those we had those projects pre-approved back in April and So, I will show you uh the 10-year plan coming up on the next slide, but we have $2.8
million budgeted there. Here's the expenditures for the district um by object code, so salaries and benefits. Uh we're mainly a people business, so $95.8 million
um is salaries and benefits, which is 78.6% 6% of that total 4.9% in supplies uh sorry I skipped one 11.8 purchase services
um which is about 14.4 million and uh 4.3% capital expenditures which is about 5.3 million. So here is the activities which is breaking down that instructional line um
even further and in here we'll show what the district's budgets for um activities. So we project around 3.08 in total expenditures um direct revenue to offset that is
616,000 from student fees um ticket receipts, gate receipts and concessions. And the the total net district support is 2.46 million. And although that does seem like it's a lot of money, which it
is in paper on paper, um just remember that that directly impacts over 1,700 students. Um so across our whole district. So that that's a major differentiator for Morehead to um to draw families into our district and keep
them here. So looking forward here to how those expenditures in the activities budget are spent. Um the majority is employee benefits or salaries and wages and employee benefits over 50% for our
adviserss um for each of the programs and um salaries or excuse me purchase services of 1.08 which is mainly the transportation piece. Yep. Keith, I'm just a request. I know
on the first pie chart you had the percent and the dollar amount and the second one I think had the percent and this one has the dollar. Could we get both just in going forward on the same slide? >> I must have. >> That's okay. >> Overlooked that piece. >> I just noticed it and it was different than the other one. So,
>> y that way we don't have to flip back. But >> yep. Appreciate it. Thank you. >> I got a quick question. What does the employee benefits? >> That's just your your um your FICA payroll taxes, things like that.
>> Yeah, social security. >> Yeah, social security. >> So, here's the 10-year LTFM plan um based on the April approved projects um presented by Steve Moore. Um this includes the 10-year roofing plan and
pavement projects. So, so some of the major projects outside of that include uh HVAC upgrade at Sports Center, um high school track resurface resurfacing, bleacher replacement um at various locations, fire alarm panel
replacements, and security upgrades. And with this, it's kind of um projecting out how how those funds are to be spent over the next 10 years. Yeah, Keith. Um, I can't remember and maybe Steve will know as well. Is that
does that include the the annual increase like the cost of something is $100,000 next year and this year and next year will be $103,000. Is that I think that was calculated in there. Correct me if I'm wrong on that. >> Um, that is in the roof and the
pavements plan, but these the when you get out past, you know, they're just raw numbers. >> Park. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. Thank you. But I did use those numbers to base off these. So they should match pretty close.
So here's the ending fund balance and what that looks like for FY27 and and going forward the next two years. Um as you can see our uh board approved policy is 12 to 15%. Um so we're gaining ground
in that sense. Um by FY29 we are projected around 12%. And the the key will be to maintain that 12 to 15% moving forward. So some of the future challenges there um is the the revenue gap that we see
from um inflation uh how it hasn't kept up with inflation even with the most recent uh formula increases. the compensatory revenue which I brought up earlier um is is uh the district is benefiting from the the
one-time hold harmless provision this year but moving forward um they are projecting that to that formula to change. So what that looks like going forward is unknown at this moment. Um and then some of the unfunded man
mandates such as the hourly unemployment insurance um as that pot of money runs out the district will be um responsible for those funds going forward after FY27 Minnesota paid leave ESST
question whenever you're ready. >> Go ahead. I would just like to highlight that these unfunded and underfunded mandates state continues keep expectations upon us and they don't come back with with any significant support. So I just want that to be on the record. We're all
aware of that, but it it it really is frustrating and I think honestly I think we're doing a very good job coping with that that struggle. So thank you for for your daily work on that, trying to figure it out. Yeah, I imagine those will be big topics of conversation as we
move forward to the next legislative session >> and we need to continue to remind our legislators that we're dying out here. >> Absolutely. Um so with that, there's also the M Minnesota paid leave um ESST which drive
up costs um operational costs and substitute costs for the district. um special ed cross subsidy costs are looming looming um in toxin legislation um transportation reimbursement there has already dropped down to 90%
reimbursement rate so um I anticipate more cuts will be coming in that area and then enrollment uh declining so our our ADMs are seeing a little plateau right now and we kind of project a
slight decline um based on trend And so that's something to monitor as well. >> Cam, is there any um any word on what the PE is a PFML going to go up to
>> the paid family leave? Yeah, >> paid family leave. >> There's nothing um that I saw yet. >> It still hasn't come out yet. >> The state doesn't know yet. So that's something um I was just on a call earlier today and they they weren't aware of a new number there. So, but I
imagine that will go up. >> That's what I was thinking and that I'd like to know. >> They they do have the authority to move that to 1.1 um without any legislative changes. So, I would anticipate that uh due to usage, maybe not
necessarily tied to what we're doing here in Morehead, but from a statewide perspective, I I would anticipate that we'll be moving that thing to 1.1. And uh right now we're in a cost share with with our folks. So um 1.1 is the max
they can do without any legislative change. I would I would anticipate uh next legislative session they'll be addressing that. Uh one one other thing I think is worth mentioning. Uh Cam did touch on the compensatory revenue. Uh they really got to get that resolved. Um
nobody has a definite answer on where that's going to go. Uh the other one that I think we need to continue to watch and keep our eye on is the um blue ribbon commission on special education. Uh keep in mind the state has a maintenance of effort just like we do uh
that we have to maintain from a special ed perspective. Uh the rumbling is that um the cross subsidy is going up faster than they anticipated, but they've got to find a way to strike a balance between
things that don't tie to the cross subsidy and things that I'm sorry, things that don't tie to maintenance of effort and things that tie to maintenance of effort because if the state takes away too much on the cross subsidy, then they could get dinged by the federal government on maintenance of effort. So right now they're looking at
a blend of things and it and it has to do with ADS funding uh which a majority of the districts do take advantage of ADSIS funding. We are one of them. Um and the other one that's out there is transportation regarding um special ed
um and that could range anywhere from homeless uh to uh other types of transportation. those items uh don't necessarily count towards maintenance of effort. Uh but my fear is that uh I
think the cross subsidy right now is roughly around 50%. Uh meaning there's still a cross subsidy out there that the general fund is picking up uh and as our costs continue to rise um so does that cross subsidy
for the state. So uh we do uh we do need to keep our eye on that. The blue ribbon commission is expected to present their findings sometime this fall so they can have those ready when they head into the legislative session uh when they uh in
February of 2027. So just uh just know that we're keeping our eye on that. Um but also know that some of these things um are out of our control and are very difficult to control. So, similar to
what uh board member Volin said earlier, uh that we'll just continue to add uh some stress to our budget if if we don't find a resolution uh to those. Uh we also are very cognizant of the state's position in terms of where they are at
also financially. So, it's not going to be a diff it's not going to be easy here the next couple of years, but um we'll do our best to keep an eye on it and to keep you informed of any of those changes as they come as well. So, just wanted to share that.
Are there any questions on fund one, the general fund before I move on to fund two? So fund two um food service under Minnesota's universal free school meals program state reimbursements have
replaced the paid sales. Um this shows a fund uh balance of 2.95 which is a strong positive fund balance uh up 447,000 from prior year. And here you can see the expenditures
and revenues and our increase in our fund balance there. Um, one thing I'll note of our fund balance is that the state uh restricts what we are allowed to carry over in our reserve there. And
they the state says that uh school food authorities must limit net cash resources to not exceed three months of operating expenses of um of average operating expenses. However, in 2627
they did um increase that to six months average operating expenditures through through the 2627 school year. So what that 6 months average expenditure looks like on our end is $3.5 million. So we
are just below that amount. Um but going forward that is something that we'll have to address as our fund balance um keeps increasing there. Keith, um, similar to what Matt had said earlier about making sure our legislators know, I do, um, want to point out and
appreciate the free school meal program that has been able to continue. Who knows for how long, but uh, I I think that's a a very nice benefit for our community and for our families. So, I just wanted to make that noted as well. >> If that funding would change and it
would come back to the local, could this be used for part of that to cover the cost or is that a different item? um for the cover if they have like reduced amount of payment that would come from the state to cover the being reduced and it come back to local. Could
this fund be used for that? >> Um you know it would be it would be tied into this fund. So the No, it would have to be that uh I'm not sure I understand what you're >> So like right now it's 100% covered for
the free from the state, right? >> Yeah. >> So we get 100% coverage. So if they reduce it to like 80%'s covered and the rest is covered locally, can we use this fund to cover that 20% or does it have to be coming from like general fund dollars, not like fund one? >> Does that make sense?
>> Um I think he could I think you could there may have to be some legislative change to to work with that. Okay. >> But what right now the rules are what you know everything is uh considered to be uh reimbursed for us. If that did
change, they they may say you can only raise your price X and if you don't want to raise it X, you could probably tap into your fund balance, but that would require some guidance as uh they would look at potentially changing some of
those rules and if that did change, then we would have to provide that and and give you a summary of that. So, as it sits right now, my answer would be more than likely yes, if that were to change. Uh but right now I from everything I'm hearing that is not going to change.
They're going to keep moving forward with uh the reimbursement as it is, meaning free free breakfast and lunch for our students. And um so uh but if it did change uh that could be a possible use of funds. Now the only thing that
complicates that Dave would be uh if uh there was a USDA rule because we have we have federal funds in this fund balance and we have a combination of local as well. So they may say you can use your local portion to cover that. But again
uh until things change and they give us guidance on how we can use that fund balance um I would say we just stick to the the rules. But if they did if they did make any changes, then we would have to uh we would let you know what that would look like in terms of how we would
handle any decrease in in um expenditure or revenue based on what you're asking. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Here's a little detailed look at at our expenditures and revenues and how the reserve is growing. um revenue majority
is federal sources and state sources. Um expenditures majority is salaries, wages and um food costs. So here you can see that breakdown there. Moving on to community service fund. Um this fund is strictly is restricted to
non-K12 day programs um based on local census met metrics and the fund balance um is projected to decrease by 182,568 down to 497,547. Um this is just to program in
investments, increased expenditures in u salaries and wages and uh revenue not keeping up with our expenditures there. Um some of the drivers key drivers for this fund are um like I said population
metrics and property wealth um and participation fees rather than average daily memberships or um student enrollment. So looking at our fund balance like I said it is um decreasing steadily each
year. As we as we look at that, we are um we do have a plan to look at and correct our expenditures outpacing our revenues by either looking for alternative funding sources or um have a
have a talk about raising fees um things like that for families. So, that is something on our radar as we move forward. >> Then here we have >> Sorry. Um this maybe isn't for you, maybe more for Brandon. Do you know the last time those fees have been raised?
Those community service fees? >> I've been here since 2014 and I don't recall them being raised uh in my time. Now, that I don't want to provide you inaccurate statements, but I honestly don't remember them being raised since I've been here. So,
>> yeah. >> Yeah, we really try to keep them as affordable as possible. Absolutely. What we have also been doing is is trying to um amp up our scholarship fund and that you know helps us um feel better about
raising raising fees. Um several programs around the state have gone to like sliding fees um which you know I'm exploring a little bit of um people pay what they feel they can afford. Um some districts have had great success with
that um because um people can afford more pay more um you know other districts have not. So we're we're exploring a few options of of um really addressing that. So we have a detailed look at revenues and expenditures here in the community
service fund. Um as you can see in 2829 that is when it starts to dip below that 10% um uh of total expenditures line there. So that is something that like I said we'll we'll talk about but I will say that uh
the community service fund is is a fund that shouldn't have a a large fund balance. So it is something that is um to be used for the community for um staff and and supporting these programs. So I think the district has done a good
job with um their resources there. Moving forward to building construction fund six. Um this is the the fund that tracks the voter approved uh construction revenues and expenditures.
Um, as of June 15th, um, today, the the $144 million voter approved, uh, project of the career academy and high school, um, was is 97.7% complete.
Um, and as you can see there on the financial summary that there is about a little less than $5 million in commitments that we have left to have. Um, and to fully provide the staff with what they need to furnish the buildings,
the district will recommend uh issuing tax neutral capital obligation bonds backed by operating capital in FY27 to finalize the project. um using these using that additional
funding was always part of the long-term plan um to ensure that the the project fully delivers on what the vision was um approved by our voters in 2019. Um we've had the career academy sports um medicine lab and the the phase one
and phase two also included in there. the only thing that uh was not fulfilled was the phase three of the athletic complex. So with that all of that um fulfilling our our our our
uh vision for the the voters that is what is remaining and that is what uh the district will work with Ellers to recommend to um the board. So with that there there's also
the district also had to utilize um multiple alternative funding sources to to bridge that gap after COVID hit um including health and safety bond abatement bond. Um a $5 million legislative transfer from LTFM to
operating capital. Um, we were able to uh support some of the the kitchen equipment um and things with the career academy utilizing food service fund fund two um and then as well as er funds for
HVAC upgrades at uh the career academy building. So So like I said this was all this capital obligation bond was something that was on the radar. uh we wanted to wait till we were at that uh
95 to 98% completion rate to see where we were at with what our remaining project balance was. And um that is what we'll go come forward with to the board next month with others.
>> Cam, we another question. >> Yeah. I'd just like to take this opportunity to commend our entire administrative staff for navigating these difficult waters through co and all of the uh all of the challenges that have presented them. I think uh we've just come up with an amazing project and
I know that it is just taken a lot of time and expertise to pull that off. So for me I say thank you and all of us I believe. >> Thank you. Then lastly, we have the debt service
fund. So this is the fund that manages all of the outstanded outstanding bonded indebtedness. Um this is the financial lock box for the district. Um its sole purpose is to pay down our long-term voter approved capital bonds. So, per
Minnesota law, we levy 105% of what is actually due each year in order to to cushion that fund balance and protect our credit rating. Um, and as well as absorb any local tax delinquencies there. Um, so since this
is a fixed payment structure for the next several years, this is our most stable predictable budget. Um and as the ending fund balance is gets too high, what they do is they reduce it on the levy in the following
year. So that is something that we might see in 2728 after we um went out for that refund 26 26A bond refunding um partial refunding bond. Um that will save the district money long term and
will also relieve some of the taxpayer impact as well. And with that, I am done. Any questions? Any other questions?
Scott, do I still make a motion now or are we done with this? >> I think so. >> Thank you, Cam. Thank you. >> Move to approve the 2026 2027 annual operating plan including a prelim preliminary and long-term facility
maintenance plan for the fiscal year of 2027. >> A second. >> Motion by Scott, second by Cassidy to approve the 2027 annual annual operating operation plan, including a preliminary and long-term
facility maintenance plan for the fiscal year 2027. Any additional questions? Any comments? All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. Motion carries. And yes, thanks Cam again for all the good
information. Moving on. Transportation agreement with Palmer Bus Service of Morehead, Inc. Seymour. >> Good evening. Um, back uh in April, I made a notification to the school board
that on the first of May 2026, Richard's Transportation was acquired by Palmer Bus Service of Morehead Incorporated. And u we finished out that contract in the school year um with a memorandum of agreement that just carried on the
remaining 30 days of the contract with Richards. So, um, now that we're in a new contract year, I felt prudent to to go to a new contract with Palmer Bus Service. And tonight, we're requesting
uh we did a direct negotiation like we typically do with our transportation providers. And um, essentially the agreement is based off of a state of Minnesota template. It's the same essentially that we had with
with um Richard's transportation. Uh this one will be uh we recommend a three base year contract with two op option years and um the rates uh with a 3% annual increase in rates which is typically what we've done um uh for a
while now. But uh with that I I'm be happy to answer any questions. >> Any questions? Keith, make a motion. Move to approve the transportation service agreement as detailed in attachment one to Palmer bus
service of Morhead Minnesota of Morehead, Inc. as presented. >> Scott, >> I will second it. >> All right, we have a motion by Keith, second by Scott to approve the transportation service agreement as uh detailed in attachment one to Palmer bus
service of Morhead, Inc. as presented. Any additional questions or comments? Could I just add one thing? >> Sure. >> Uh really want to thank um Richards as uh as they move into
retirement and uh we have a competent contractor coming in to replace them. I just uh want it to be known publicly that uh Richards has done a lot for uh the district and uh have been a um
staple for us uh long before I got here. and uh just very solid community people and I just want to make sure that uh they're thanked for the work that they've done with us for I I don't know
how many years it's been but I just want to make sure they're aware that we did appreciate uh everything that they did for us. So >> thank you for that Matt. And I would echo that and and for me it goes back 40 years in youth ministry travel with
Richards as well as them um busing our my children and grandchildren and uh I certainly second that. What a what a wonderful relationship we've had with Richards. >> Wonderful. >> One last and they also worked very hard to find an appropriate busing company to
come and work with us is my belief and my understanding from what they did. They uh they didn't want just anybody to come in and take over this bus company. So, thank you, Richard's blessing. That's great.
All right. Any other discussion? >> All right. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Post same sign. Motion carries. Moving on to resolution clarif certifying the population estimate for the 2026 payable 2027 levy of
independent school district 152. Brenda. >> All right. So this is really relevant as we uh talked about the AOP that um Cam just uh presented. Um every year we have an opportunity to um reertify the census
if it um increases and um this year our um population estimate did increase um at 50,201 um as determined by the state demographer. Um so the recommendation is to formally adopt a resolution to certify an updated population estimate
for the district. And what this does for us then is um um we'll use that figure in 2026 payable 2027 revenue calculations. Um so with that is about an increase of 993 from what we were
currently certified at at 49208. And so um we would have general community ad revenue increase of 630555 and our youth service after school enrichment and adults with disabilities um revenue increase would be 3,16767
for a total increase of uh 947322. >> Motion >> Scott, go ahead. I'll make a motion to adopt the resolution the population >> estimate for the 2026 payable 2027 levy
of independent school district. >> Cassidy, >> a second. >> Have a motion by Scott, second by Cassidy to adopt the resolution certifying the population estimate for the 2026 payable 2027 levy of Independent School District 152 as presented. Any further discussion?
Any other discussion? All in favor say I. >> Post same sign. Motion carries. Resolution establishing dates for filing affidavit of candidacy. >> Dr. Lunik. >> Thank you. uh tonight. It's hard to
believe, but it's uh already that time of year, and uh Deb really enjoys this time of year. That um this resolution just confirms that uh we will be opening that window for school board candidates
to file. And I believe that window starts July 14th and uh closing at 5:00 p.m. on July 28th. So, uh, with this resolution and your support, we just open that window for us to accept, uh, filings for candidates, uh, during that
time stated. All right, Matt. I'll move to approve the resolution establishing dates for filing affidavit of candidacy for the office of school board member of Independent School District number 152 beginning on July 14th, 2026 at 7:30
a.m. and closing at 5:00 p.m. on July 28th, 2026 as presented. Filing hours will follow the Morhead public schools operations center office hours Monday through Thursday 7 a.m. to 4:30m and closed on Fridays.
>> Scott, >> I will second that. >> Motion by Matt, second by Scott to approve the resolution establishing dates of filing affidav affidavits of c candidacy. Is that word? for the um office of schoolboard member of Independent School District 152
beginning on July 14, 2026 at 7:30 a.m. and closing at 5:00 pm on July 28th, 2026 as presented. Filing hours will follow the Morehead Area Public Schools operations center office hours Monday through Friday 7 to 4:30 p.m. and closed
on Fridays. Any additional discussion? Any other discussion? All in favor say I. I >> oppose. Same sign. Motion carries. Resolution calling for a public hearing to consider granting property tax
abatement. Dr. Lun. >> Thank you. So, a couple months ago, if I could have you um go back in time when when Steve Moore presented on his um uh parking lot and roofing uh plan for the
next 10 years. And we also at the same time presented uh a program that we could be a part of that would seek uh 50% uh reimbursement on an annual basis uh from the state and then as our average
age gained we would lose that reimbursement. So uh we would lose the percent of reimbursement as it would get less and less as we would gain back more aid. Uh so this resolution is tied to the presentation you heard from Steve a
couple months ago and uh this just allows us to call for uh a public hearing to consider the abatement and as you are aware the abatement portion of this uh really helps uh the process in terms of only can be used for parking
lots. So there'd be two parts to that, but by law we do have to do a hearing for the abatement, which is the abatement bond. So uh this allows you to call this resolution allows you to basically call for the public hearing
next month. So with your support, I'd like to move forward with that uh to review uh and to bring that forward uh for our July board meeting. Any questions or motion? Keith,
>> I'll make a motion. Move to adopt the resolution calling for the public hearing to consider granting property tax abatement to be held on Monday, July 20th, 2026 at 6 p.m. um the MAPS operation center, boardroom 600 as presented. >> Cassidy,
>> a second. Motion by Keith, second by Cassidy to adopt the resolution calling a for public hearing to consider granting property tax abatement to be held on Monday, July 20th, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. MAPS operation center, boardroom
600 as presented. Any other discussion? Any other discussion? All in favor say I. >> I. Oppose. Same sign. Motion carries. Renewal of expiring referendum revenue
authorization Minnesota statute 16 126c.17 subdivision 9B. Dr. Lunik, thank you. This uh resolution tonight uh is um brought to you as a result of a
legislative change from the uh 2023 legislative session. And in that session, uh, they granted, uh, the school board the authority to extend a voter approved levy for the length that it was originally approved for. So, back
in, um, November of 2016, the community renewed the 22366 for 10 years. So tonight we are at that point again where because now the the statute has changed and has you folks uh
being able to renew it. Uh tonight is our opportunity to uh renew our $22366 um levy uh by by board approval. And so tonight, I ask your support in extending
this $223 per pupil for another 10 years um starting in taxes payable of 2027. So, with that, I I would entertain any questions, but if I could just add before uh you ask any questions or move
forward with this resolution, I think now is a good time to thank our public once again uh for their support in uh 2016 with this operating levy. Because if you think about what we brought to our community over the last 10 years, we
brought a big we brought a bond in 2015. they supported. Uh we brought this in 2016. They supported. We brought the high school in 2019 and then last year we brought the um other operating levy
of 575 plus the capital project levy. So as we extend this, I don't want the community to think that uh we're unappreciative of that. And I think now is a good time to uh thank our community once again for their unwavering support of our district. So, if you choose to
extend that, uh, tonight's the night to do it, then we do it by this resolution. So, thank you, >> Matt. I second that. Certainly, public education is the foundation of our democracy. And with that, I move to approve the resolution authorizing the
renewal of an expiring referendum revenue authorization as presented to ensure the continuity of the operational funding for Independent School District 152 Morid Area Public Schools. >> Cassidy,
>> I second. Motion by Matt, second by Cassidy to adopt the resolution authorizing the renewal of an expiring referendum revenue authorization as presented to ensure the continuity of the operational funding for the independent school district morid area public schools. Any
additional comment, Keith? Oh, y are we at the the top of the board approved um what we could approve as a board or is there >> No, we're below that. We still have capacity. Yep. >> Um I think that's well into the $2,200
per student. And you look at it on the operating side for us, we are at the 575 plus 223. >> Yep. >> So we we have capacity and when you compare it to peers of our size like like a Burnsville for instance, they are
at about $2,200 per pupil. But I but I think the thing that we have to keep in mind is just because there's capacity, there's different tax bases in the two communities that we compare ourselves to. Uh Burnsville probably has a $2,200
per pupil operating levy for the same impact that we may have for what we have. Uh I'm not 100% sure of that, but they they do have a different uh property uh makeup than than we do. So even though we have the capacity, I
would uh I would be very cautious in terms of putting putting more uh on there. >> I think I recall seeing the comparison last fall and prior in the past. So um but yeah, it's a continuation or we're re we're now continuing on what we had.
So um but there is additional funds that could be added but we're not doing that tonight. >> Yeah. So, so, well, they could only be added by by the vote of the people and the will of the people. If if you were to extend this and you said you wanted $224 versus $22366,
we would have to go to the voter for that, right? >> You can only renew it for what it currently was voted in for back in 2016. Pennymore means we're going to the voters. So tonight, even though overall
we have capacity, anything we do above what we have on the books right now has to go back to the voters for another vote because you're keeping it the same. You have the board authority to extend this another 10 years. So I just want to make that clear.
>> Yeah, appreciate the clarification, >> Scott. >> Thank you. >> Just clarification, you said it would start in taxes payable 27. On line two, it says taxes payable 28 or not line two, page 138, number two,
paragraph 2. So, I just want clarification, make sure we have that correct. >> I'm going to look, but off the top of my head, Scott, I think you're on the 28. >> That's what it says. >> Yeah, I think I think that's I think
that's correct. Um, I think the one of the uh when we put it in in 2016, it probably didn't go into effect until uh fiscal year. So, yeah, 28 would be the 28 would be the year. Yeah. And we have
>> two years to basically renew it by board approval. >> You don't just have to wait till you're right up against it. Yeah. So that's why it's here tonight versus waiting till uh next year at this time. So just want to make sure that we have that continuity
in place. >> Yeah. I just want to make sure we correct on that. So thank you. >> Any additional comments. >> All right. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppose same sign. Motion carries.
Administrators master agreement. Dr. Damer. >> Um thank you. A new agreement was successfully negotiated with the administrators for the period of July 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2028. Um changes to uh language was article 8 basic salary schedule and a financial
statement for the 2-year contract is as follows. 262752, um $15 at 3.81% increase. Um and 2027 2028 43,882 at 3.21% 21% for a total of $95,897,
a 7.02% increase. Um, just a note, uh, we have the long suggested resolution here. Previously, we have used a shorter resolution just to move to approve the agreement, um, with the cost as presented, if that's a choice that you'd like to make.
>> Do I have a motion, Matt? the confidence that has uh been shown in these uh troubling times. It's uh an honor to move to approve the administrator's master agreement for 2026 2028 as presented with the cost as
follows. Year 2026 to 20 2027 52,15 percentage increase of 3.81% 81%. 2027 to 2028 cost of $43,882
percentage increase of 3.21% for a total of $95,897 a percent increase of 7.02%. >> Scott, >> I'll second it. Motion by Matt, second by Scott to approve the administrator
master agreement for 2026, 2027 or 2026, 2028 as presented with the costs below twice enough. Any other discussion? Any other discussion? All in favor say I.
>> I post same sign. Motion carries. Principal master agreement. Dr. Damer. A two-year cont two-year contract was successfully negotiated with the principal unit for a period of July 1st 2026 through June 30th 2028. Language changes were made to article 9 salaries
and a financial uh settlement is as follows 2026 to 2027 $124,272 a 3.74% increase in 2027 20228,124 a 3.28% 28% increase for a total of
$233,396, a 7.02% increase. >> Scott, I'll make a motion. Move to approve the principal's master agreement for 2026 and 2028
as presented with the costs as follows. And I'll just go with what Christian said. >> Do I have a second? >> Keith, I'll second. I have a motion by Scott, second by Keith to approve the principal master agreement for the 2026
to 2028 as presented with the cost that follows. Any discussion? Any further discussion? All in favor say I. >> I oppose. Same sign. Motion carries. Supervisor master agreement. Dr. Damer.
>> Thank you. A new 2-year contract would successfully negotiate with the supervisor's unit for July 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2028. Language changes were made to article 6, article 7, article 8, and article 9 um with the cost as follows. Uh 2026 to 2027,
$110,862, an increase of 4.15%. 2027 through 2028, $76,558, a 2.87% 87% increase for a total cost of $187,420 a 7.02%
increase. >> Cassidy, >> I move to approve the supervisor master agreement for 26 to or 2026 to 2028 as presented with the cost as follows that Dr. Damer just discussed. Uh Scott
>> motion by Cassidy, second by Scott to approve the supervisor master agreement for 2026 to 2028 as presented with the cost below. Any additional discussion? Any additional discussion? All in favor say I.
>> I. Oppose. Same sign. >> Motion carries. Confidential master agreement. Dr. Damer. >> Thank you. Last but definitely not least are confidential employees tonight. A two-year contract was successfully negotiated uh with this group for July 1st through 2026 through June 30th,
2028. There were no changes to contract language, and the cost is as follows. 2026 to 27, $14,4641. A 4.33% increase. 2027 to 2028, $8,769.72,
a 2.69% increase for a total of $22,916.13, 7.02%. 02% total package increase. >> Matt, >> can you give us a general description of confidential? >> Sure. It's a small group. Um, generally it's uh professional level employees, a confidential group. Uh, generally are
those attached um in some way, shape or form to negotiations uh by state requirement. So, um it would be the executive assistant to the superintendent, generalist, payroll um and then our our generalist, our payroll, and our benefit specialist. So,
it's a small group. >> Thank you. A very important group I might add. >> Very much so. >> I move to approve the confidential master agreement for 2026 2028 as presented with the cost as Dr. Damer has outlined. >> Keith,
I will second. All right. We have a motion by Matt, second by Keith to approve the confidential master agreement for the 2026 to 2028 as presented with the cost that was that were presented. Any further discussion?
Any additional discussion? All in favor say I. >> I. >> Post same sign. Motion carries. Set meeting dates, times, location for the 2026 2027 Dr. Lunick.
>> Okay. Tonight, uh page 148 uh we ask that you set uh the meeting times for uh the next school year starting or the next fiscal year starting in July. So if you look on that page, you'll see in uh year 2026,
uh we would propose to meet uh July 20th, August 17th, and December 14th when those months have um one meeting per month, as well as in 2027. We would be doing June 21st, July 19th, uh August
16th, and December 12th. Uh every other uh meeting would take place at 6:00 uh in this uh room here uh following the second meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. All right, Keith
>> move to approve the proposed annual meeting schedule, establishing that the schedule shall be set annually at the June meeting and that the school board adopts the meeting details and exception schedule for 2026 and 2027 as presented.
>> Scott, I'll second it. Motion by Key, second by Scott to approve the proposal annual meeting schedule establishing that the schedule shall be set annually at the June meeting and that the school board adopts the meeting details and exception schedule for the 2026 and 2027
as presented. >> Uh just quick question. I know we put it out for July 19th, August 16th, and December 12th of 2027. Wouldn't that be on next year's or that's okay we do that now?
>> We'll repeat that come next June. >> Okay. Thank you. Same same question. >> Yeah. Next. >> Oh. Okay. So, we're good with any other discussion. All in favor say I.
>> I. Oppose. Same sign. >> Motion carries. Schoolboard compensation. Matt, >> be very difficult for me to uh to personally support uh an increase in our compet compensation
at a time when when uh our families are struggling and uh I would I would just really urge us to consider um keeping it as it is. That said, I have always I think along with Scott, not to speak with you for you, Scott, but I've always
supported um the idea of uh of increased compensation for uh our chair. And I understand that that might be for a different time, but I just wanted to go for that because I I think uh there's more clearly more responsibility, more time that goes with that.
>> I'll go ahead and I I agree. I'd like to see the compensate the same as well for the next year ahead. So, I'm going to uh make the motion to authorize uh $11,760 of compensation, $980 a month for each schoolboard member for the fiscal year
2027 school year as presented. >> Scott, >> I'll second it. A motion with Scott second to authorize $11,760 of compensation or $980 a month for each schoolboard member for the fiscal year
2027 school year as presented. Any further discussion? Any additional discussion? All in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. >> Nay. >> Motion cares. 2026 2027 schoolboard committee
appointments. um I'll start discussion there as well. I think you all were um presented and emailed out the schedule for liaison schools um committee assignments and those things. >> Um so we've all been assigned to those
and I did not receive any other additional comments or anybody wanting to switch it. So, um, I'm going to go ahead and make a motion to approve the sending committees, school leaison, and community committees appointed as determined on the sheet that is all
emailed. >> Do I have a second? >> Oh, a second. >> Oh, Keith first. >> I will second. >> I motion Keith second to approve the setting committees, schools, and community um committees appointed as
determined. Any further discussion? Any additional discussion? >> Go ahead. Yep. Um I don't think now I could be missing it. Do we have Klay County Collaborative on here? >> Yeah.
>> Is it? Where is it? >> I think it's the first one. >> Top one. >> That's the first one. >> You have page numbers? Page numbers. Yeah. >> No, that's not the one I'm thinking of. >> 153. >> No, >> there's joint powers.
>> No, I got that one. >> That's That's not the one I'm talking about, though, because I'm on this committee. And I don't think we have had a change on it for a long time. It's the one that Dwayne serves as the school
administrator and I serve on as the school board member. It's the Klay County Collaborative, right Dana? Or sorry, um Dwayne, but it's not this joint powers collaborative governance
board. I don't think that's correct term for it. Correct. >> I can get back to you on that, but that's what it has always been list. It is not because it says it meets twice a year and I we meet like almost monthly
if not quarterly. >> Cassid's gone to them too. >> So, >> okay, we'll check on that one. >> Yep. I I'll It's called the Klay County Collaborative, but it's not what you have down here, Deb. I'm sorry. I I'll get it to you.
>> It is. So, well, >> I will stay on it. So, I'm already on it, so I'll stay on it. >> But I just want to I just point a note that we >> So, we can add it to the list. >> We have to add it to the list. Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> So, we already have a motion to second.
So, any other discussion? >> Any other discussion? All right. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Oppose. Same sign. >> Motion carries. Superintendent updates. Dr. Lick, >> I don't have any updates at this time.
So, thank you. >> All right, we'll move on to close meeting. >> Keith, >> move to close the public meeting at 7:16 p.m. pursuant to Minnesota statutes section 13D.05 subdivision A for the purpose of
discussing an employee evaluation. Do >> I have a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Thank you. I have a motion by Keith, second by Matt to close the public meeting at 7:16 p.m. pursuant to Minnesota statute section 13D.05
subdivision 3A for the purpose of discussing an employee evaluation. Any further discussion? Any other discussion? All in favor say I. >> I post same sign. Motion carries. We will close the meeting here
All right. Open our meeting. Do we have a motion? Scott. >> Move to open the public meeting at 7:36 p.m. >> Cassidy. >> We'll second. >> Motion by Scott. Second by Cassidy to open the public meeting at 7:36 p.m. Any further discussion? Any additional
discussion? All in favor say I. >> Post. same sign. Motion carries. Moving on to the end of the year, yeah, end of year superintendent evaluation summary. The Morhead Area Public School Board of Education has concluded that
expectations have been met at the end of the year superintendent evaluation. The board specifically highlighted Dr. Lunick's excellent community leadership and success in passing the referendum, which positively impacts the district's financial future. Furthermore, the initiatives in safety and security have
established a district as a regional model for its proactive programs. While this while his commitment to pair professional development maintains a valued ongoing priority, board maintains full confidence in Dr. Lunik's leadership and that of the administrative team heading into the
next year and will continue to support his efforts to achieve the district's strategic goals. So, thank you, Dr. Dr. Lunik for your commitment to the mor public schools and we appreciate what you do. >> Could I add something quick? >> Yes. Go ahead. >> I would like to add that there, you
know, a lot of people don't realize how much time Dr. Lunik puts in to speak with legislators and to be advocating for our district and all districts within the state of Minnesota and trying to come up with ideas in order to bring
more revenue to our schools. And it's, you know, I've been down with the at the um legislators down at the capital a couple times with Dr. when and it is amazing how many legislators know him and recognize him when walking through
the Capitol Ratunda and I I just I just need to say that because he's he's always there advocating for schools and you know it's it's just amazing to see and watch him and watch him work down there and uh I I appreciate it and I
thank him for that. >> I agree. Thank you for that Matt. And I was going to say almost exactly the same thing. I'm I'm really in awe of the relationship you have with legislators and your peers. >> Perfect.
>> All right. Moving on to adjournment. Yes, Keith. >> Move to approve the adjournment of the June 15, 2026 schoolboard meeting at 7:39 p.m. >> Cassidy. A second >> motion by Keith, second by Cassie to
approve the adjourment of the June 15, 2026 school board meeting at 7:39 p.m. All any discussion any discussion? All in favor say I. I. >> Oppose. Same sign. Motion carries. We are adjourned.
Done.