WHICH ANNOUNCEMENT AS OF THURSDAY WILL PROVIDE CLOSED CAPTIONING OF AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER SERVICES THROUGHOUT TODAY'S BOARD MEETING. LIVE TRANSCRIPTION CAN BE FOUND HERE AT SMB AS V.EDU/BOARD TRANSCRIPT. ATTENDEES WHO WISH TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT TO THE BOARD AND WOULD LIKE AN AFL INTERPRETER CAN USE THE Q&A BOX IN THE ZOOM APP TO TYPE THEIR NAME OR HANDLE. AND LESLIE ITEMS IN THE AGENDA THEY WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE ATTENDEES WILL NEED TO HAVE A FUNCTIONING CAMERA IN ORDER TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE INTERPRETER AND BOARD WHEN IT IS THE ATTENDEES OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE COMMENT. THE ZOOM HOST WILL PROMOTE THE ATTENDEE TO PANELISTS AND ENABLE THE ATTENDEES VIDEO ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY EMAIL THEIR COMMENT WITH THE AGENDA ITEM IDENTIFIED ON THE COMMENT TO BOARD OFFICE AT SB AS NEEDED TO U BY 2 P.M. THE DAY OF THE MEETING IF THEY DO NOT WISH TO MAKE THE COMMENT OR IN THE BOARD MEETING THE COMMENTS WILL BE READ INTO THE RECORD AS OF TUESDAY WILL PROVIDE INTERPRETATION THROUGHOUT TODAY'S BOARD
MEETING. >> TRANSLATION GO AHEAD. THANK YOU AND IF YOU SEE SOMETHING INTERPRETATION SERVICES IN SPANISH AND CANTONESE IF YOU NEEDED INTERPRETATION PLEASE ENTER THE FOLLOWING PHONE NUMBER UP TO DAILY PLEASE INTO THIS NUMBER. THIS MESSAGE WILL BE REPEATED IN SPANISH AND CANTONESE WHEN A SERVICE ELICITS ESCOLAR AN ECHO THAT SAN FRANCISCO PHRASES HAVE BECAUSE THE SPEAKERS ARE SEEN AS A SEAT INTERPRETER SOMEONE THEY WILL MEET ONE OF OUR INTENT AND THE THE WORD TELEFONICA SEGUIDO EITHER THE NEXT YES OR NO RESPONSE AND WHETHER THE RESULTS OF THOSE SERVICES SAY YES BUT OUR INTERESTS SAY SAY CINCO. NEVER NEVER SAY NEVER SET THE SAY SO YOU LET THEM. GRACIAS. CANTOS INTERPRETER, PLEASE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, LUIS. I GOT MUCH HOPE FOR YOU AND I GUESS I'M I'M NOT EGOMANIACAL TO PICK HOUR WHEN WE EAT WHAT THEY LIKE AMONG THE WHEAT TYPE THE TRAIN IF YOU WILL BE MY SHOW YOUR DATA FROM FEEDING
PEOPLE MAKE A HOME DYING PAYING LEAVE A HOME NOT YET SAFE I SAY BOTTOM SAY SO I'M SIMON YOU BACK IN MET MY CHECK YET ACCOUNTING CHANGE DOES IT THANK YOU THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION FOR MARCH 4TH 2026 IS NOW CALL TO ORDER AT 5:10 P.M. ROLL CALL PLEASE. >> COMMISSIONER RAY, YOUR COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER VICE PRESIDENT HULING PRESIDENT KIM HERE COMMISSIONER WISEMAN AWARD HERE. COMMISSIONER GUPTA HERE DO WANT TO SPEAK TO COMMISSIONER FISCHER. THANK YOU FOR PRESENT. THANK YOU. UM. HELLO AND WELCOME TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO THIS SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. PLEASE KNOW THAT TONIGHT PUBLIC COMMENT IS LIMITED TO AGENDA ITEMS ONLY. EACH PARTICIPANT MAY SPEAK FOR UP TO ONE MINUTE. STAFF WILL TAKE TO PARTICIPATE AT THE ONE MINUTE MARK AT ONE MINUTE AND FIVE SECONDS I'VE ASKED MR. TRUJILLO TO PLEASE TURN OFF THE MIC IN TRANSITION . TRANSITION TO THE NEXT SPEAKER. WE CAN'T HEAR YOU ALL NINE I ASKED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO PLEASE RESPECT THAT ONE MINUTE LIMIT SO THAT WE CAN HEAR FROM
AS MANY SPEAKERS AS POSSIBLE. I HAVE . HELLO AND WELCOME TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. PLEASE KNOW THAT TONIGHT PUBLIC COMMENT IS LIMITED TO AGENDA ITEMS ONLY. EACH PARTICIPANT MAY SPEAK FOR UP TO ONE MINUTE. STAFF WILL THANK THE PARTICIPANT AT THE ONE MINUTE MARK AT ONE MINUTE AND FIVE SECONDS I I'VE ASKED MR. TRUJILLO TO PLEASE TURN OFF THE MIC AND TRANSITION TO THE NEXT SPEAKER. I ASK MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO PLEASE RESPECT THAT ONE MINUTE LIMIT SO THAT WE CAN HEAR FROM AS MANY SPEAKERS AS POSSIBLE. I ENCOURAGE SPEAKERS WHO ARE SPEAKING ON THE SAME TOPIC TO COLLABORATE AND COMBINE THEIR COMMENTS SO THE BOARD CAN HEAR OUR VIEWPOINT DURING A LIMITED TIME. PLEASE ALSO NOTE THE BOARD ACCEPTS WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS VIA EMAIL AT BOARD OFFICES IF YOU SEE THAT EDU UM MR. TRUE YOU I DON'T HAVE ANY IN-PERSON PUBLIC COMMENT. WE'LL MOVE TO ZOOM MEMBERS AND SO IF YOU ARE A STUDENT PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. WE'LL HEAR FROM STUDENTS FIRST.
I SEE NO STUDENTS. WE'LL GO TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. >> IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ZOOM, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND . OKAY. WE WILL START WITH BERNIECE CASEY. GO AHEAD AND UNMUTE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'VE ALREADY EMAILED ALL OF YOU AND ALERTED YOU THAT THE NOTICE OF THIS MEETING WAS NOT POSTED IN ALL THE LOCATIONS THAT YOU POST THE MEETING. IT WASN'T IN YOUR CALENDAR. IT WASN'T IN THE YEAR LONG CALENDAR FOR THE SCHOOL YEAR AND I'M UNSURE ON HOW YOU CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE A MEETING WHEN THE PUBLIC WASN'T PROPERLY NOTICED. I'VE SENT YOU SCREENSHOTS OF THE CALENDARS WITH THE DATE AND TIMES. SO AGAIN I'M NOT SURE YOU CAN HAVE THIS MEETING WHEN THE PUBLIC WASN'T IN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU PRESIDENT KIM AS YOU KNOW WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO RESPOND TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC BUT I'M RESPONDING TO YOUR QUESTION ASKING ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS MEETING WAS
PUBLICLY POSTED AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE BROWN ACT. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT WAS THE REASON BEING FOR THAT IS THAT THE MEETING WAS POSTED BOTH PHYSICALLY IN THE LOCATIONS WHERE STAFF GENERALLY POST THE AGENDAS AND THE ITEM WAS POSTED ON BOARD DOCS IN EXCESS OF THE 24 HOUR MINIMUM AND I BELIEVE IT WAS POSTED ON FRIDAY WHICH IS YOU KNOW 72 HOURS PLUS. SO THIS MEETING HAS MET ALL OF THE HALLMARKS REQUIRED BY THE BROWN ACT. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? >> NO. OKAY. THANK YOU. MOVING TO AGENCY DISCUSSION BUDGET STUDY SESSION NUMBER ONE I CALL ON DEPUTIES SUPERINTENDENT OF BUSINESS SERVICES CHRIS MONEYPENNY JUST TO INTRODUCE THIS ITEM. THANK YOU, PRESIDENT KIM. THIS EVENING'S SPECIAL MEETING IS A STUDY SESSION. IT GIVES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE BOARD TO INTERACT WITH MYSELF AND OTHER PROFESSIONALS IN THE DISTRICT ABOUT BUDGET. IN THE PAST IT'S BEEN
REFERENCED BOTH FROM THE DAIS AS WELL AS IN GENERAL THAT THE BOARD PERHAPS NEEDS MORE TIME TO DISCUSS AND ASK QUESTIONS IN PUBLIC TO HELP INFORM THE PUBLIC OF THE CONDITION OF THE BUDGET AS WELL AS TO SEEK FURTHER UNDERSTANDING FOR THEMSELVES. I WOULD ALSO RECOMMEND IT'S A GREAT TIME SINCE WE'RE DOING THIS PRIOR TO THE SECOND INTERIM FOR YOU TO PERHAPS WRITE DOWN QUESTIONS THAT YOU THINK YOU WANT TO BE HEARD BY A BROADER AUDIENCE. IT IS OKAY TO ASK ME QUESTIONS AND STAFF QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALREADY KNOW THE ANSWER TO IF YOU JUST WANT A GREATER AWARENESS IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE. I DID BRING WITH ME TONIGHT MY EVER GROWING INCREASINGLY SUPPORTIVE AND COMPETENT STAFF. I'M HAPPY TO REPORT TO YOU THAT WE ARE BUILDING SYSTEMS AND STAFF. I WANT TO INTRODUCE QUICKLY AND GET TO THE TABLE STAFF. >> SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY IS FAMILIAR WITH THE FOLKS THAT ARE DEVELOPING THE FISCAL SYSTEMS AND FOUNDATION FOR THE DISTRICT MOVING FORWARD. STARTING WITH MY LEFT JENNIFER SCHUSTER, OUR INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE BUDGET OFFICE.
JENNIFER IS ACTUALLY A LONG TIME EMPLOYEE OF THE DISTRICT. SHE'S GREAT TO GIVE NOT JUST PERSPECTIVE AND HISTORY BUT SHE HAS REALLY STEPPED UP AND BECOME A LEADER FOR THE BUDGET OFFICE AND HAS TAKEN ON THE CHALLENGES OF ALL THE TRAINING AND OPPORTUNITIES AND SYSTEMS THAT WE'VE OFFERED . IT'S AN AWFUL LOT OF WORK AND I'VE STARTED TO INVITE JENNIFER TO THE TABLE MORE OFTEN. SHE'S TO DEVELOP THAT LEVEL OF COMPETENCY THAT SHE'S REALLY BECOMING A RESOURCE FOR THE BOARD AND FOR THE DISTRICT. WE HAVE NEERAJ IYER I'M IN NAVY. WE RECRUITED FROM LOS ANGELES. SHE IS THE BOARD'S CFO. SHE IS ALSO YOUR SECOND FIDUCIARY. YOU HAVE MYSELF AND YOU HAVE NURU DO FIDUCIARY FOR THE DISTRICT WHICH MEANS THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO SEEK OUT AND ACT ON THE DISTRICT'S BEST FINANCIAL INTEREST IN OUR ROLES WITH THE DISTRICT AND TO ADVISE YOU OBJECTIVELY AND INDEPENDENTLY ON YOUR FINANCIAL QUESTIONS AND YOU IS ALSO A STATE RECOGNIZED SPECIALIST AT SPECIAL EDUCATION FUNDING WHICH IS ONE OF HER MANY TALENTS BUT IT'S ONE THAT I LEAN ON BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE DIFFERENT SPECIALIZATIONS AND IT'S NOT AS MUCH ONE OF
MINE. I DEFER TO YOU IN ALL THINGS SPECIAL EDUCATION FUNDING AND REPORTING AND WE HAVE DANIEL MUNOZ ALSO A RECRUIT FROM FROM LA AND DANIEL IS YOUR DIRECTOR OF POSITION CONTROL WHO JUST COMPLETED THE FIRST RECONCILIATION OF POSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT I THINK EVER IN THE DISTRICT. THIS WAS A REQUIREMENT OF VIC MATT AS WELL AS KDDI THAT DANIEL HAS SUCCESSFULLY NAVIGATED SO HE IS ABLE TO PROVIDE THE DATA THAT WE NEED TO REALLY MUCH MORE ACCURATELY PRODUCE BUDGETS AND PROJECTIONS FOR IT FOR THE DISTRICT. >> SO WE ONLY HAVE ONE MORE KEY MEMBER THAT EVERYBODY'S BEEN SAYING WE HAVE TO HIRE WHICH IS OUR INTERNAL AUDITOR WHICH WE STILL HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO SOURCE. WE HAVE HAD IT POSTED NOW FOR SEVEN MONTHS BUT I AM HAPPY TO SAY THAT WITH NEW ADVERTISING WE FINALLY HAVE TWO APPLICANTS WHICH IS AT LEAST A START SO THAT'S GOOD NEWS. >> SO WITH THAT I'M GOING TO JUMP INTO THE PRESENTATION. I AM GOING TO MOVE QUICKLY BECAUSE LIKE GOOD BUDGET AND FISCAL FOLKS WE OVERPRODUCED IN DOCUMENTS FOR THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT WE HAVE
TONIGHT. >> IT'S GOOD RESOURCES WE WILL BE POSTING THEM FOR THE PUBLIC OF COURSE AFTER THE MEETING. SO THE FIRST DOCUMENT THAT WE'RE GOING TO RUN THROUGH AND SOME OF IT IS FOUNDATIONAL INFORMATION THAT MANY OF THE THE BOARD MEMBERS MIGHT BE AWARE OF THE COMMISSIONERS BUT THE PUBLIC MIGHT FIND IT SORT OF INSTRUCTIVE IS THE ONE THAT JUST AS BUDGET STUDY SESSION WITH TODAY'S DATE ON IT AND I'M JUST GOING TO RUN THROUGH THE SLIDES FAIRLY QUICKLY WHEN ARE YOU DRIVING THE PRESENTATION? SO I'M GOING TO MOVE QUICKLY. JUST KEEP UP. I'M NOT GOING TO SAY TO ADVANCE AND WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO SORT OF QUICKLY. SO LOOKING AT THE FIRST PICTURE, THIS JUST OUTLINES FOR THE BOARD AND THIS IS A CURRENT BREAKDOWN OF OUR REVENUES. THESE ARE THE REVENUES ARE FUNDING SOURCES FOR THE DISTRICT FEDERAL 4% STATE LCF AS WELL AS SOME OTHER DOLLARS 68% AND LOCAL 28%. AGAIN THAT LOCAL IS A MUCH LARGER PERCENTAGE FOR SAN FRANCISCO THAN IT IS FOR OTHER DISTRICTS. AND ON THE LEFT WE JUST HAVE SORT OF AN INFOGRAPHIC OF HOW THAT MONEY COMES TO US AND THE
PROCESS IT GOES THROUGH TO GET TO US. IF YOU WANTED SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE NEXT PAGE WE JUST ARE GOING FURTHER INTO THE FORMULA THE LCF FUNDING FORMULA WAS IMPLEMENTED IN 1314 AFTER A MAJOR FINANCIAL DOWNTURN IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO EQUALIZE FUNDING THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA BASED ON A FUNDING FORMULA PER STUDENT PER GRADE LEVEL AS WELL AS AUGMENTATIONS TO THAT FUNDING FORMULA FOR OUR THREE FOCAL GROUPS WHICH ARE ILLUSTRATED THERE WHICH ARE LOW INCOME STUDENTS, ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS AND FOSTER YOUTH AND YOUTH AND HOMELESS CHILDREN. >> MOVING ON TO THE NEXT PAGE IT JUST PROVIDES SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE BASE AMOUNT THAT'S THE FORMULA AS IT APPLIES TO EACH STUDENT BY GRADE LEVEL THE SUPPLEMENTAL GRANTS GRANTS FOR THOSE UP ON DUPLICATED PUPIL PERCENTAGES WHICH LOCALLY WE CALL FOCAL STUDENTS AND THEN CONCENTRATION GRANTS WHICH IS BECAUSE WE HAVE A CONCENTRATION OF U.P STUDENTS OVER THE STATE REQUIRED PERCENTAGE AND THAT GIVES US A LITTLE BIT OF
ADDITIONAL REVENUE ABOUT 3% OF OUR FUNDING THE NEXT PAGE ADDITIONAL SORTS OF FUNDS THIS JUST GIVES AN EXPLANATION SOMETHING THAT FOLKS CAN TAKE AWAY AND POINT TO FOR THE PUBLIC OF WHAT ARE THE COMPONENTS OF OUR LOCAL REVENUE AND WHY ARE THEY SUCH A GREATER PORTION OF OUR BUDGET THAN THEY ARE FOR PERHAPS OTHER DISTRICTS? AND SO THIS JUST ILLUSTRATES THOSE THOSE ITEMS. THE FIRST ONE IS WHAT IS LOCALLY REFERRED TO AS PIF. THE PUBLIC EDUCATION ENRICHMENT FUND. I CAN ALWAYS GO INTO MORE DETAIL ON THESE BUT THAT'S THAT'S A BIG CHUNK OF OUR RESTRICTED REVENUE THAT COMES THROUGH LOCALLY AS WELL AS THE NEXT BULLET POINT. THE NEXT TWO ACTUALLY PARCEL TAXES Q T.A AND F WPA WHICH IS PRIMARILY FOR STAFF SALARY AUGMENTATION IS ALSO NOW COMMITTED TO FUTURE BENEFIT INCREASES. STUDENT SUCCESS FUNDS ACTUALLY ASSOCIATE WITH THE SAME SOURCE OF FUNDING THAT PIF COMES FROM BUT FLOWS THROUGH THE CITY AND IS MORE TARGETED IN GRANTS OR IN A GRANT FORMAT
AND THEN LEASE REVENUES. AND SO THAT'S REVENUES THAT WE ACTUALLY GET FROM LEASING OUT SOME OF OUR OLD PROPERTIES THROUGHOUT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT . MOVING ON TO HOW DO WE DEVELOP THE BUDGET? HOW DO WE ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT REVENUES ARE? SO I ALWAYS LOVE THIS BUDGET TIMELINE. THIS ILLUSTRATES THE MAJOR POINTS THROUGHOUT ONE YEAR OF WHAT WE HAVE TO DO FOR A BUDGET. THE THING I WOULD REMIND THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC IS THIS SHOWS ONE YEAR WE'RE ACTUALLY WORKING IN THREE YEARS ALWAYS ALL AT THE SAME TIME SO WE'RE ALWAYS CLOSING THE THE LAST YEAR'S BUDGET AND DOING ANALYSIS. WE'RE ALWAYS WORKING AND MANAGING THE CURRENT YEAR BUDGET AND WE'RE ALWAYS DEVELOPING THE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET. SO WE ALWAYS ASK FOR WHICH FISCAL YEAR WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOT BECAUSE WE'RE BEING OBTUSE OR DIFFICULT BUT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO CHANGE OUR BRAIN ON WHICH YEAR OR AND WHERE THAT YEAR IS. ARE WE DOING POSTMORTEM ANALYSIS? ARE WE DOING MANAGEMENT OR ARE WE DOING PLANNING? AND BECAUSE CALIFORNIA REQUIRES US TO DO ONLY ONE YEAR AT A TIME EVERY YEAR CAN ACTUALLY LOOK SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT
WHICH IS WHY WE ALWAYS ASK FOR WHICH FISCAL YEAR OR START OUT WITH WHICH FISCAL YEAR WE'RE WORKING IN. SO CURRENTLY WE'VE CLOSED LAST FISCAL YEAR WE'RE MANAGING THIS FISCAL YEAR AND OF COURSE WE'RE DEVELOPING NEXT FISCAL YEAR WHICH WE ADOPT IN JUNE. MOVING ON TO THE NEXT PAGE WE'RE OFTEN ASKED HOW DO YOU DETERMINE REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS SO REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS IN A SCHOOL DISTRICT THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT A INCREDIBLY COMPLEX FORMULA. IT JUST LOOKS REALLY COMPLICATED IN CHARTS WHEN YOU PUT IT UP THERE LIKE THIS, RIGHT? SO WHAT WE DO IS WE CROSS REFERENCE ENROLLMENT IN ADA WHICH STANDS FOR AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE AND WE CROSS-REFERENCE IT WITH THE CHART ON THE LEFT. THIS IS ISSUED BY THICK MAT THE FISCAL CRISIS AND MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE TEAM AND SCHOOL SERVICES OF CALIFORNIA THAT'S THE ITEM ON THE LEFT. IT'S CALLED THE DARTBOARD. THE DARTBOARD GIVES US OUR FINANCIAL ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO PLUG INTO OUR CALCULATORS TO DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE SO REVENUES ARE NOT DETERMINED ARBITRARILY OR RANDOMLY. WE LITERALLY PLUG IN THE
ASSUMPTIONS ON THE LEFT AND THIS IS A PUBLICLY AVAILABLE AVAILABLE DOCUMENT ONLINE IF ANYBODY WANTS TO PULL IT UP AND IT GIVES US MANY YEARS TO ENTER THE ASSUMPTIONS WE THEN ENTER OUR PROJECTED ENROLLMENT AS WELL AS CURRENT ENROLLMENT AND ADA AND IT PRE POPULATES THOSE REVENUES FOR US NOW WE STILL ALWAYS HAVE TO GO BACK AND CHECK WHAT'S COMING IN AND WHAT'S BEING SAID IN THE GOVERNOR'S PRELIMINARY BUDGET FOR ADOPTION AS WELL AS THE ENACTED BUDGET TO MAKE SURE ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO THESE ASSUMPTIONS ARE MADE. BUT THIS IS ACTUALLY HOW WE DETERMINE REVENUES ON THE RIGHT IS SOMETHING THAT SO I THINK THAT THE DISTRICT WAS MORE FAMILIAR WITH THAT DART BOARD PRIOR TO MY ARRIVAL. WHAT YOU'RE SEEING ON THE RIGHT THIS IS THE ACTUAL CALCULATOR. SO WE PLUG ALL OF THOSE ASSUMPTIONS AND ALL OF OUR LOCAL INFORMATION INTO THIS CALCULATOR WHICH IS JUST A VERY COLORFUL AND IN-DEPTH SPREADSHEET AND THIS CALCULATES ALL OF OUR REVENUES FOR US FOR THE CURRENT AND THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS AND SO THAT CALCULATOR IS ALSO PUBLICLY
AVAILABLE. IT IS SOMETHING THAT EVERY DISTRICT IN THE STATE USES AT ITS TOOL AND I WILL HAPPILY TELL YOU THAT WE NOW USE IT IN THE DISTRICT. IN THE PAST WE WERE NOT USING THE APPROVED CALCULATOR. WE WERE USING MANUAL SPREADSHEETS THAT FOLKS WERE KEEPING ONLINE EITHER ONLINE OR ON THEIR COMPUTERS. RIGHT. SO THAT IS A STANDARD THAT WE'VE IMPLEMENTED IN THE DISTRICT. YES. A LOCAL DRIVES. YEAH. CAN I JUST ASK BECAUSE YEAH, YOU CAN INTERRUPT AT ANY TIME AND QUESTION FOR THIS DART BOARD IT SAYS THAT THE LCF PLANNING FACTOR DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE STATUTORY COLA IS PROJECTED TO BE 3.02% FOR 2627 BUT I THINK AT LEAST I'VE HEARD LOWER NUMBERS AS DO WE CORRECT. IS THAT AN ACCURATE PROJECTION OF WHAT IT IS NOT AND THAT'S IN OUR SECOND BOOK. >> SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE TITLE THAT'S THIS IS WHAT A FISCAL PERSON ALWAYS DOES. WE LOOK AT THE HEADING AND WE LOOK AT WHAT WE CALL THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE DOCUMENT. WE'RE LOOKING FOR. THIS SAYS AT THE TOP THAT IT WAS FOR THE 2526 ENACTED
BUDGET. SO THIS DART BOARD WAS PUBLISHED IN JULY OF THIS PAST YEAR. THEY PUBLISH A NEW ONE AT THE JANUARY GOVERNORS PROPOSAL WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE USING NOW FOR SECOND INTERIM. SO YES, THAT HAS GONE DOWN THAT PROJECTED COLA HAS GONE DOWN AS OF THE JANUARY PUBLISHED GOVERNOR'S BUDGET. GREAT CATCH THAT WAS SMALL TYPE TO READ. YEAH YEAH YEAH I WILL MOVE QUICKLY SO HOPEFULLY IT KEEPS YOUR ATTENTION NOW THIS NEXT PAGE TALKS ABOUT PLANNING FACTORS AND THIS ACTUALLY GETS TO SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD HAS BEEN ASKING FOR FOR A WHILE. >> THIS CHART ACTUALLY WAS REALLY REVEALING TO ME PERSONALLY. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE REST OF THE FISCAL TEAM. IT ILLUSTRATED SOMETHING REALLY INTERESTING I WANT TO GO DOWN THERE'S MANY YEARS HERE THAT ARE ACTUAL AND THEN THE NEXT THREE YEARS THAT WE'VE PROJECTED BUT I WANT TO GO DOWN WITH EACH ONE OF THESE MEANS THE COLA COMES FROM PAST DART BOARDS. THIS IS WHAT WE GOT IN COLA AND IN THE PROJECTED IT'S WHAT THEY ARE PROJECTING FOR COLA. SO YOU CAN SEE FOR EXAMPLE IT'S ALREADY WE'VE CHANGED THIS DOWN TO THE CURRENTLY KNOWN COLA FOR NEXT YEAR WHICH IS 2.41 NOT 3.0
FOR ENROLLMENT. >> SO THAT ACTUALLY SHOWS YOU OUR ENROLLMENT FROM SEABEDS FOR THAT YEAR. THE REASON I SPECIFY SEABEDS WE DO MULTIPLE ENROLLMENTS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR SO WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE TELLING YOU WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT IT WE DO SEABEDS SOMETHING CALLED P1P2 AND YEAR END CLOSE. THIS IS OUR SEABEDS ACTUAL ADA THAT'S THE AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE ACCORDING TO THAT ENROLLMENT NUMBER. SO IT GIVES YOU THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS THAT WERE FUNDED FOR AS AN AVERAGE OR AS THE ACTUAL FOR THAT YEAR. AND NOTICE THAT LET'S JUST LOOK AT THIS YEAR. CURRENTLY WE'RE BEING FUNDED BECAUSE OUR ATTENDANCE IS AT 44,790. WE ACTUALLY HAVE ENROLLED 48,768. SO A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS ENROLLED VERSUS THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS ACTUALLY ATTENDING EACH DAY WHICH EQUATES TO THAT 88 PERCENTAGE THE NEXT LINE AND YOU CAN SEE THAT HISTORIC AND THIS WAS MY AHA WHICH I
HADN'T REALLY REALIZED WE HAVE A LONG STANDING ROUGHLY 91 TO 92% ATTENDANCE RATE. ARE THERE DISTRICTS OF OUR SIZE ARE BETWEEN 95 AND 97%. THAT MEANS URBAN DISTRICTS LARGE DISTRICTS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT IS ACTUALLY IMPACTING US MORE THAN OUR 500 AVERAGE PER YEAR DECLINING ENROLLMENT. RIGHT. WHY IS THAT? I DON'T KNOW. BUT LOOKING AT THIS ON A CHART I THOUGHT THIS IS A LONG STANDING ISSUE SO THAT JUST SOMETHING INTERESTING THAT POPPED UP AND THEN YOU HAVE A LINE THAT SAYS FUNDED ADA. SO DO THEY FUND US AT THE PERCENTAGE THAT WE'RE AT THAT YEAR? THE ANSWER IS NO. WE RECEIVE OUR REVENUES BASED ON A THREE YEAR AVERAGE OF OUR ADD ADA AND THE REASON THE STATE DOES THAT IS THEY DON'T WANT US TO EXPERIENCE BIG DIPS UP OR DOWN IN OUR FUNDING SO THEY SMOOTH THE JAGGED NESS OF THAT CURVE BY GIVING US FUNDING BASED ON A THREE YEAR AVERAGE. >> THE OTHER INTERESTING NUMBER
THIS IS WHAT OUR ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING IS YOU'LL SEE THAT ON DUPLICATED PUPIL PERCENTAGE THAT U.P OR THOSE VOCAL STUDENTS WHAT IS THE THREE YEAR AVERAGE PERCENTAGE OF THOSE STUDENTS? AND YOU CAN SEE THAT FOR THIS YEAR OR VERY SLIGHTLY ABOVE 60% THAT CONCENTRATION FUNDING WE LOSE IF WE EVER FALL BELOW WHAT PERCENTAGE PLEASE RULE 55 SO WE ARE STILL ABOVE BUT THAT IS THE CATEGORY THAT WE ARE MOST RAPIDLY DECLINING IN RIGHT? INTERESTING DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE FOR THE DISTRICT. >> OKAY. I'M JUST GOING TO PAUSE THERE FOR A SECOND. THAT'S A LOT TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE FOR EXAMPLE LIKE ADA VERSUS FUNDED ADA WHICH IS AN AVERAGE OF THREE YEARS. SO THAT'S WHY WE PRODUCED THIS CHART. I THINK IT'S HELPFUL. WE HAVE A A CHART THAT TALKS ABOUT ENROLLMENT AND ADA TRENDS . THIS CHART ILLUSTRATES THAT REALLY WHEN WE LOST THE LARGEST PORTION OF OUR ENROLLMENT WAS WAS POST COVID WE STILL HAVEN'T EVER RECOVERED THAT ENROLLMENT. MOST SCHOOLS IN CALIFORNIA HAVE NOT. BUT THIS ALSO SHOWS THAT WE ARE
DECLINING MODERATELY EVERY YEAR AND STILL MOST INTERESTING TO ME THAT WE CONTINUE TO STRUGGLE WITH ATTENDANCE MORE SO THAN WE DO ACTUALLY ENROLLMENT LOSS WHICH IS SURPRISING FOR A DECLINING ENROLLMENT SCHOOL DISTRICT. SO I'M GOING TO MOVE ON TO A TOPIC WHICH FASCINATES ONE AND ALL WHICH IS THE SCHOOL STAFFING MODEL. AND SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE THIS IS ACTUALLY THE STAFFING MODEL ON THE RIGHT AND IT'S AN EXAMPLE OF A SCHOOL. SO ALL A STAFFING MODEL IS AND THIS IS A MODEL USED FOR EVERY SCHOOL DISTRICT IN THE STATE IS IT CREATES A PROCESS THAT WE CAN LOOK AT THAT YEAR'S ALLOCATIONS AND WE CAN DETERMINE THE FOLLOWING YEAR'S ALLOCATION WITH PROJECTED ENROLLMENT AND THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT CLASSROOMS ARE STAFFED ACCORDING TO THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS. THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A MISNOMER. YOUR CBA WHEN THE BOARD APPROVES IT AND VOTES ON IT ACTUALLY IS A LOCAL LEGAL REQUIREMENT. SO WE HAVE TO CROSS-REFERENCE
THE STATE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS WITH THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS AS APPROVED BY THE BOARD IN THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT. SO A STAFFING MODEL MAKE SURE THAT WE HIT THOSE MINIMUMS AND WE NEVER FALL AFOUL OF A LEGAL DISCREPANCY AND PROVIDING EDUCATION THAT IS ACTUALLY WHAT A STAFFING MODEL IS AND WE HAVE TO ALIGN THOSE FTE WITH THOSE LEGAL DOCUMENTS AND THE PROJECTED ENROLLMENT FOR EVERY SCHOOL TO MAKE SURE THAT INDEED WE HAVE ENOUGH STAFF ACCORDING TO LAW AND ACCORDING TO THE LOCAL CONTRACTS AT EVERY SCHOOL SITE WE ALWAYS LOOK FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO MAXIMIZE THE EFFICIENT USE OF OUR RESTRICTED FUNDS. REMEMBER RESTRICTED FUNDS FIRST BECAUSE THE UNRESTRICTED ONES ARE THE SOLVENCY OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND SCHOOLS RECEIVE A BASE ALLOCATION THAT'S ALSO FREQUENTLY CALLED A CENTRAL ALLOCATION FROM LCF FUNDING ACCORDING TO THEIR SCHOOL LEVEL MEANING ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE HIGH OR K THROUGH EIGHT AND THE SIZE MEANING THE ENROLLMENT NUMBER SCHOOLS RECEIVE ADDITIONAL ALLOCATED ALLOCATIONS BASED ON SIZE AGAIN MEANING IF THEY'RE
PARTICULARLY LARGE SCHOOL LEVEL MEANING THAT THERE ARE SOME SERVICES PROVIDED AT SOME LEVELS AND NOT OTHERS AND PROGRAMMATIC NEEDS FROM LCF SUPP LCF SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION FUNDING AND RESTRICTED FUNDING. THE ILLUSTRATION ON THE RIGHT IS JUST AN EXAMPLE OF THE LOCAL STAFFING MODEL. YOU CAN SEE IT'S FAIRLY COMPLEX. IT OUTLINES EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE TO EVERY SINGLE SCHOOL SITE. I WILL SAY IT IS THE MOST COMPLEX ONE THAT I'VE EVER WORKED WITH BECAUSE WE BECAUSE ALL THAT LOCAL FUNDING IS TIED TO THE PROVISION OF PARTICULAR PEOPLE AT PARTICULAR SCHOOL SITES. SO IT IS A FAIRLY COMPLEX STAFFING MODEL. MOVING ON FROM THAT WE TAKE THAT STAFFING MODEL AND WE APPLY IT TO EVERY SCHOOL SITE AND WHY DO WE START WITH SCHOOLS? BECAUSE IT'S THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR DISTRICT. WE DON'T START WITH CENTRAL OFFICES AND WE LOOK AT THEIR ENROLLMENT FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR.
WE APPLY THAT MODEL AND IT COMES UP WITH WE LITERALLY RUN IT THROUGH A FORMULA. >> THERE'S A BIG SPREADSHEET THAT WE USE AND IT COMES UP WITH THE ALLOCATION AND WE ROUND UP ON EVERY ALLOCATION, RIGHT? SO IF IT ENDS UP AT 11.2 RIGHT WE CLEARLY MIGHT HAVE TO GO UP TO 12 OR 11.5 DEPENDING UPON THE TYPE OF POSITION BECAUSE WE DON'T DO A TON OF FRACTIONAL POSITIONS HERE AND SO IT GENERATES FOR EACH SCHOOL SITE THEIR ALLOCATION BASED ON THE ENROLLMENT OF THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS THAT THEY HAVE FOR THAT FOLLOWING YEAR. NOW THESE ARE ADJUSTED AS ENROLLMENT CONTINUES TO BUILD ALL THE WAY UNTIL WE DO WHAT WE CALL OUR INITIAL RUN WHICH IS ALL OF THE ENROLLMENT AND THEN HOW IT'S ASSIGNED TO THE SCHOOLS AS A DISTRICT OF CHOICE . THAT INITIAL RUN MEANS THAT WE ACTUALLY DO FINAL ASSIGNMENTS TO SCHOOL SITES BASED ON THE PROGRAM FOR PARENT CHOICE. SO WE WILL ADJUST THE INITIAL STAFFING ALLOCATIONS THAT WE PROVIDED IN JANUARY VERY TO SCHOOL SITES BASED ON HOW MANY STUDENTS THEY ACTUALLY GOT
DURING THE ENROLLMENT PERIOD. >> EVERYBODY GETS THE PDF THAT'S ILLUSTRATED AT THE RIGHT SAYING EXACTLY HOW MANY STUDENTS THEY THEY LOOK TO HAVE THE FOLLOWING YEAR AS WELL AS HOW THAT EQUATES TO STAFF. >> THIS IS BEFORE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT PAGE PRINCIPALS THEN GET THEIR BUDGET SPREADSHEET WITH ALL THIS ALL THE STAFFING ALLOCATIONS HERE FROM CENTRAL ARE AT THE TOP SAYING THAT THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE BEING FUNDED AT AND THEN WE ASK THEM TO LOOK AT THEIR OTHER STAFFING THAT'S ALREADY AT THE SITE AND TO EITHER DECIDE TO CONTINUE THAT POSITION, DISCONTINUE THAT POSITION OR TO CREATE A NEW POSITION THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO USE THEIR FUNDING FOR. SO IT'S LITERALLY A STRAIGHTFORWARD SPREADSHEET FOR THEM. WE PUT IT IN THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM FOR THEM TO REDUCE ERROR SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO LEARN HOW TO USE THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM AND THEN WE CROSS-REFERENCE WHAT WE PROVIDE, WHAT PRINCIPALS WANT LOCALLY THROUGH CHOICE AND WE LOOK AT WHAT WE CALL THE DELTAS, WHAT THEY DECIDE TO GIVE UP SOMEBODY THAT WE NEED TO PLACE SOMEWHERE ELSE SOMEBODY SOMETHING THAT THEY DECIDED THAT THEY WANT THEY DIDN'T WANT THE YEAR BEFORE. SO THAT'S POTENTIALLY A MOVEMENT FROM ANOTHER SITE OR A NEW RECRUITMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY
POSITIONS THAT PEOPLE AREN'T AWARE OF OR PEOPLE THAT AREN'T FALLING INTO A POSITION THIS YEAR FOR CENTRAL OFFICES WE HAVEN'T COMPLETED THE BUDGET PROCESS. INSTEAD EVERYBODY GOT THE JOY OF DOING A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT CUT EXERCISE. >> WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WE PROVIDED EACH OF THE EXECUTIVE CABINET MEMBERS WITH A SPREADSHEET DETAILING ALL OF THE BUDGETED RESOURCES TO THEIR DEPARTMENTS AND ASKED THEM TO COME UP WITH SCENARIOS AT THE FIVE, TEN, 15 AND 20% REDUCTION LEVELS TO GIVE US FLEXIBILITY IN MEETING THE GOAL THE STATED GOAL OF REDUCING CENTRAL OFFICE OPERATIONS BY THE 14 POINT SOMETHING MILLION THAT WE HAD TARGETED FOR THIS YEAR AND SO WE HAVE NOT FINISHED THOSE FINAL DECISIONS BUT THAT IS STILL IN PROCESS AND THEN CENTRAL OFFICES WILL RECEIVE THEIR BUDGETS FOR NEXT YEAR. ALL OF THAT INFORMATION THAT I JUST COVERED ALL WE DO IS ADD THOSE SPREADSHEETS UP FOR THE ENTIRE DISTRICT AND THAT IS
WHAT EQUALS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S BUDGET WHICH IS WHAT WE PRESENT TO YOU ALL IN JUNE AS YOUR ADOPTED BUDGET. SO IT REALLY IS JUST ADDING UP EVERYBODY'S REQUESTS AND MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T MISS ANYTHING IN THE DETAILS ADDING THINGS THAT ARE REQUESTED, SUBTRACTING THINGS THAT ARE NOT NEEDED AND PRESENTING THAT TO THE BOARD IN THE PUBLIC. GOING ON TO OUR LAST SLIDES HERE I JUST WANTED FOLKS ASK HOW DO WE DO OUR MULTI YEAR PROJECTIONS SO WE USE THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY ILLUSTRATED IN IN THE DART BOARD AND CURRENTLY WE NOW HAVE A TOOL ALSO COMMONLY USED THROUGHOUT THE STATE THAT FISCAL STAFF HAS BEEN TRAINED ON AND IT COMES FROM THICK MAT AND IT'S CALLED PROJECTION PRO . SO INSTEAD OF PEOPLE TRYING TO MANAGE A PROJECTION ON THEIR OWN IN A SPREADSHEET THIS IS AN ONLINE RESOURCE THAT STAFF HAS BEEN TRAINED ON. WE ACTUALLY BROUGHT THE STATE IN TO TRAIN STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY PUT IN ALL THE ITEMS FROM THE BUDGET AND THIS THEN GENERATES A VERY ACCURATE PROJECTION OF ALL RESOURCES FOR
THEM AND THAT'S ACTUALLY HOW WE DEVELOP THE MULTI YEAR PROJECTION, RIGHT? >> SO WE ACTUALLY RUN IT THROUGH THE STATE SYSTEM. IT WILL TELL US ERRORS PRIOR TO PUBLISHING THEM SO THAT WE CAN GIVE YOU A MUCH MORE ACCURATE PROJECTION MOVING FORWARD. SO I'M GOING TO TAKE A BREATH THERE WAS RAPID I KNOW BUT I WANTED TO GET THROUGH THAT AND A LOT OF IT I KNOW IS FUNDAMENTAL TO YOU. BUT SOME OF THE QUESTIONS HAD BEEN ASKED ABOUT THAT AND PAUSED FOR ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS TO STAFF TO ASK. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN PULL IT BUT I WOULD JUST TURN ON AND TURN THE MIC TOWARDS YOU AND THIS WAS A LITTLE LIKE OKAY, SORRY I HAVE TO TURN AWAY IN ORDER TO USE THIS MICROPHONE . I JUST WANTED TO ASK A COUPLE OF OF MORE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS. >> ONE IS ABOUT THE PARCEL TAX. IT'S REFERENCED ON PAGE SIX AND IT'S USE FOR FOR HEALTH CARE AND I'M WONDERING IF YOU CAN EXPLAIN FOR US WHAT THE
PARCEL TAX TAXES HAVE BEEN USED FOR LIKE WHAT ARE THEY ACTUALLY USED TO COVER AND WHETHER THE HEALTH CARE BENEFITS THAT THE DISTRICT THE DISTRICT AND THE UNION AGREED ON IN THE TENTATIVE AGREEMENT WILL CUT INTO ANY OF THOSE EXISTING USES OF THE PARCEL TAX AND EXPLAIN IF NOT HOW THE PARCEL TAX IS BEING USED TO FUND THAT HEALTH CARE INCREASE. THAT'S MY FIRST QUESTION. THANK YOU. GREAT QUESTION. SO I'M GOING TO DEAL WITH THEM A LITTLE BIT SEPARATELY IF A USED FOR ALL STAFF FOR VARIOUS SALARY AUGMENTATIONS IT'S GOVERNED BY AN MOU WHICH WAS DRAFTED FROM THE BALLOT LANGUAGE OF THE PARCEL TAX AND THEN AGREED TO BETWEEN THE VARIOUS BARGAINING UNITS OF THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER. COULD YOU MUTE YOU THE SORRY AS WELL AS THE DISTRICT WITH STAFF REPRESENTING THE DISTRICT I AND THAT ONE IS A BIT MORE RESTRICTIVE AND USED IT'S THE OLDER OF THE TWO AND IT MOSTLY GOES TO SALARY AUGMENTATIONS FOR ALL EMPLOYEES. QTL IS MORE RESTRICTIVE AND BY THAT I MEAN IT HAS A MORE NARROW FOCUS. IT'S JUST FOR EDUCATORS. >> EDUCATORS IS A LOCALLY
DEFINED TERM. IT IS NOT A COMMONLY ACCEPTED ONE WHICH INCLUDES EVERYBODY IN U.S. AND U.K.. RIGHT. AND THE REASON I POINT THAT OUT IS THAT IS A DIFFERENT DEFINITION THAN USED IN MOST DISTRICTS, WHICH MEANS CERTIFICATED EMPLOYEES TYPICALLY BUT THAT ALSO INCLUDES OUR PARA EDUCATORS IN THIS DISTRICT AND THAT'S USED FOR SALARY AUGMENTATIONS ALSO GOVERNED BY AN MOU AND A GOVERNING GOVERNING BOARD AND Q.T. A ALSO HAS SET ASIDES FOR THE DISTRICT TO USE AS DOES IT A SMALL PORTION OF IT. AND SO WHAT WE AGREED TO IN NEGOTIATIONS IS THESE THESE PARCEL TAXES INCREASE IN VALUE THAT THEY BRING IN REVENUE TO THE DISTRICT SLIGHTLY EVERY YEAR AND THAT AMOUNT HAS TO BE COMMITTED. THE COMMITTEE HASN'T ALWAYS KEPT UP WITH THE COMMITMENTS ON PARTICULARLY T.A. AND SO THERE WAS ENOUGH MONEY THERE IN CARRY FORWARD BALANCES AS WELL AS UNCOMMITTED REVENUES TO COVER THE HEALTH CARE PROPOSAL FOR UC FOR I THINK THE FIRST WHEN I GLANCED TO MY RIGHT AND SAY A YEAR AND A HALF. YES.
OKAY. YES. OKAY GOOD. I'M GLAD I GOT THAT RIGHT. AND SO AND THEN AT THAT POINT IT WILL EXPIRE ABOUT SIX MONTHS AFTER THAT POINT AND WHEN IT'S RE UPPED IN 28 ARE REQUESTS OF THE BOARD AND THE CITY AND OUR STAFF AND YOU WHO BENEFIT SPECIFICALLY FROM CURITIBA IS THAT THE AMOUNT PER PARCEL INCREASE AND THAT IT GOES UP FOR ANOTHER 20 YEARS TO CONTINUE TO COVER THAT ADDITIONAL COST AND PROVIDING HEALTH CARE BENEFITS FOR ALL FOR OUR EDUCATORS MOVING FORWARD AND IT'S VERY SPECIFICALLY AS I SAID BASED ON LANGUAGE AND MOU NOT MY PREFERENCE. THAT'S WHAT THAT MONEY IS INTENDED FOR. OKAY. SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY WE WON'T BE REDUCING ANYTHING WE'RE ALREADY DOING IN TERMS OF PROVIDING AUGMENTATION FOR EDUCATORS OR OTHER EMPLOYEES. WE'RE GOING TO USE INCREASES OR UNSPENT FUNDS TO COVER THE APOLOGIES. >> YOU'RE CORRECT. I SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
YES. IT DOESN'T JUST WANT A RECAP TO BE SURE. >> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. I ALSO JUST HAD A QUICK QUESTION ABOUT I'M GOING TO USE SOMETHING AS AN AS AN EXAMPLE BUT SAID JEWEL ALTRIA'S SETTLEMENT MONEY THAT I SAW ON PAGE 15. BUT THIS QUESTION DOESN'T ONLY RELATE TO JEWEL. ALTRIA JUST MAYBE SERVES THE CONVENIENT REFERENCE POINT. I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT SETTLEMENT MONEY IS LIMITED AND WILL RUN OUT SO FOR FUNDS LIKE THAT USING THIS OR OTHERS YOU WANT AS AN EXAMPLE WHAT ARE THEY CURRENTLY BEING USED FOR AND WHAT IF ANYTHING DO WE HAVE ANY ABILITY TO REPLACE THOSE FUNDS OR ARE THOSE PROGRAMS THAT WOULD JUST HAVE TO BE SHUT DOWN OR REDUCED IN SOME WAY? GREAT QUESTION. WE HAVE A HUGE MIX OF RESTRICTED FUNDS HERE AND SO JEWEL, ALTRIA AND THE SETTLEMENT A GREAT EXAMPLE IT WAS A SETTLEMENT STATEWIDE WE RECEIVED OUR PORTION AND INSTEAD OF SPENDING IT CENTRALLY WHICH A LOT OF DISTRICTS DO, WE ACTUALLY GAVE
IT TO SCHOOL SITES TO USE AND SPEND WHICH WE DO ACTUALLY MOST OF OUR RESTRICTED FUNDS ONCE THEY SPEND THOSE SPEND THOSE MONIES EXCUSE ME THEY DO GO AWAY AND THEN FREQUENTLY WE GET OTHER MONEYS RIGHT ON THE RESTRICTED SIDE THIS CAN BE GRANTS, THIS CAN BE DONATIONS. THIS IS FOR EXAMPLE THE SPARK FOUNDATION LIKE THEY BRING IN RESTRICTED FUNDS THAT WE GIVE TO SCHOOLS ALL THE TIME. SO THE SCHOOLS ARE GIVEN THE MONEY ASKED TO BUDGET WHAT THEY WANT FROM THAT MONEY AND ONCE THAT MONEY IS GONE IT GOES AWAY. BUT OTHER RESOURCES CONSTANTLY SHOW UP ON THAT RESTRICTED SIDE RESTRICTED MONIES ARE USUALLY TIME BOUND AND THEY'RE USUALLY ALSO BOUND BY WHAT WE CALL FUND REQUIREMENTS WHICH MEANS THAT THEY HAVE TO BUY CERTAIN TYPES OF THINGS RIGHT? SO FOR EXAMPLE THE OLD TO PAY THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A LONG TIME WHICH IS THE TOBACCO CESSATION PROGRAM MONEY WE WERE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS IN THE CLASSROOM TO GET STUDENTS TO STOP USING TOBACCO PRODUCTS. RIGHT. SO THAT WAS ANOTHER TYPE OF LIMITED TIME MONEY. SO MOST OF THOSE RESTRICTED FUNDS DO COME WITH GUIDELINES
OF HOW THEY HAVE TO BE SPENT BUT WE LET OUR SCHOOLS DECIDE HOW TO SPEND THEM. THERE ALSO MIGHT BE A CENTRAL ALLOCATION TO DO DISTRICT WIDE STUFF IN SOME OF THESE CASES BUT EACH ONE OF THOSE IS DIFFERENT. IF YOU EVER HAVE A TYPE OF MONEY THAT YOU WANT TO SEE WHAT WAS ACTUALLY SPENT FROM THAT SEND THE REQUEST TO US AND WE CAN JUST SIMPLY RUN A REPORT ON HOW THE MONEY WAS SPENT. BUT THERE'S SO MANY OF THEM DOING IT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD I'M GOING TO GET IT WRONG. SO THANK YOU. I'LL WAIT FOR OTHERS TO ASK BEFORE ASKING ANYTHING ELSE. OKAY. I HAVE TO I THINK SIMPLEST QUESTIONS AND THE FST 1ST MAY ACTUALLY MAY OR MAY NOT MATTER BUT I'M WONDERING THE SAME SLIDE SIX WITH THE ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF LOCAL FUNDS DO WE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING THAT THESE FUNDS CHANGE IN TERMS OF THE AMOUNTS BUT DO WE HAVE A SENSE AND ALSO UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S NOT LIKE YOU CAN SPEND ALL OF THEM FOR ANYTHING BUT DO WE HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT THE PERCENTAGES ARE LIKE? WHAT IS THE BREAKDOWN IF
THERE'S 28% LOCAL, DO WE HAVE A SENSE OF LIKE ONE IS JUST AN OUTSIZED PROPORTION OF THAT 28% AND LOCAL FUNDING THAT WE HAVE LIKE FOR EXAMPLE AND I ASK BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD BEFORE FROM COMMUNITY LIKE DO MORE WITH YOUR PROPERTY BUT IF THE REALITY IS WE'RE NOT GETTING THAT MUCH ANYWAYS FROM THE PROPERTY IT WOULD BE GOOD TO KNOW AND MAYBE THAT'S NOT WHERE AS MUCH EFFORT GOES IF WE NEED TO SPEND EFFORT ELSEWHERE BUT IF IT DOES SEEM LIKE A VIABLE AND IMPORTANT PLACE TO TO DO MORE BECAUSE WE CAN GET MORE THERE OR IT IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT THAN THAN THAT I THINK THAT WOULD BE GOOD TO KNOW. THAT'S MY FIRST QUESTION. >> GREAT. I'M GOING TO TAKE A STAB AND JENNIFER SCHUSTER THROW SOMETHING AT ME IF I GET IT WRONG. SO THIS GOES IN SOMEWHAT OF A DESCENDING ORDER BULLET POINT. SO THE LEAST THAT WE GET IS LEAST REVENUES. THAT'S BECAUSE FIRST OF ALL IT'S NOT A MASSIVE AMOUNT I'M ASKING FOR ANOTHER BOARD STUDY SESSION IN APRIL TO BRING TO
YOUR REAL PROPERTY AND ASK FOR PERMISSION TO MONETIZE IT MORE ON BEHALF OF THE DISTRICT. IT'S BEEN LEFT A LITTLE FALLOW FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS SO WE HOPE TO IMPROVE THAT IN THE FUTURE. HOWEVER THE BIGGEST PORTION THAT WE GET IS IS PIF ESPECIALLY WHEN WE ADD IT TO THE STUDENT SUCCESS FUND. SO THE SOURCE OF THOSE FUNDS IS THE SAME. THAT'S WHAT WE CALL THIS IS REALLY TECHNICAL WONKY EXCESS ERATH WHICH THE CITY TAKES THE MAJORITY OF BUT A PORTION OF IT IS REALLY INTENDED FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION. SO THEY TURN AROUND AND THEY GRANT IT TO US AND SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE OF AN OBFUSCATED PATHWAY FOR US TO GET THE MONEY THAT IN MOST DISTRICTS JUST FLOWS DIRECTLY TO THE DISTRICT. BUT THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS SET UP IN SAN FRANCISCO AND THOSE COME WITH SOME RESTRICTIONS. SO FOR EXAMPLE, PIF SAYS YOU HAVE TO SPEND A CERTAIN PORTION OF THIS ON I WILL GET THE RIGHT ARTS, MUSIC, SPORTS, PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND LIBRARY. >> THANK YOU. THAT'S A LITTLE BIT UNUSUAL THAT THEY SET IT UP THAT WAY. AND THEN THE STUDENT SUCCESS FUND THEY TOOK A PORTION OF THAT ACCESS ERAP AND SAID WE'RE GOING TO DO IT AS GRANTS FOR
SCHOOLS THAT WE FEEL ARE THE MOST NEEDY. SO IT IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A RESTRICTION LOCALLY THAT WE HAVE THAN OTHER DISTRICTS THAT RECEIVE THAT MONEY BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT WAS SET UP HERE. BUT THAT'S THE LARGEST PORTION. THE PARCEL TAXES ARE EACH SIGNIFICANT BUT THEY'RE STABLE. THEY DON'T INCREASE AS RAPIDLY BUT THEY ARE GOOD FOR 20 YEARS AT A TIME. RIGHT. AND THE CITY'S ALWAYS BEEN VERY GENEROUS AT PASSING THOSE MIGHT. MY SECOND QUESTION IS RELATING TO SLIDE NINE THE TOOLS FOR DETERMINING REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S LONG BEEN CONCERNS I THINK THOSE ARE MINIMIZED AND GIVEN THIS AMAZING STAFF AND THE SYSTEMS THAT WE'RE PUTTING INTO PLACE BUT CONCERNS THAT WE DON'T LIKE WE'RE NOT GREAT AT BEING ACCURATE IN OUR IN OUR NUMBERS IN OUR PLANNING BUT NOW WE HAVE POSITION CONTROL AND WE HAVE OTHER THINGS SO THAT'S GETTING A LOT BETTER. I'M WONDERING THOUGH HOW CLOSE HAVE WE HISTORICALLY BEEN LIKE WHEN WE'RE WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT YOU MENTIONED THERE'S SOME ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE
IN SEATS ON ANY GIVEN DAY OR EVEN HOW MANY STUDENTS ARE EXACTLY GOING TO ROLL AND ENROLL. AND WE HAVE A SENSE BASED ON, YOU KNOW, SEEING WHO APPLIED FOR THE SCHOOLS IN SELF ESTEEM. BUT OF COURSE THERE'S NOT EVERYONE SAYS YES BUT SO HOW CLOSE HAVE WE HISTORICALLY BEEN IN USING THOSE ASSUMPTIONS BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE AND THEN WHERE WE END UP LIKE IS THERE LIKE WHERE IS THAT? WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? IS IT A CONSISTENT NARROW DIFFERENCE OR ARE WE ALL OVER THE PLACE IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO ASSESS ACCURATELY AND PREDICT ACCURATELY AND I UNDERSTAND A PREDICTION IS A PREDICTION BUT IT IS PRESUMABLY BASED ON SOME INFORMATION THAT WE TRUST. YEAH, I'VE REALLY I'VE DUG INTO THIS MORE THE DISTRICT WAS ABLE TO MAINTAIN A LOT OF ACCURACY SPECIFICALLY UP UNTIL COVID FOR SOME REASON A LOT OF THINGS HAPPEN IN THE DISTRICT. ALL OF YOU ACTUALLY WERE HERE. I LIVED HERE BUT I WASN'T INVOLVED WITH WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AT THE TIME. SO YOU WERE MUCH MORE AWARE OF ALL THE UPS AND DOWNS IN THE DISTRICT. BUT SOMETHING DEFINITELY
HAPPENED DURING COVID AND POST-COVID TO THE POINT WHERE THE KNOWLEDGE OF HOW TO DEVELOP AND MONITOR BUDGETS WAS LOST. IT'S VERY IT'S VERY CLEAR FROM THE PAPER TRAIL THE BUDGET TO ACTUAL PRESENTATION I DID FOR THE BOARD LAST YEAR ILLUSTRATED JUST HOW DRAMATICALLY OFF BUDGET SYSTEMS TRACKING RESPONSIBILITY HAD GOTTEN WHICH FRANKLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALARMING TO THE BOARD. RIGHT. THAT'S IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD BUT THAT'S ALSO WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE SO MUCH TURNOVER FOR VARIOUS REASONS THAT YOU PROBABLY ALL ARE MORE FAMILIAR WITH BUT YOU LOSE THAT KNOWLEDGE AND IT CAN THROW A DISTRICT INTO DISARRAY ESPECIALLY WHEN WHAT YOU SEE AS THE OPERATION STAFF FINANCIALLY IS VERY SMALL IN A DISTRICT. AND JENNIFER, YOU WERE PROBABLY THE ONLY PERSON HERE LONG ENOUGH IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO ANY OF THAT AS FAR AS WHAT HAPPENED AND THEN VERSUS NOW PERHAPS. SURE. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS JENNIFER SCHUSTER. SO I WILL SAY PRE-COVID A LOT OF THE WORK AROUND THE REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS BUDGET TO ACTUALS WAS REALLY HELD BY ONE PERSON IN THE BUDGET OFFICE AND WE'VE HAD A LOT OF TURNOVER SINCE THEN AND SO UNFORTUNATELY A LOT
OF THAT INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE WAS LOST AND SO WE ARE NOW REGAINING IT WHEN IT COMES TO OUR EXPENDITURES. WE DID NOT FOLLOW A GOOD PRACTICE. WE WOULD SET UP ALL OF OUR BUDGETS AND WE WOULD JUST LEAVE THEM THERE EVEN IF THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT UNDERSPENDING AND THAT WOULD PRODUCE BIG VARIANCES AT THE END OF THE YEAR. AND SO WITH OUR NEW LEADERSHIP WE'VE BEEN INSTITUTING MUCH BETTER BUDGETING PRACTICES SO THAT WE'RE MONITORING OUR BUDGETS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, MAKING ADJUSTMENTS BASED ON UPDATED REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS BASED ON ACTUAL SPENDING TRENDS BASED ON OUR POSITIONS FILLED VERSUS VACANT. AND SO I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A LOT OF CHANGES BASED ON THESE IMPROVED BUDGETING PRACTICES THAT'S SUPER USEFUL AND I'M THRILLED TO HEAR THAT AND TRUST THAT THAT IS TRUE EVEN JUST A SPECIFIC ON THAT THAT JUST ENROLLMENT LIKE HOW CLOSE ARE WE WHEN FOR EXAMPLE RIGHT NOW LAST YEAR PRESUMABLY WE HAD A PROJECTED ENROLLMENT
NUMBER FOR 2526 HOW CLOSE DID WE GET TO THAT 48,768? LIKE DO WE KNOW THAT BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE PROJECTING LIKE 48,267 FOR NEXT ACADEMIC YEAR AND I'M JUST WONDERING LIKE DO WE ARE WE CONFIDENT BASED ON LOOKING AT OUR HOW CLOSE OR HOW CLOSE WE'VE BEEN WITH WHAT WE PROJECTED AND WHAT THE ACTUAL NUMBERS HAVE BEEN AND MAYBE THAT'S MAYBE THAT'S NOT YOU ALL MAYBE THAT'S OUR IT SORT OF THING. YOU'RE RIGHT. IT'S ENROLLMENT AND THEN BY THE WAY, ENROLLMENT DOES A GREAT JOB THERE'S A COUPLE OF OF LUMINARIES THERE JOSEPH THE ENROLLMENT STAFF AND THEY ALSO WORK WITH SOME GREAT DEMOGRAPHERS HOWEVER NOT NOT ENROLLMENT WAS ONE OF MY DEPARTMENTS AS WELL BUT WHEN YOU HAVE SO MUCH CHANGE AND PEOPLE AREN'T UNDERSTANDING THE IMPACTS OF THE INFORMATION THEY'RE PUTTING INTO THE SYSTEM, WE WOULD GET A NUMBER OUT OF THE ENROLLMENT AND THEN WE WOULD PUT A DIFFERENT NUMBER INTO THE BUDGET AND I'M GOING TO HAVE NAIRU SPEAK TO THAT AND WHY PEOPLE WOULD DO THAT
WHEN THEY WERE PRODUCING BUDGETS. OKAY. HI, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS . >> SORRY I OKAY ALL RIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO ALL RIGHT. WE DID A DEEP DIVE AS TO WHAT WAS PROJECTED LAST YEAR. >> SO LAST YEAR'S STAFFING MODEL HAD A PROJECTED ENROLLMENT OF 49,000 468 STUDENTS. AND WHEN WE LOOKED AT THAT, WE LOOKED AT OUR HISTORICAL ENROLLMENT TRENDS AND IT DIDN'T REALLY MATCH ANYTHING THAT WAS CONSISTENT WITH PRIOR YEAR. SO IF YOU LOOK AT SLIDE TEN YOU'LL NOTICE WE HAVEN'T REALLY HAD 49,000 STUDENTS SINCE 20 425. SO IT SEEMS THAT THEY WERE USING AN ENROLLMENT FIGURE THAT WAS THAT WAS EVEN HIGHER THAN THE ACTUAL ENROLLMENT AT 2425 TO BUILD THE STAFFING MODEL. >> SO THAT THAT WAS THE FIRST THING WE FOUND. >> THE OTHER ISSUE IS THAT WE SEE THAT IN THE FIELD THERE IS A MISUNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CAPACITY AND ENROLLMENT, RIGHT? SO THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT REQUIRES US TO NORM TEACHERS BASED ON THE ACTUAL ENROLLMENT NOT THE CAPACITY AND THERE CONTINUES TO BE A MISUNDERSTANDING AS TO HOW THAT PROCESS SHOULD BE DEVELOPED SHOULD BE THAT SOME PEOPLE FEEL THAT IT SHOULD BE BASED ON CAPACITY AND WE'VE EXPLAINED NO THE CAPACITY IS JUST THE CAPACITY OF THE SCHOOL. SO WHO'S ACTUALLY THERE AT THE SCHOOL SITE? SO THAT IS ONE THING THAT WE HAVE TRIED TO FIX WITH THIS CURRENT YEAR STAFFING MODEL IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ENROLLMENTS THAT WE ARE USING FOR THE STAFFING MODEL IS AS CLOSE TO CURRENT YEAR AS POSSIBLE WITH AND A MINOR ADJUSTMENT JUST FOR AGING, RIGHT? SO WE USED A PROJECTION OF 48,000 42 STUDENTS FOR 2627 THAT IS PRETTY MUCH IN LINE WITH WHAT WE'RE SEEING ALSO. SO WHEN WE FACTOR IN A -1% FOR ENROLLMENT IN THE CURRENT YEAR SO YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THERE'S A 40 8267 STUDENTS IN SLIDE TEN.
THAT IS BECAUSE THERE ARE STUDENTS IN THIS NUMBER THAT ARE NOT IN THIS MODEL. THEY INCLUDE STUDENTS THAT ARE NON PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOR EXAMPLE OR OTHER STUDENTS THAT ARE JUST KIND OF FALL INTO THE PURVIEW OF OUR T K TO 12 OUR STUDENTS IN OUR EARLY ED CENTERS THAT I THINK ARE PICKED UP IN PADS THAT ARE EARLY ETC. AND THAT WOULDN'T FALL UNDER STAFFING MODEL AS WELL THEY COULD SWITCH SO SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND AND I APPRECIATE YOUR KIND AND THOUGHTFUL RESPONSE SO WHEN YOU HAVE AN ENROLLMENT NUMBER THAT YOU'RE PLUGGING INTO A BUDGET WHICH IS HIGHER THAN WHAT YOU KNOW YOUR ENROLLMENT IS GOING TO BE, I WILL KINDLY CALL THAT OPTIMISTIC BUDGETING WHEN YOU'RE TOLD THAT YOU ONLY HAVE 48,000 STUDENTS AND YOU PUT INTO THE BUDGET CALCULATOR 49,000 FOR REVENUE YOU'RE OVER PROJECTING YOUR REVENUE. NOW THAT DOESN'T INTO INTENTIONALITY. IT COULD BE THAT PEOPLE HAVE FORGOTTEN HOW TO UPDATE THAT NUMBER OR THAT THEY DIDN'T KNOW THAT THEY HAVE TO UPDATED EVERY YEAR WITH THE CURRENT PROJECTION BUT TO NEAR THIS POINT IT WAS BEING OVERSTATED. SO THE WELL SO SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO IN MY HEAD IS THEN
TAKE ALL THIS INFORMATION AND OVERLAY IT ON THE EXPERIENCE THAT WE'VE HAD SINCE DECEMBER RIGHT. AND THEN ASK OURSELVES WHAT DOES THIS MEAN ABOUT OUR WORK MOVING FORWARD AND SO SO THE THE FIRST INTERIM BUDGET THAT WE RECEIVED INCLUDED AN FSP THAT I THINK THE WAY THAT IT WAS FRAMED TO US WAS THAT THIS WAS AN FSP OF LAST RESORT. IT WAS IT WAS THE WORST POSSIBLE SCENARIO AT THE TIME. IS THAT BECAUSE ALL OF THAT WAS BASED ON PROJECTIONS THAT WE DID NOT CONCRETELY KNOW ANSWERS TO AT THAT TIME IS A MULTIPART QUESTION. >> BUT YES, THAT'S MY FIRST QUESTION. >> YOU KNOW THE CONCEPT OF AN FSP AND YOU HAVE ONE AND AGAIN NEXT TUESDAY IT'S IT'S REQUIRED BY LAW SO THAT YOU BASICALLY CAN SOLVE FOR NOT JUST THE CURRENT YEAR DEFICIT BUT THE CURRENT YEAR PLUS TWO YEARS OF DEFICIT AND THERE'S AN ABSTRACT THINKING ABOUT THE DEFICIT. WELL, IT'S JUST ON PAPER IT NEVER ACTUALLY MATERIALIZES
BECAUSE WE NEVER SPEND 100%. BUT WHEN YOU START SPENDING YOUR MONEY DOWN, IF YOU AREN'T BALANCING THE BUDGET, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY DOLLARS LEFT TO PAY FOR EVEN IF IT'S AN EXTRA $10 THAT YOU SPEND OVER BUDGET. AND SO IN FACT IS SUPPOSED TO ACCOUNT FOR BALANCING THE BUDGET OVER A THREE YEAR PERIOD OF TIME. >> CORRECT. BUT WHICH IS THE THE LEGAL THIS IS WHAT I'M JUST TRYING TO SO THAT THE THREE YEAR PERIOD IS THIS YEAR PLUS TO THE SUBSEQUENT TWO YEARS WERE BASED ON THESE ENROLLMENT BUDGET PROJECTIONS YOU >> KNOW FOR FIRST INTERIM WE HAD ALREADY TAKEN CARE AND MADE PROJECTIONS ACCURATE. OKAY SO THEN JANUARY COMES AROUND WE GET THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET BUT STATES ALSO RECEIVED THEIR BUDGET ALLOCATIONS THAT REALLY FOR THE FIRST TIME IN YEARS, RIGHT. THOSE WERE ALL BASED ON A PROJECTION PROJECTED ENROLLMENT RATE FOR EACH SITE BASED ON WHAT? SO OUR ENROLLMENT OFFICE AND OUR DEMOGRAPHERS AND THE STATISTICIANS THERE TAKE ALL OF THE CURRENT STUDENTS THERE
AND WE HAVE YEARS OF DATA TO TELL US EXACTLY WHAT PERCENTAGE AT EACH SCHOOL SITE MIGRATE FROM THIRD GRADE TO FOURTH GRADE FROM FOURTH GRADE TO FIFTH GRADE. HOW MANY NEW ENROLL HOW MANY GET PUSHED TO A SITE BASED ON THEIR CHOICE AND WHICH POSITION THEIR CHOICE IS IN THEIR PREFERENCE LIST? AND SO THAT'S A VERY SOPHISTICATED OPERATION THAT DOES A VERY GOOD JOB AT PROJECTING ALL THE ENROLLMENT AND WHERE IT'S GOING TO MOVE THE NEXT YEAR BASED ON OUR ENROLLMENT PROCESS. THE PART THAT'S A LITTLE TRICKIER IS THAT T.K. BECAUSE WE FIND OURSELVES WITH WHICH WE ALL LOVE. K IT'S A FANTASTIC IDEA AND BUT IT'S TOUGH BECAUSE THE DEMAND DOES NOT ALWAYS FALL WITHIN THE AVAILABILITY AND BECAUSE IT'S YOUR FIRST YEAR OF SCHOOL IT'S HARDER TO PREDICT HOW MANY WANT TO ENROLL VERSUS HOW MANY SPACES YOU HAVE AND HOW MANY ARE WILLING TO GO TO ANOTHER SITE IF IT'S NOT THEIR LOCAL SITE. >> BUT I FELT LIKE THOSE TIGHT BUDGETS WERE BASED ON A 1% ACROSS THE BOARD CUT.
NO, IT'S THAT THE PROJECTION WAS A 1% DECLINE IN ENROLLMENT ACROSS THE BOARD WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE SEEING OF ALL CURRENT ENROLLMENT. SO WE DID A 1% ACROSS THE BOARD IN COLLABORATION WITH ENROLLMENT SAYING NO, THIS SITE DOESN'T EVER DECLINE OR THIS SITE ALWAYS GOES UP A LITTLE BIT. THEY ALWAYS REACH THEIR CAPACITY BECAUSE THEY'RE VERY HIGHLY SOUGHT AFTER SCHOOL ETC. OKAY. >> SO THOSE CONSIDERATIONS FOR EACH SITE WERE FACTORED INTO SITE ALLOCATIONS. OKAY. BECAUSE THEN SITES RECEIVE THEIR BUDGETS PROJECT BASED ON THIS PROJECTED ENROLLMENT JANUARY NOW LET'S THEY WORKED THROUGH I THINK IT WAS THE END OF JANUARY TO INCLUDE THE POSITIONS BASED ON THE STAFFING MODEL PLUS I BACKS RIGHT SO THAT BACK PROCESS WAS AN EXCEPTION SPACE PROCESS RIGHT WHERE FOLKS CAN ADD ADDITIONAL POSITIONS AND BASED ON RESTRICTED FUNDING. OKAY WELL YEAH A COUPLE OF THINGS. SO WE DID OUR BASE FUNDING RIGHT? WE AUGMENTED IT WITH RESTRICTED FUNDS AND POSITIONS.
THE BEST EXAMPLE THAT EVERYBODY REMEMBERS SOCIAL WORKERS RIGHT SO THAT WE COULD ALLOCATE THEM TO EVERY SITE AGAIN NOT JUST TITLE ONE SITES WE FOUND SOME WE USED MEDICAID MONEY TO FUND THEM FOR EVERY SITE AND THEN PRINCIPALS THE NEXT STEP IS ACTUALLY PRINCIPALS THEN CHOOSE WHAT THEY WANT TO SPEND THEIR LOCAL MONEY ON THAT THEY GET RIGHT MOSTLY THEY CHOOSE POSITIONS AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT THERE'S AN APPEALS PROCESS THAT GOES TO THE SUPERINTENDENT AND ED SERVICES AND SO IN TOTAL OVER LOCALLY SELECTED BY PRINCIPALS AND CENTRAL ALLOCATIONS. >> IN ADDITION TO THAT THERE WERE BETWEEN 130 AND 135 ADDITIONAL POSITIONS GRANTED BASED ON APPEALS AND SPECIFIC ASSIGNMENTS WHICH IS SIGNIFICANT CONSIDERING THAT WE ONLY HAVE 122 SCHOOL SITES WHERE APPEALS DENIED A FEW WERE DENIED. YEAH SORRY BEAR WITH ME. I'M JUST TRYING TO ARTICULATE THE ARC OF WHAT WE'RE EXPERIENCING RIGHT NOW. SO THEN SO THEN THE END OF THE MOST RECENT MEETING COMES AROUND FOR YES LISTS AND THOSE PICKS LISTS I THINK WE
ARTICULATED THIS AT THE BOARD MEETING. I MEAN IT WAS LESS THAN 50 PEOPLE OR POSITIONS, RIGHT? AND IF I RECALL IT'S MOSTLY DRIVEN BY CHANGES IN THE PROJECTION OF OUR ENROLLMENT NOT NECESSARILY THE T OH YEAH, THE T, YEAH. THIS WAS DONE FAR BEFORE THE TIME. RIGHT? SO THE TO WILL SHOW UP IN THE OTHER PACKET THAT WE HAVE TONIGHT RIGHT HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR IT BUT THIS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE T AT THE TIME SO THIS IS AN ENROLLMENT DRIVEN AND FINANCE DRIVEN RIGHT. SO FOR EXAMPLE IF I'M A PRINCIPAL THAT HAD 350 STUDENTS THIS YEAR AND I ONLY HAVE 300 NEXT YEAR, THEN I'M GOING TO HAVE LESS DISCRETIONARY MONEY TO SPEND NOW LET'S FAST FORWARD TO MAY WE GET THE MAY BUDGET REVISE WHEN WE FACTOR IN RETIREMENTS ATTRITION AND TURNOVER OF STAFF ALL THAT STUFF. IT COULD BE THAT COME MAY WE ACTUALLY DON'T NEED TO LAY ANYONE OFF POTENTIALLY YEAH. SO BECAUSE OF THE STATUTORY TORY DEADLINE OF MARCH 15TH
IN THE STATE AND THEN ALL THE STUFF THAT HAPPENS BETWEEN MARCH 15TH AND MAY 15TH WHEN YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE FINAL NOTICE THERE'S ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT HAPPEN THAT YOU MIGHT NOT TO HAVE TO EXECUTE. NOW HERE'S THE OTHER THING AND THIS HAS HAPPENED TO THE BOARD HERE AS WELL AFTER MAY 15TH THERE'S STILL OTHER STUFF, RIGHT? PEOPLE STILL DECIDE TO MOVE WITH A PARTNER SOMEWHERE ELSE OR TWO THEY DON'T WANT TO BE IN THIS JOB ANYMORE OR THEY THEY WANT TO WORK SOMEWHERE ELSE OR THEY TAKE ANOTHER POSITION WITHIN OUR DISTRICT AND THEN WE HAVE MORE POSITIONS AND THAT PROCESS CONTINUES UNTIL THE FIRST DAY OF SCHOOL. AND REMEMBER THAT IF YOU ARE A PERSON WHOSE JOB IS ACTUALLY ELIMINATED AND YOU'RE STILL IN IT WHICH IS CALLED A LAYOFF THAT THAT 39 MONTH REHIRE CONTINUES FOR ANOTHER THREE YEARS TO CALL YOU BACK INTO A POSITION AS THEY OPEN UP. ALL RIGHT, GREAT. THEN WE WE DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW OUR FINAL ENROLLMENT OBVIOUSLY UNTIL SCHOOL BEGINS. CORRECT. >> I'M JUST TRYING TO FULLY CLOSE THIS LOOP. YES. AND AND IT CHANGES THROUGHOUT THE YEAR WHICH IS IN OUR NEXT PRESENTATION BECAUSE IT HAS CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY DURING
IN YEAR THIS YEAR. SO WE ARE ALWAYS CHASING ENROLLMENT. HOWEVER BECAUSE WE DO ARE SO FAR AHEAD OF TIME WE ARE GETTING PLACEMENT RUNS NEXT WEEK SO WE ACTUALLY DO A BETTER JOB FURTHER AHEAD OF TIME THAN THAN MOST DISTRICTS I MEAN THINK YEAH BECAUSE I, I THINK AND I APPRECIATE YOU JUST WALKING ME THROUGH THAT IN PART BECAUSE I THINK THE NUMBERS KEEP CHANGING RIGHT? WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND MORE CLEARLY WHY THE NUMBERS WHAT'S DRIVING THE CHANGES OVER THIS ARC AND THAT WILL HELP US BETTER UNDERSTAND OKAY SO AT WHAT POINT DO WE NEED TO LOOK FOR CERTAIN THINGS SO THAT WE HAVE A CLEARER UNDERSTANDING OF HOW WE ARE GETTING TO A SMALLER SWING AT THE END OF THE YEAR MORE CLEARLY DEFINED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STAFFING MODEL ALL OF THAT STUFF THAT TELLS US THE ACTUALS, RIGHT? AND SO I DO THINK I WILL SAY JUST BECAUSE WE ARE SIMULTANEOUSLY RECONCILING ONE BUDGET WHILE PROJECTING ANOTHER
IS VERY CONFUSING FOR MANY PEOPLE. RIGHT. AND SO TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT RIGHT THEN YOU LAYER ON AN FSP THAT IS ACTUALLY FUTURE FOCUSED WITH HONESTLY A TEACHER THAT'S ALSO FUTURE FOCUSED, RIGHT? WITH A BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IS TAKING PLACE RIGHT NOW FOR ACTUALS IT GETS EVEN MORE CONFUSING RIGHT? SO SO I JUST I THINK THAT I'M TRYING TO ORGANIZE ALL OF THIS IN MY HEAD. I'M SURE LIKE FOR FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TOO. IT'S JUST I THINK WE WE OWE IT TO OURSELVES AS COMMISSIONERS TO UNDERSTAND HOW ALL OF THESE ARE PLAYING A ROLE WITH EACH OTHER AND THEN HOW ARE WE COMMUNICATING THAT WITH THE PUBLIC BECAUSE I THINK IF IF WE ARE TAKING ALL THIS TIME TO DIG INTO IT OURSELVES LIKE THERE'S GOING TO NEED TO BE SOME WORK TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE COMMUNICATING THIS IN A WAY THAT MAKES SENSE FOR OTHERS. >> SO THAT'S I THINK I APPRECIATE TAKING ME ON THE JOURNEY.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOLLOW UP ON THE REVENUE PROJECTIONS POINT BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY I'M REALLY EXCITED FOR THE STUDY SESSION ABOUT REAL PROPERTY AND THANK YOU FOR PREPARING THAT BECAUSE YOU KNOW WELL PROPERTY HERE IS LIKE MORE EXPENSIVE THAN NEARLY ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD AND SO IT HOPEFULLY IS AN ASSET THAT WE CAN PUT TO WORK FOR OUR STUDENTS THROUGH AND FOR OUR WORKFORCE THROUGH HOUSING OR OTHER THINGS. AND I HAD A QUICK QUESTION FOR GENERAL COUNSEL JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THE EARLIER CONVERSATION COMMISSIONER I RAISED ABOUT THE ALTRIA SETTLEMENT AND THOSE SETTLEMENT FUNDS CAME FROM LIKE A LONG STANDING LITIGATION THAT EVENTUALLY SETTLED ABOUT THE MARKETING OF VAPING VAPES BY JEWEL TO STUDENTS AND FROM TIME TO TIME GOVERNMENTS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS JOIN CASES LIKE THAT. ARE THERE ANY CASES THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY A PARTY IN THAT MAY IN THE FUTURE YIELD ADDITIONAL SETTLEMENT FUNDS AS PLAINTIFFS ? AS OF NOW NOTHING COMES TO MIND BUT I WOULD NEED TO GET BACK TO YOU TO FIGURE OUT IF SOMETHING IF WE JUMPED IN PERHAPS IN THE LAST FEW YEARS AND IT'S JUST BEEN QUIET
BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN NOTHING NO SUBSTANTIAL MOVEMENT BUT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD WE'VE BEEN APPROACHED AND WE GET A VARIETY OF INVITATIONS BUT WE THINK ABOUT WHAT MAKES SENSE AND WHAT YOU KNOW IN TERMS OF THE TRADEOFFS OF STAFF TIME AND WHATNOT. SO BUT NOT NOTHING THAT COMES TO MIND. >> YEAH I KNOW THERE ARE OTHER SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN A FAIR AMOUNT OF LITIGATION ABOUT SOCIAL MEDIA BEING ADDICTIVE TO STUDENTS AND HARMS TO YOUTH. SO I'D BE CURIOUS TO HEAR IF WE END UP THAT ENDS UP COMING TO THE BOARD IN THE FUTURE IF IT'S NOT ALREADY PLAINTIFFS AND THEN MY QUESTIONS ABOUT REVENUE PROTECTION SO YOU SAID THAT PAST ERRORS IN REVENUE PROJECTION ACTUALLY OVER PROJECTED REVENUE BASED ON CARRYING OVER PAST ENROLLMENT THAT WAS HIGHER FROM PAST YEARS THAT WAS HIGHER. HOW DOES THAT SQUARE WITH CONCERNS THAT THE DISTRICT MAY HAVE UNDER PROJECTED REVENUE IN THE PAST AND THEN MORE MONEY HAS COME IN IN ACTUALS IT WAS PROJECTED HAS THAT HAPPENED ON OCCASION AS WELL?
YES, MOSTLY WHEN PEOPLE AREN'T MAINTAINING THEIR REVENUE CALCULATORS. SO THERE ARE I'VE ONLY GOTTEN TO LOOK BACK AT MAYBE THE LAST 4 OR 5 YEARS AT THIS POINT. LAST TIME I TALKED TO YOU I THINK IT WAS THREE I GUESS IS WHAT I DO IN MY SPARE TIME FOR FONZIE'S RIGHT THERE ARE TIMES THAT WHOEVER WAS PROJECTING REVENUES WOULD ACTUALLY NEGLECT TO PROJECT ANY REVENUES IN A FUND SOURCE FOR A YEAR AND THEN THEY WOULD CATCH IT AT FIRST INTERIM OR SECOND INTERIM SO IT WOULD BE A ZERO AT ADOPTION AND THEN THEY WOULD CATCH IT. BUT THERE WAS THE BIGGEST DISCREPANCY I'VE FOUND SO FAR GOING BACK WAS MAYBE I'D HAVE TO I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AGAIN BUT I THINK 24 MILLION IS THE HIGHEST ONE I'VE SEEN IN A SINGLE YEAR NOW THAT'S PROBABLY AS FAR BACK AS I'M GOING TO GO. I'M NOT GOING TO BECAUSE IT'S ALL PAPER BASED WHICH IS FRANKLY BURDENSOME. BUT I HAVE LOOKED BACK 4 OR 5 YEARS AT THIS POINT. >> YEAH, IF YOU DO HAVE THE ACTUAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PROJECTED AND ACTUAL REVENUE
FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS IF YOU COULD OR IF YOU OR FOUR YEARS OR WHATEVER THE MOST RECENT YEARS THAT YOU DID ACTUALLY LOOK AT IT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL I THINK IF YOU COULD SHARE THEM FOR EACH YEAR WITH THE BOARD I'M SURE IT'S JUST IN A SPREADSHEET IF THAT'S OKAY WITH EVERYBODY BUT IT'S A PRETTY BASIC ONE BUT AND AND THERE'S ALSO BEEN ALL SORTS OF I THINK POLITICAL SPECULATION ABOUT WHAT THE GOVERNOR'S MAIN BUDGET REVISE WILL LOOK LIKE THIS YEAR AND FOLKS YOU KNOW STATING THAT THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL MONEYS IN THE MAY BUDGET REVISED DO WE HAVE ANY REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THAT WILL BE TRUE EITHER BECAUSE THE COLA WILL BE ADJUSTED UP OR PROP 98 WITHHOLDINGS WILL BE PROVIDED OR ANY OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING ARE FORTHCOMING THROUGH THE STATE. I MEAN I ENJOY READING ASTROLOGY AND ALL THE OTHER STUFF IN THE NEWSPAPER BUT I'M NOT IN THE MAGIC EIGHT BALL BUSINESS FOR WORK YOU PAY ME TO DO YOUR FINANCES AND SO UNTIL IT'S IN WRITING AND I KNOW IT'S COMING, I DON'T PROVIDE IT TO
YOU RIGHT? SO HAVE THERE BEEN CONVERSATIONS AT THE STATE LEVEL TO FULFILL THE DEFERRALS THAT WE RECEIVED IN THE PAST YEARS? YES. HAS THE GOVERNOR MOVED ON THOSE YET? NO. WHAT WOULD OUR PORTION OF THAT BE IF IT'S OF THE $1.9 BILLION DEFERRAL, OUR PORTION OF THAT WOULD BE ROUGHLY 24 MILLION BUT IT WOULD JUST BE MOVING THE DEFERRAL FROM JULY TO JUNE. IN OTHER WORDS, WE'D RECEIVED THE MONEY ONE MONTH EARLIER BUT IT'S NOT MORE MONEY, RIGHT? SO A DEFERRAL IS JUST THEM NOT GIVING US OUR FULL APPORTIONMENT FOR A MONTH AND HOLDING SOME BACK TO COVER THEIR OWN BILLS UNTIL THEY HAVE THE MONEY. SOMETIMES THEY HOLD THAT FOR 12 MONTHS THEY'VE BEEN KNOWN TO HOLD IT FOR 18 MONTHS OR TWO YEARS. THEY'VE EVEN BEEN KNOWN TO TAKE MONEY BACK. THEY'VE ALREADY GIVEN US UP TO THREE YEARS BACK, RIGHT? THE STATE GOVERNMENTS THE ONLY ORGANIZATION THAT HAS A TIME MACHINE THEY CAN GO BACK THREE YEARS AND TAKE YOUR MONEY BACK RIGHT? DID YOU SAY 2014? YEAH. YEAH. IF THE 1.9 BILLION THAT WAS
DEFERRED IN THIS PAST BUDGET CYCLE IS GIVEN TO US, IT EQUATES TO ABOUT $24 MILLION FOR US, RIGHT. BUT THERE'S A DEFERRAL IN THE JANUARY BUDGET FOR THIS NEXT YEAR AS WELL THAT'S EVEN LARGER. SO HOW ALL OF THOSE THINGS PLAY OUT I ALWAYS TELL STAFF DON'T ENGAGE IN THE PREDICTION GAME BECAUSE NONE OF US EVER KNOW UNTIL WE GET THE BUDGET AND IT'S NEVER WHAT ANYBODY GUESSES. >> SO IF THAT 24 MILLION CAME IN IN JUNE INSTEAD OF JULY THAT WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY MONEY THAT WAS ORIGINALLY BUDGETED BY THE STATE OR INTENDED FOR THE 2526 SCHOOL YEAR. BUT THE 2526 SCHOOL YEAR IS OVER AND SO WE CAN'T GO BACK WITH OUR TIME MACHINE AND SPEND IT THIS YEAR AND SO WOULD THE FUNCTIONAL EFFECT OF THAT BE TO HAVE IT BE ESSENTIALLY ROLL OVER ONE TIME UNSPENT FUNDS AS OPPOSED TO GREATER NEW UNRESTRICTED FUNDS IN THE 2627 SCHOOL YEAR AND FISCAL YEAR? >> YES. AND LET ME MAKE IT MORE COMPLICATED TO YOU. THEY COULD RESTORE THAT DEFERRAL BUT NOT MAKE IT
ACTIONABLE UNTIL DECEMBER WHICH MEANS THEY'RE GIVING US MONEY DUE IN JUNE IN JANUARY LIKE I SAID, THEY HAVE A TIME MACHINE SO IT'S JUST THEM SETTING THE PAPER RECORD. IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY SAY WHEN WE GET THE CASH RIGHT. SO IF THEY HAVE THE POLICY EFFECTIVE USING THE SAME EXAMPLE THAT THE DEFERRAL ENDS AND WE'RE GOING TO MAKE YOU WHOLE IN JUNE BUT WE'RE NOT IMPLEMENTING THE POLICY UNTIL DECEMBER, YOU STILL DON'T HAVE THE MONEY FOR SIX MONTHS. SO IT REALLY DEPENDS UPON WHAT THE BUDGET SAYS. YEAH. SO IF IN THE SCENARIO YOU JUST LAID OUT WHERE IT WAS PROMISED IN JUNE RESTORED ON PAPER IN JUNE BUT PAID IN DECEMBER THEN FUNCTIONALLY THEY CAN SAY THAT THEY GAVE US THE FULL AMOUNT FOR THE 2526 SCHOOL YEAR BUT WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE ANY DOLLARS ON OUR BOOKS AND CAPACITY TO SPEND THEM UNTIL THE 2728 SCHOOL YEAR. RIGHT. AND THEN THEY WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE CONSIDERED ONE TIME FUNDS BECAUSE THEIR ROLL OVER UNSPENT FUNDS. RIGHT.
OKAY. YEAH, YOU GOT IT JUST WANT TO MAKE YEAH JUST THAT IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING AND I FEEL LIKE OUR I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M ABLE TO ACCURATELY REPRESENT THIS TO OUR STATE PARTNERS AS THEY CONSIDER THEIR DECISION MAKING AND ITS EFFECT ON LOCAL EDUCATION. SO COMMISSIONER, THE LEGISLATIVE ELLIS OFFICE ACTUALLY PUT OUT A VERY HELPFUL PRIMER ON THIS AND THEY SAID THE SAME EXACT THING WE WON'T KNOW TILL 2728. WE CANNOT ASSUME THOSE REVENUES FOR THE COMING 2627 SCHOOL YEAR BECAUSE THE BUDGET DESIGNED STATE BUDGETS HERE THAT INFORMATION THAT THAT MONEY WILL BE AVAILABLE. SO I THINK AND SORRY JUST TO FOLLOW THIS THREAD ONE MORE QUESTION AND THEN I'LL SEE BUT IF THE GOVERNOR'S MAY BUDGET REVISE CONTINUES TO BORROW FROM PROP 98 FUNDS AND ESSENTIALLY LOAN THE STATE MONEY TO BALANCE ITS BUDGET FROM MONEY ALLOCATED
BY THE VOTERS FOR LOCAL PUBLIC EDUCATION. WHAT WOULD BE THE AMOUNT THAT'S BEING WITHHELD FROM OUR BUDGET FOR 2627 LIKE BECAUSE WHAT IT'S FIVE POINT 9 BILLION THAT THERE IF THE JANUARY LET'S JUST SAY IF THE NOT READING THE TEA LEAVES BUT IF THE JANUARY PROPOSED BUDGET HOLDS WHICH HAD I BELIEVE A FIVE PLUS BILLION WITHHOLDING FROM PROPERTY WHAT IS OUR SHARE OF THAT THAT WE WOULD BASICALLY NOT BE GETTING FOR NEXT YEAR? >> I'M NOT GOING TO ANSWER THAT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO GET IT RIGHT. BUT THEY'RE ALSO PROPOSING SOMETHING DIFFERENT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE NOTICED AN ARTICLE CALLED AN ADVANCED PROPORTION APPORTIONMENT PROPOSAL. HERE'S HERE'S ONE THAT'LL BLOW YOUR MIND. WE ARE NOW GOING TO GIVE YOU AN EXTRA MONTH OF YOUR APPORTIONMENT BECAUSE IT BECAUSE SCHOOLS ARE A GREAT BANK AND THEN WHEN WE GET IN FINANCIAL TROUBLE WE'RE GOING TO SKIP A MONTH AND WE'RE GOING TO SAY WE ALREADY PAID YOU WHICH MEANS SCHOOLS YOU NEED TO KEEP A FOUR MONTHS OF APPORTIONMENT IN YOUR FUND BALANCE OR IN A RESERVE BECAUSE
WHEN WE GET IN TROUBLE WE ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU MONEY FOR A MONTH. SO THAT'S AN ADVANCED APPORTIONMENT PROPOSAL THAT'S ALREADY ALSO CURRENTLY BEING PUT OUT THERE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE US AN EXTRA MONTH AND THEN AT A TIME THAT THEY DON'T TELL US THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GIVE US A MONTH WHICH MEANS THAT WE NEED TO DEVELOP A GOOD SAVINGS POLICY. >> WOULD THAT LEGALLY REQUIRE US TO INCREASE OUR CASH RESERVES FROM THE MINIMUM STATE REQUIRED 2% OR WOULD THAT JUST BASICALLY PUT US I'M TRYING TO SAY THIS ABOUT SWEARING IN IN A LOT OF TROUBLE IN THE FUTURE IF WE JUST DIDN'T HAPPEN TO ALREADY HAVE LARGER RESERVES ON HAND SO YOU CAN'T SPEND THE 2% AND SO THAT DOESN'T THAT DOESN'T MATTER. IT'S NOT MATERIAL I CAN'T IMAGINE THEM GOING THROUGH WITH THAT SCHEME WITHOUT LAWS THAT REQUIRE A LOCAL RESERVE BECAUSE SCHOOLS ARE VERY GOOD AT SPENDING MONEY BUT NOT ALWAYS SAVING THEM. AND IF THEY DIDN'T REQUIRE YOU TO SAVE A PORTION YOU COULD
FIND YOURSELF INTO BANKRUPTCY LITERALLY WITHIN A 60 DAY PERIOD. RIGHT RECEIVERSHIP. BUT THAT'S WE'RE NOW IN THE REALM OF SPECULATION WHICH IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SORT OF AVOID BECAUSE I I DON'T HAVE A MAGIC EIGHT BALL. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO. I REALLY APPRECIATE VICE PRESIDENT EWING'S QUESTIONS AND THE OTHER ONES ABOUT THE REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS SINCE THIS IS SOMETHING I'VE BEEN HARPING ON ABOUT FOR A WHILE SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THE THE THE DISCUSSION AND I JUST WANT TO SAY I THINK THIS I THINK THIS I UNDERSTAND IT FEELS SPECULATIVE BUT I THINK IT'S REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE I THINK I MEAN I KNOW MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HAVE BEEN ASKING ME THIS QUESTION. YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE THINK ABOUT THAT DEFERRAL YOU KNOW, IF WE GET A $24 MILLION ALL OF A SUDDEN NEXT YEAR THAT WE DIDN'T BUDGET FOR 2627 PEOPLE CAN SAY WELL WAIT NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU HAVE ALL THIS MONEY YOU DIDN'T BUDGET, WHY DIDN'T YOU BUDGET IT? >> WHY WERE WE TALKING ABOUT LAYOFFS? SO THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I THINK
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO SAY LOOK, WE KNOW THAT MONEY IS THERE. WE CAN'T BUDGET FOR IT FOR X, Y AND Z REASONS BECAUSE THE STATE HAS MADE THAT DECISION RIGHT? SO I THINK THAT'S WHY IT'S ALSO HELPFUL. I WOULD SECOND THIS REQUEST OF GOING BACK A YEAR OR TWO. I MEAN DOESN'T YOU KNOW I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS THE COVID MONEY TIMES WHEN THERE WAS WE HAD 200 MILLION EXTRA DOLLARS BUT FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS IT'S BEEN MORE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 80 MILLION WHERE AND EVEN THIS EVEN 2526 I LOOKED BACK THE REVENUE FOR THE BUDGET WE APPROVE THE REVENUE PROJECTION SORRY THE REVENUE PROJECTION LAST DECEMBER WAS 1.215 MILLION AT THE FIRST INTERIM THEN THIS DECEMBER AND FIRST INTERIM WITH BETTER PROJECTIONS WE'RE SAYING WE'RE NOW PROJECTING 1.292 MILLION AGAIN IT'S ABOUT $77 MILLION MORE. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU ALL ARE DOING A MORE ACCURATE PROJECTION NOW THAN WE WERE IN THE PAST. >> AS YOU'VE SAID. BUT I THINK TO BE ABLE TO SAY WHAT IS THAT 77 MILLION WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL JUST SO THAT WE COULD SAY HERE'S WHAT WE
DISCOVERED WE WEREN'T LOOKING AT NOW HERE'S WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IF SOME OF IT IS NEW MONEY FROM THE STATE TO SAY LOOK WE COULDN'T BUDGET THIS FOR X, Y AND Z REASONS NOW WE KNOW IT'S COMING IN. >> I JUST THINK THAT'S THE LEVEL OF TRANSPARENCY THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL SO THAT WE DON'T GET IN THIS SITUATION WHERE ALL OF A SUDDEN WE HAVE 80 MILLION MORE DOLLARS AND WE DON'T KNOW WHY BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHAT CREATES THE THE THE THE TRUST GAP IF THAT MAKES SENSE. >> YEAH. I CAN PROVIDE YOU THE PAST BUT I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE WHY IN THE PAST WHAT YOU SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR AS THE BOARD IS WHEN WE DO THE INTERIM PROJECTIONS WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE SHOWING YOU FOR THE UNRESTRICTED AND THE RESTRICTED GENERAL FUND ANY CHANGES IN REVENUES AS WELL AS EXPENSES THAT ADD UP WHICH IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING AND YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT EXPENSES ARE GOING UP AND DOWN AND WE SHOULD CALL THEM OUT AND ANY INCREASES OR DECREASES IN REVENUES AND Y RIGHT. SO ANY FIRST OR SECOND INTERIM
REPORT SHOULD INCLUDE THOSE AND IF THEY DON'T THAT SHOULD BE A RED FLAG FOR YOU TO SAY WAIT, WAIT, WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. IT CHANGED BUT YOU'RE NOT TELLING US WHY WE SHOULD ALWAYS TELL YOU WHY BECAUSE THEY DO GO UP AND DOWN. YEAH, THAT'S REALLY AWFUL. I ALSO WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON THE ENROLLMENT QUESTION. SO WHEN I LOOKED AT THAT SLIDE ON WHAT IS IT SLIDE TEN. YEAH IT LOOKS TO ME AND TELL ME IF THIS IS ARE THAT INTERPRETATION THAT OUR ENROLLMENT WENT DOWN BEFORE PRE 2022 THERE WAS THAT COVID DROP AND THEN 20 2223, 2023, 24, 28, 2425 WAS PRETTY STABLE FOR ABOUT THREE YEARS AND THEN THIS YEAR WE LOST SOME STUDENTS MAYBE 500. IS THAT ABOUT RIGHT? ROUGHLY. SO WHY WHY DO WE THINK THAT THAT'S NOT A BLIP? LIKE WHY DO WE THINK THAT IT WAS STABLE FOR THREE YEARS WE LOSE 500. WHY DO WE IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE PROJECTING THAT IT KEEPS GOING DOWN. >> SO I'M CURIOUS WHAT OUR THINKING IS THERE AND THIS IS WHERE WE SHOULDN'T BE RELYING ON MY BRAIN OR OUR BRAINS. THIS IS WHAT A DEMOGRAPHER IS
FOR, RIGHT? AND SO THERE'S NOT ONLY A BLIP I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY NOTICED IT. IT ACTUALLY WENT UP BRIEFLY BETWEEN 23 FISCAL YEAR 23 AND FISCAL YEAR 24 AND THEN IT DROPPED DOWN AGAIN. SO WE ACTUALLY DON'T DO ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS IN THE BUDGET OFFICE. IT'S DONE BY THE ENROLLMENT CENTER. THEY DO THE ENROLLMENT AT SCHOOL SITES VERY WELL BUT THEN THEY CONTRACT OUT WITH A PROFESSIONAL DEMOGRAPHER TO ACTUALLY DO THE ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS WHICH IS WHAT WE USE IN THE BUDGET. SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL JUST AGAIN SO THAT WE KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER WEISSMAN WAS EARLIER QUESTION YOU KNOW WHERE ARE WE GETTING IT RIGHT? MAYBE IT'S A GOOD QUESTION BUT AND WHAT IS TO WHAT EXTENT ARE WE CONFIDENT THAT THESE ARE THAT THIS IS THE RIGHT PROJECTION? >> RIGHT. SO AND AGAIN UNDERSTANDING WE MAY WANT TO MITIGATE RISK BY MAKING MORE CONSERVATIVE PROJECTIONS BUT AT LEAST KNOWING WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH WOULD BE WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL BECAUSE IT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE. AGAIN, THE FIRST GO BACK TO THE FSP QUESTION THE FSP IS BASED
ON A REVENUE ASSUMPTION. >> THE LOWER WE ASSUME OUR REVENUES TO BE THE MORE WE HAVE TO CUT. SO THAT'S I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE BEING CLEAR AND TRANSPARENT. AND THEN I GUESS MY LAST QUESTION WAS OH, AROUND THE BACK WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT THIS AS MUCH BUT THE SCHOOL STAFFING MODEL THE QUESTION I'VE BEEN GETTING IN WHICH I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO ANSWER IS THAT WE HAVE AS YOU NOTE VOCAL GROUPS IN LCF LOW INCOME STUDENTS, ENGLISH LEARNERS, FOSTER YOUTH BUT IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S NOT TOTALLY CLEAR TO A LOT OF PEOPLE WITHIN SFD HOW THE NEW SCHOOL STAFFING MODEL REALLY PROVIDES MORE RESOURCES FOR THOSE STUDENTS OTHER THAN THE SORT OF SMALL DISCRETIONARY AMOUNTS. BUT IN TERMS OF LIKE ADDITIONAL STAFFING, WHERE DOES THAT SHOW UP IN THE STAFFING MODEL? SO SO IT DOESN'T YOU'RE RIGHT IT'S IN THE DISCRETIONARY FUNDING FROM WHAT WE DO CENTRALLY AND THEN I WILL I WOULD POINT THE BOARD TO THE 135 ADDITIONAL STAFF GRANTED THROUGH APPEALS AND THROUGH ADVOCACY DONE THROUGH ED
SERVICES WITH THE SUPERINTENDENT. SO WE JUST WE JUST DO THE FORMULA AND THE ALLOCATIONS AND THEN THE THE DISCRETIONARY PART IS REALLY FISCAL FOLKS DON'T LIKE TO GET ADDED DISCRETION AS MUCH. YEAH THAT'S JUST THE WAY WE THINK. NO AND ACTUALLY THAT'S BEEN A CONCERN OF MINE BECAUSE AND I SHARE THIS WITH THE SUPERINTENDENT THAT THAT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT AN APPEALS PROCESS IS A STRATEGY IS A STRATEGY. >> I MEAN I'M GLAD WE HAVE IT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT IF THERE WERE MISTAKES BUT TO SUGGEST THAT OUR SORT OF EQUITY FUNDING FORMULA IS AN APPEALS PROCESS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE I DON'T THINK LIKE ME AND AS YOU AS HAS HAD A LONG HISTORY OF ACTUALLY BUILDING IN FACTORS TO OUR FUNDING FORMULA TO SCHOOLS SO THAT MORE MARGINALIZED STUDENTS WHO REQUIRE MORE RESOURCES TO ACHIEVE STUDENT OUTCOMES GOT THEM RIGHT. I MEAN WE AS EDUCATORS KNOW THAT THAT'S A SMART STRATEGY. SO SO I GUESS I'M WONDERING WHERE YOU YOU KNOW AND AGAIN I DON'T WANT TO PUT ANYONE ON THE SPOT BUT WAS THERE AN
INTENTIONAL DECISION MADE TO NOT HAVE EQUITY WAITS OF SOME SORT IN THE STAFFING MODEL OR HAS THAT JUST DOES THAT MAKE SENSE BECAUSE IT USED TO BE THERE USED TO BE VERY EXPLICIT WE HAD IT WE HAD A MULTI TIERED SYSTEM OF SUPPORTS. WE HAD ALL THESE DIFFERENT SORT OF FUNDING STRATEGIES THAT DROVE MORE RESOURCES TOWARD FOCUS STUDENTS. YEAH, I MEAN THERE WERE DIFFERENT METHODOLOGIES BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THOSE ARE MOSTLY GONE. YEAH. SO I'M JUST CURIOUS SO YEAH AND I AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT WHAT YOU'VE ALWAYS HAD WE WE TOOK THE BASE AND WE DID TAKE AND WE WE BLENDED THE ALLOCATION FOR BECAUSE BECAUSE THE DISTRICT MEANING SAN FRANCISCO RECOGNIZES NOT JUST UP WHICH IS WHAT THE STATE RECOGNIZE IS BUT OTHERS. THE OTHER INTERESTING THING THOUGH AND I POINTED THIS OUT TO THE BOARD EARLIER IS THAT THINGS THAT WE TRIED TO DO TO PROVIDE MORE SUPPORTS TO SCHOOLS IN OUR DISTRICT WITH HIGHER POPULATIONS OF OF MORE AT RISK OR WHAT IN OTHER DISTRICTS WE CALL STUDENTS THAT TRADITIONALLY HAVE MORE BARRIERS TO SUCCESS IN PUBLIC EDUCATION IS THAT WE PROVIDE THEM THROUGH RESTRICTED
PROGRAMS. THE PROBLEM HERE IS WHAT I CALL UH EVERYBODY NEEDS CREEP, RIGHT? AND SO OUR TITLE PROGRAMS ARE A GREAT EXAMPLE. THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE THOSE THINGS THAT OTHER SCHOOLS DON'T GET BUT AS SOON AS OUR TITLE PROGRAMS HAVE PROVIDED SOMETHING IN THE DISTRICT, THE DEMAND HAS BEEN EVERY SCHOOL NEEDS IT. SO ARE YOU REALLY DIFFERENTIATING OR ARE YOU JUST GIVING EVERYBODY THE SAME AFTER A WHILE? AND SO WHERE WE FIND OURSELVES NOW IS EVERYBODY GETS EVERYTHING. SO I'LL POINT OUT THE SOCIAL WORKER DISCUSSION, RIGHT? THAT WAS A TITLE ONE FUNCTION THAT THEY LOST AND WEREN'T ABLE TO EFFECTIVELY SPEND THEIR MONEY ANY MORE BECAUSE THEY WERE RUNNING AFOUL OF SUPPLEMENTING VERSUS SUPPLANTING WHICH LEFT THEM IN A POSITION OF NOT EFFECTIVELY BEING ABLE TO SUPPORT THE LOW INCOME STUDENTS THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO SUPPORT. SO WE SAID LET'S MAKE THAT A TITLE ONE FUNCTION AGAIN AND HOW DO WE SAFEGUARD IT SO THAT THEY DON'T LOSE THAT FUNCTION WHICH WE DID AND WE DID FIND SOMETHING THAT DOES
NOT TRIP TO SUPPLEMENT OR SUPPLANT WHICH IS MEDICARE AND MEDICAID FUNDING REVENUES THAT WE GET BACK. WILL THAT LAST FOREVER AT THE LEVEL WE'RE SPENDING THEM? NO, BUT IT WAS A SOLUTION FOR THE COMING YEAR. SO THOSE ARE PRESSURES THAT WE SEE HERE AND YOU CAN HISTORICALLY LOOK AT THE STAFFING DISBURSEMENT AND YOU CAN SEE WHAT STARTS AT ONE SCHOOL FOR STUDENTS THAT NEED MORE SUPPORT VERY QUICKLY SPREADS TO ALL SCHOOLS NEED IT. SO IT'S A VERY SORT OF CLEAR STORY HERE. YEAH, AND THAT MAKES SENSE FOR I'M SURE THERE'S LOTS OF POLITICAL AND OTHER REASONS FOR THAT. I GUESS I JUST MY CONCERN IS THAT THEN WE'RE NOT PROVIDING THOSE ADDITIONAL SUPPORTS AND WE DON'T HAVE A TARGETED STRATEGY. SO WHICH YES, I DON'T KNOW MAYBE THIS IS MORE OF A QUESTION FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT BUT BUT I, I, I AM GOING TO JUST I'M HAVING REAL TROUBLE SUPPORTING A BUDGET THAT DOESN'T VERY EXPLICITLY HAVE A STRATEGY AROUND IMPROVING STUDENT OUTCOMES FOR ALL STUDENTS WHICH IS GOING TO REQUIRE MORE YOU KNOW, A KID WHO'S A HOMELESS STUDENT WHO HASN'T HAD OPPORTUNITIES TO LEARN TO READ IS GOING TO MEAN MORE NEED MORE HELP COMING
IN TO YOU KNOW, AS AN EARLY LITERACY LEARNER THAN ONE WHO'S HAD THEIR, YOU KNOW, A STABLE HOUSING ENVIRONMENT, FOR EXAMPLE. AND SO IF WE DON'T HAVE A STRATEGY THAT ADDRESSES THAT, IT FEELS TO ME LIKE WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT GOING TO MEET OUR ACADEMIC GOALS IN COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER MAYBE I CAN I JUST WANT TO BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS A REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTION OF HOW WE OPERATIONALIZE THE VALUES OF OUR DISTRICT RIGHT AND IN OUR CITY QUITE FRANKLY AND AND I DON'T KNOW I DON'T THINK YOU WERE SAYING THIS BUT DEFERRING TO FEDERAL FUNDS AS A WAY TO IDENTIFY FOCAL POPULATIONS AND SERVING THEM WHICH I DON'T THINK YOU WERE SUGGESTING. YEAH, BUT I GUESS THE QUESTION WOULD BE HOW EXACTLY THROUGH OUR STAFFING MODEL ARE WE HOW WOULD YOU HOW WHAT WOULD YOU POINT TO AS THE EXAMPLES IN OUR STAFFING MODEL THAT DO SUPPORT OUR STUDENTS IN OUR LOCAL POPULATION? >> SO IN A WAY YEAH GO FOR THAT WE DO. >> THIS IS HOW IT WAS IN THE
WAY THAT WE DO IN FACT INCORPORATE NEED IN THE STAFFING MODEL SO TEACHERS IS ONE EXAMPLE WHERE WE JUST USE A STRAIGHT NUMBER RIGHT BASED ON THE CBA BUT WE DO ALLOCATIONS FOR ASSISTANT PRINCIPALS COUNSELORS E.G. TEACHERS, SUPPLEMENTAL TEACHERS. SO THERE WERE 89 ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL TEACHERS OVER AND ABOVE THE CBA WHERE THE U.P. WAS CONSIDERED T TOWNS STUDENT AID WAS INCORPORATED THERE AND ALSO DEDICATED CORE SUBS. WE LOOKED AT STUDENT NEED FOR THAT AS WELL SO THERE WERE ACTUALLY SEVERAL EXAMPLES IN WHICH WE USED NOT EVEN RESTRICTED FUNDS BUT UNRESTRICTED GENERAL FUND MONEY TO SUPPORT STUDENTS. >> I MEAN IS THERE A FORMULA WHERE WE CAN SEE THAT? I THINK THAT WAS WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET AT WAS DOES IT SAY IF YOUR SCHOOL HAS X NUMBER OF U.P. STUDENTS OR X PERCENTAGE YOU'VE GOT AN AP THAT'S IN THERE? YES. THAT WOULD BE REALLY, REALLY HELPFUL TO THINK OVER TO SMALL
YEAH, YEAH. >> BUT I'M SAYING IF WE COULD PULL OUT LETTING NO NO I UNDERSTAND THAT BUT IF IF WE COULD PULL OUT THE THE ONES THAT ACTUALLY ARE DOING THAT I THINK WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL FOR ME JUST SO THAT I BECAUSE THAT THAT HAS BEEN ONE OF THE CRITERIA I'VE BEEN MENTIONING TO THE SUPERINTENDENT. >> I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO SEE IT SO SO COULD WE PLEASE PROVIDE A LEGIBLE VERSION OF THE FORMULA AS WELL AS SO FOR EXAMPLE WE ALSO PROVIDE THE FOCAL SCHOOLS AND THE SCHOOLS WHAT'S THE PHRASE WE USE HERE FOR THE SCHOOLS THAT WE PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CONCENTRATION? NO, NO. THE ACTUAL ALLOCATION OF LIKE FOR THE THE SCHOOLS HERE THAT WE'RE SAYING OR OR TIER WHATEVER THAT WE PROVIDE FULL TIME SUBS, HIGH POTENTIAL SCHOOLS. >> YEAH ALL THAT STILL EXISTS THAT'S IN ADDITION TO YEAH YEAH THAT IS MY MATH AND BOARD I'M I'M JUST GOING TO DO A QUICK TIME CHECK SO WE'VE DONE SOME BASIC BUDGET ITEMS AND THERE'S STILL SOME ITEMS HERE TOO THAT ARE GOING TO BE ENGAGING TO USE YET CAN WE ACTUALLY HAVE A LITTLE GO REALLY QUICKLY AND THEN WE'LL DO SO YEAH.
JUST AS A FOLLOW UP, IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT AREN'T JUST SUPPLEMENTAL TO THE STAFFING MODEL LIKE PAY INCENTIVES TO GO TO HIGH POTENTIAL SCHOOLS OR YOU KNOW STUDENT SUCCESS FUND GRANTS OR THINGS LIKE THAT LIKE OTHER ITEMS THAT WE ALSO SUPPORT OUR EQUITY GOALS THAT WOULD ALSO JUST BE REALLY HELPFUL TO SEE LIKE EVERYTHING IN ONE PLACE NOT JUST LIMITED TO THE TO THIS STAFFING MODEL BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S ALL SORTS OF SUPPLEMENTAL SO THAT WOULD BE YEAH SO THAT WOULD BE IF IF IF STAFF COULD MAKE SURE THAT WE SHARE FOR EXAMPLE THE ALL THE STUDENT SUPPORT GRANTS AND WHAT PEOPLE ARE PURCHASING WITH THEM AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. SO THIS YEAR THE STAFFING MODEL INFORMATION THAT THE SCHOOLS RECEIVED IN THEIR BUDGET TEMPLATES INCLUDED BOTH THE BASE ALLOCATIONS, SUPPLEMENTAL CONCENTRATION ALLOCATIONS AND ALSO ALL RESTRICTED GRANT INFORMATION THAT WE HAD AVAILABLE AT THAT TIME.
THAT WAY SCHOOLS COULD SEE THE FULL SCOPE OF THEIR BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR AND MAKE WELL INFORMED DECISIONS SO WE COULD ABSOLUTELY WE DO A WALKTHROUGH OF THE SCHOOL STAFFING MODEL THAT INCLUDES ALL THE DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCES, THEIR METHODOLOGY AND WHAT THE SCHOOL ALLOCATIONS WERE. IF IF I UNDERSTAND ALEXANDER'S QUESTION AND AT LEAST MY QUESTION IS LIKE COULD WE AS THE BOARD OR HAVE SHARED PUBLICLY JUST LIKE A LIST OF IF YOU'RE AT A SCHOOL WITH GREATER NEED WITH GREATER FOCAL POPULATIONS LIKE A SUMMARY ONE PAGER OF LIKE THIS IS WHAT S.F. USD DOES EXTRA FOR YOUR SCHOOL TO ADDRESS EQUITY CONCERNS WHETHER THAT IS YOU KNOW YOU GET EXTRA STAFF OR YOUR TEACHERS GET PAID EXTRA TO BE INCENTIVIZED TO GO TO THOSE SCHOOLS OR YOU GET EXTRA GRANTS FOR FIELD TRIPS LIKE THERE'S SO MANY THINGS I THINK THAT THE DISTRICT DOES THAT IT WOULD JUST BE HELPFUL TO SEE IN ONE PLACE WHICH IS DIFFERENT I WOULD SAY THAN ARTICULATING A DISTRICT STRATEGY LIKE WHERE THE MONEY COMES FROM AND HOW IT
GETS ALLOCATED. THAT'S ONE THING I AM STILL CURIOUS LIKE YOU KNOW WHAT EXACTLY IS OUR STRATEGY? SO BUT AND I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU AT ALL WHAT WE PUT TOGETHER WAS ALL THESE DIFFERENT PIECES THAT THE DISTRICT HAS ALWAYS DONE AND TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S A SYSTEMIZED SYSTEMATIZED APPROACH. HOWEVER WITH THIS STRATEGY, PARTICULARLY WITH THE PLACE THAT WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW THAT ALSO NEEDS TO COME WITH A LIST OF THINGS THAT WE WANT TO NOT DO ANYMORE SO THAT WE CAN FUND THOSE THINGS. >> YEAH, YEAH. AND I THINK EVEN JUST SEEING IN ONE PLACE WHAT IT IS THAT WE DO AND HOW MUCH THAT COSTS LIKE ON A MAYBE A PER SCHOOL OR PER PUPIL BASIS THAT WE DO EXTRA THAT WILL I THINK HELP THE BOARD UNDERSTAND WHETHER WE WANT TO SAY THESE THINGS ARE GREAT BUT THEY'RE NOT ALIGNED WITH OUR STRATEGY. CAN WE ASK TO REDIRECT THESE RESOURCES INTO A MORE EFFECTIVE STRATEGY? >> THE SUPERINTENDENT YEAH, BUT
WE CAN'T ASK ABOUT HOW WHAT WE'RE DOING ALIGNS WITH STRATEGY UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING. YEAH, THAT'S FINE. SO ROBUST CONVERSATION IT'S WELL I. >> I APPRECIATE IT. UM, IT'S WORTH THE WAIT. I APPRECIATE IT. THIS FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS I APPRECIATED THE AHA IN PARTICULAR OF THE FACT THAT OUR ATTENDANCE OUR ACTUAL ATTENDANCE IS SO MUCH LOWER THAN THE STATE AVERAGE RIGHT TO ME LIKE SEEING THAT WAS AND THE IMPACT I THINK THAT'S THE OTHER PART LIKE A LOT OF THIS UNDERSTANDING THE IMPACT IS IS REALLY KEY UM ONE OF THE AND ONE OF MY QUESTIONS REALLY IS YOU MENTIONED FOR AS AN EXAMPLE SOCIAL WORKERS THAT AREN'T FUNDED THROUGH TITLE ONE ARE NOW FUNDED THROUGH MEDI-CAL RIGHT WHICH MAKES PERFECT SENSE AND HISTORICALLY WE HAVE NOT DONE A VERY GOOD JOB OF COLLECTING ALL THE MEDI-CAL DOLLARS THAT WE COULD BECAUSE OF OUR POOR INTERNAL PRACTICES
. RIGHT. BUT I THINK THAT'S ONE OF MANY AREAS WHERE WE'VE LEFT, YOU KNOW, TWO MIXED METAPHORS IT'S A LOW HANGING FRUIT. AND SO I'M WONDERING ARE THERE OTHER LIKE AS FAR AS MAXIMIZING REVENUES AND WHAT ARE THERE ARE THERE PRACTICES AND I APPRECIATE LIKE FOR EXAMPLE THE YOU KNOW, WE'RE USING CALCULATORS AND SPREADSHEETS AND ALIGNING THE BEST PRACTICES AT THE STATE LEVEL. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE'RE I'M GETTING THERE. I'M GETTING THERE. YEAH. WHAT ARE WE ARE WE DOING ANYTHING FROM A IN OTHER AREAS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY MAXIMIZING REVENUES LIKE I USE THE MEDI-CAL EXAMPLE BUT I KNOW THERE ARE OFTEN STATE GRANTS THAT WE DON'T APPLY FOR. YOU KNOW WE LIKE WE ALMOST WALKED PAST OUR EARLY LITERACY BLOCK GRANTS A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. >> HOW ARE WE HOW ARE WE TRACKING ALL OF THESE POTENTIAL REVENUES AND AND OTHER SOURCES AND MAKING SURE WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING AFTER THEM? AND DO YOU HAVE ANY ADVICE OR STRATEGY THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING THAT WE'RE NOT? >> SO YOU HAVE A FEW SO MEDICAL IS ONE WE'RE ON IT'S NOW BEEN INCORPORATED INTO MY ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT SO AND FOLKS HAVE BEEN CROSS-TRAINED ON IT SO
THAT'S SOMETHING WE WON'T MISS . WE ALSO HAVE SPARC WHICH BRINGS IN A LOT OF RESTRICTED RESOURCES BUT HERE'S AN INTERESTING THING WE WERE JUST MEETING TODAY WITH SPARK BECAUSE ONE OF MY FRUSTRATIONS IS ONE OF SPARKS FRUSTRATIONS IS WE BRING IN THE MONEY AND THEN PEOPLE DON'T SPEND IT AND THEY DON'T SPEND IT ON TIME. SO WE FIND OURSELVES IN A SCRAMBLE TO CHARGE OFF THAT MONEY TO SATISFY THE THE FUNDER IN A TIMELY WAY RATHER THAN EMPHASIZE THAT'S THE MONEY WE SHOULD BE SPENDING FIRST TO MAXIMIZE THOSE RESOURCES BECAUSE FOLKS THAT SPEND IN AN APPROPRIATE MANNER IN A TIMELY MANNER FOR WHAT THE FUNDER WANTS TEND TO GET MORE MONEY. THAT'S THE WAY THAT THAT WORKS. SO AND ANYTHING THAT'S A STATE OPPORTUNITY OUR OUR FISCAL DEPARTMENT WON'T PASS UP NOW SOME OF THOSE ARE ON THE ED SIDE BUT WE JUST NOTIFY THEM AND THEY'RE PRETTY GOOD AT APPLYING FOR THEM HERE. ANY OTHERS FROM STAFF? I DO WANT TO MOVE ON HERE. SO ONE STRATEGY WE USED IN L.A. IS THAT OUR CHILD
DEVELOPMENT FUND HAS A SET ASIDE SPECIFICALLY FOR EARLY EDUCATION STUDENT IDS WITH DISABILITIES. WE ARE NOT REALLY TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THAT AND SO I'M NOT SURE COMMISSIONERS ARE AWARE CHILD DEVELOPMENT FUND IS DONE ON A REIMBURSEMENT BASIS SO THE MORE THAT WE CAN CHARGE TO CHILD DEVELOPMENT FUND IT'S ACTUALLY A WIN WIN FOR EVERYBODY. THEY DON'T LOSE ANYTHING. THEY DON'T LOSE ANYTHING FROM THEIR BUDGETS AND WE ACTUALLY GET MORE MONEY FROM THE STATE. SO THAT'S ANOTHER PROJECT THAT WE HAVE ON OUR Q BECAUSE WE DON'T BELIEVE THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT FUND IS FULLY MAXIMIZING ITS REIMBURSEMENT AND THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY THERE AND ALSO WITH IF I COULD SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE FORWARD SO ONE OF THE RISKS OF DOING THAT MAXIMIZATION IS THAT IT DOES HURT OUR EMPLOYEES BUT BECAUSE WE HAVE THESE THIS UC AGREEMENTS ON THE TABLE WE CAN ACTUALLY BALANCE OUT THE INCREASE IN COST TO THE EMPLOYEE BY UTILIZING THEIR CHILD DEVELOPMENT FUND SO IT
WOULD BE A WASH OUT AND WHAT WE SEE IS THE SAME AND THERE'S A GAP THERE ARE SO THERE IS A THERE'S A WHOLE STRATEGY THERE THAT WE'VE USED IN LOS ANGELES THAT WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO POSSIBLY IMPLEMENTING HERE. >> AND JUST TO TAKE A STEP BACK MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT WE CAN'T WHAT WE SPEND ON SPECIAL EDUCATION THIS YEAR IS THE EXPECTATION OF WHAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO SPEND YEAR OVER YEAR UNLESS WE HAVE A REALLY GOOD EXPLANATION. >> SO THAT'S THAT'S DID I GET THAT RIGHT? OKAY. JUST SO THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE CONCERNED THAT IF WE INCREASE SPECIAL EDUCATION FUNDING THROUGH THIS REVENUE SOURCE THEN WE'VE GOT TO BE CAREFUL YEAR OVER YEAR NOT THAT WAS SUPER HELPFUL THOUGH. >> THANK YOU. YEAH. UM REALLY QUICKLY DID YOU YOU MENTIONED YOU HAD SOMETHING ELSE TOO. YEAH, WE STILL HAVE THAT ACTUALLY THE BULK OF THE PRESENTATION SO WE NEED TO LOOK LIKE THAT SO SO THE FIRST THE THE FIRST DECK WELL NO IT WAS ASKED THAT WE BE MINDFUL OF TIME BECAUSE WE ARE WE DID HAVE A TIME CERTAIN SO WE HAVE A LOT TO GET THROUGH. SO ACTUALLY WHAT WE WENT THROUGH WAS JUST THE PRIMER FOR THE PUBLIC.
WE STILL HAVE A DRAFT SECOND INTERIM WITH SOME DIRECTION NEEDED FROM THE BOARD. >> I KNOW SEVERAL HAVE QUESTIONS INCLUDING MYSELF I EVERYONE OKAY IF WE MOVE ON TO THE SECOND PRESENTATION RIGHT OKAY MAUREEN I'M GOING TO ASK THAT YOU KEEP UP WITH ME BECAUSE I'M GOING TO SKIP AROUND NOW SO WE'RE GOING TO GO TO STRAIGHT TO PAGE NINE. A LOT OF THIS IS STANDARD INFORMATION THAT HOPEFULLY YOU'RE USED TO SEEING FROM ME BY NOW JUST EXPLAINING YET THE ONE THAT'S MARKED DRAFT ON THE FRONT THIS WILL BE POSTED AFTER ANY MODIFICATION THAT WE MAKE TONIGHT. SO I WANT TO LOOK AT PAGE NINE JUST TO ILLUSTRATE A POINT ABOUT ENROLLMENT CHANGING IN YEAR. SO THIS WAS JUST INTERESTING WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT IT BECAUSE WE DO TRACK THIS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR THAT WE HAVE LOST ROUGHLY 68 STUDENTS IN THE DISTRICT THIS YEAR AND IN FROM COUNTY 76 COUNTY IS MORE UNDERSTANDABLE BECAUSE THEY HAVE SOME CONTINUATION PROGRAMS AND DO GRADUATIONS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. SO THAT'S A DECENT EXPLANATION FOR THAT. BUT THE THING THAT'S INTERESTING TO ME THAT STUCK OUT THE REASON THAT WE PUT THIS CHART IN HERE BECAUSE IT IS OUR REVENUES NOTICED THAT WE ARE
DOWN 2% IN OUR ON DUPLICATED PUPIL PERCENTAGE WITHIN THE YEAR WHICH ILLUSTRATES THAT IT IS REALLY OUR FASTEST DECLINING GROUP. IT IS ALSO THE GROUP THAT WE GET THE MOST REVENUE FOR IN THE DISTRICT. RIGHT? SO JUST SOMETHING TO POINT OUT I AM THEN GOING TO SKIP RAPIDLY TO PAGE 11 YOU ARE GOING TO SEE NEXT TUESDAY SOME BIG SWINGS IN THE BUDGET. A LOT OF THOSE SWINGS ARE THE RESULT OF WORK THAT'S BEEN ONGOING IN THE BUDGET OFFICE AS WE CONTINUE TO UNVEIL THE EFFICIENCIES THAT WE CAN MAKE IN THE BUDGET AS WELL AS THE TA . SO PAGE 11 JUST ILLUSTRATES FOR THE BOARD THAT WE HAVE GOTTEN THE RESTRICTED SIDE OF THE GENERAL FUND FOR THIS YEAR. THE PROJECTED DEFICIT IS NOW DOWN TO $44 MILLION IF YOU'LL REMEMBER WAY BACK WHEN IT STARTED OUT AT 55. SO WE'VE MANAGED TO IMPROVE THAT. WE DO THAT BY TAKING SAVINGS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. THE MAJORITY OF THE SAVINGS THAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE IS THAT SALARY OR SALARY AND BENEFITS FROM POSITIONS THAT ARE VACANT THROUGHOUT THE RESTRICTED SIDE.
WE TAKE THOSE SAVINGS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR THAT YIELD SAVINGS AND IT INCREASES FUND BALANCE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR WHICH IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT TO KEEPING THE DISTRICT STABLE . >> AND THE NEXT PAGE IS THE THREE YEAR VIEW AND ACTUALLY WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IS A FOUR YEAR VIEW OF THE RESTRICTED FUND AND I DID THAT VERY INTENTIONALLY WITH WITH THE STAFF THAT'S JOINING US TONIGHT AND THEIR STAFF. SO WE HAVE THE CURRENT YEAR WHICH YOU'LL SEE AT SECOND INTERIM SO OUR RESTRICTED SIDE IS NOW AGAIN DOWN TO A $44 MILLION DEFICIT AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S GROWING DRAMATICALLY ON THE RESTRICTED SIDE EVERY YEAR THIS IS QUITE INTENTIONAL. SO WE HAVE COMPLETED OUR WORK IN MOVING EXPENSES THAT ARE ELIGIBLE AND APPROPRIATE TO BE BUDGETED ON THE RESTRICTED SIDE TO THE RESTRICTED SIDE RATHER THAN LEAVING THEM ON THE UNRESTRICTED SIDE. SO WE'VE DONE A LARGE SHIFT OF EXPENSES FROM UNRESTRICTED TO RESTRICTED STATE AND LOCAL REVENUES ARE INCREASING A LITTLE BIT. YOU CAN SEE SOME EFFICIENCIES THAT WE MAKE BUT EXPENDITURE GROWTH IS LARGELY REFLECTIVE OF
THE SETTLEMENTS THAT WE'VE COME TO OR THE TENTATIVE SETTLEMENTS WE'VE COME TO WITH WITH THE MAJORITY NOW OF OUR BARGAINING UNITS. HOWEVER YOU CAN SEE THAT IN THE FOURTH YEAR AND THE REASON THAT WE PUT 2829 THERE IS AN ADOPTED BUDGET THAT WILL BE YOUR NEW THIRD YEAR, RIGHT? SO THAT IS THE CURRENT PROJECTION. DO WE HOPE TO TAKE THAT UP BY THE THE BUDGETED OPTION? YES. BUT AT THIS POINT THAT'S WHAT IT IS. SO NOTICE THAT THERE WAS ENOUGH OF A FUND BALANCE IN THE RESTRICTED SIDE THAT IF EVERYBODY SPENDS ALL OF THEIR BUDGET THAT WE WILL BE OUT OF FUND BALANCE IN THE RESTRICTED SIDE AT ADOPTED BUDGET IT'LL BE THE SECOND YEAR. OKAY SO THAT'S SOMETHING IMPORTANT TO PAY ATTENTION TO A RULE OF THUMB ON THE RESTRICTED SIDE OF THE BUDGET ANYTHING THAT IS BUDGETED AND PAID SPENT ON THE RESTRICTED SIDE IF WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY THERE THAT MONEY AND THOSE EXPENDITURES GO TO THE UNREACHED TICKETED SIDE WHICH IS WHY YOU NEVER WANT TO HAVE YOUR RESTRICTED SIDE RUN OUT OF FUND BALANCE. OKAY. SO I'M JUST GOING TO SHIFT VERY QUICKLY TO THE UNRESTRICTED SIDE AND THIS IS WHERE YOU'RE
GOING TO SAY WHOA, YOU GUYS REALLY MOVE THINGS AROUND IN THE BUDGET? YES, WE ARE DONE MOVING THINGS AROUND IN THE BUDGET BUT YOU CAN SAY THAT YOU SEE THAT EVEN WITH THE SIGNIFICANT COST OF OUR TOS, THE UNRESTRICTED GENERAL FUND WE'VE BEEN ABLE IN THE CURRENT YEAR TO CONTINUE TO ALSO REDUCE THE DEFICIT BY TAKING SAVINGS IN YEAR THIS MEANS THAT WE ARE ACTIVELY MANAGING THE BUDGET AND MAKING SURE IT'S IS ACCURATE AT ANY POINT IN TIME THAT WE CAN MAKE IT SO THE PROJECTED DEFICIT HAS GONE DOWN. WHAT I WANT THE BOARD TO PAY ATTENTION TO AND ON SLIDE 13 IS THE COMPONENTS AFTER F SO YOU'RE ENDING FUND BALANCE PROJECTION IS CURRENTLY AT 60.2 MILLION AND THEN YOU HAVE THE TWO PORTIONS THAT REALLY CAN'T BE SPENT THAT STORES INVENTORY AND THAT 2% RESERVE FOR ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY. NOTICE THAT WE'VE STARTED PUTTING IN WHAT WE'RE CALLING OPEN AGREEMENT ASSUMPTION. WHAT THE HECK DOES THAT MEAN? CHRIS WHAT ARE YOU DOING RIGHT? WE ARE PUTTING IN AN ASSUMPTION THE BOARD HAS DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE AND WE HAVE A BUDGET
FUNCTION CALLED AN ASSIGNMENT AND THIS IS AN ASSIGNMENT FOR THE BOARD TO ANTICIPATE THAT THE AGREEMENTS THAT WE STILL HAVE OPEN WITH BARGAINING AGREEMENTS THIS IS OUR CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE OF HOW MUCH WE PLAN ON SPENDING THIS YEAR ONCE WE CLOSE THOSE AGREEMENTS BECAUSE WE'RE LATE ENOUGH IN THE YEAR THAT I NEED TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA. SO THAT IS OUR BEST. I TOLD YOU WE DON'T LIKE DOING MAGIC EIGHT BALL BUT IT HAS A LOT OF ASSUMPTIONS IN THERE. THERE IS A MATHEMATICAL FORMULA THAT'S OUR THAT'S OUR ASSUMPTION FOR THOSE AGREEMENTS THAT ARE STILL OPEN YOU CAN SEE THAT THE LOCAL RESERVE FUND 17 IS STILL AT THE 8% FROM WHEN THE BOARD CREATED IT, CREATED IT AND LEAVING AT THE END OF THIS YEAR A PROJECTED 23.6 MILLION IN UNASSIGNED UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE ON THE UNRESTRICTED SIDE. NOW OF COURSE WE HOPE TO OUTPERFORM LINE E WE KNOW EVERYBODY DOESN'T SPEND ALL OF THEIR MONEY AND SO HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET A LITTLE BIT MORE ADDED TO FUND BALANCE WHEN WE DO FISCAL CLOSE IN SEPTEMBER. SO FROM THERE I WANT TO BRING
YOU TO THE THE BIG SLIDE, THE MULTI-YEAR PROJECTION AND THIS IS BUILDING TO A LITTLE BIT OF A CRESCENDO CAUSE I NEED SOME MORE DIRECTION, RIGHT? >> SO SLIDE 14 LAID OUT THE SAME WAY AS JUST THE SINGLE YEAR PROJECTION I NOW HAVE THE CURRENT YEAR PLUS TWO WHICH BRINGS US OUT TO 2728 BUT I PUT 2829 IN HERE BECAUSE WHAT IT SHOWS YOU IS YOUR THIRD YEAR WHEN WE GO TO ADOPTION. >> SO WHAT I WANT TO POINT OUT IS THAT THE SHORTFALL EVEN WITH THE TAS WE HAVE NOW GOTTEN TO BE MOSTLY ON THE RESTRICTED SIDE. WE HAVE MAXIMIZED ALL OF YOUR FUNDING AND THIS IS A STILL A SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURAL DEFICIT. WE'VE ACTUALLY INCREASED IT IN THE OUT YEARS AT SOME POINT. HOWEVER ENDING FUND BALANCE UH YOU'LL SEE IT GOING UP. WHY DOES ENDING FUND BALANCE GO UP? BECAUSE IT SHOWS YOU DRAWING OUT OF YOUR LOCAL RESERVE TO PAY THAT BILL, RIGHT? SO LET'S GO THROUGH THE COMPONENTS OF THAT ENDING FUND BALANCE STORES AND THE RESERVE THE 2% STATUTORY RESERVE ARE NON SPENDABLE BUT THEY'RE REQUIRED BY LAW THAT WE HAVE
THEM THEIR OPEN AGREEMENT ASSUMPTION THIS IS THE SAME AS THE PRIOR PAGE BUT I'M SHOWING IT OVER MULTIPLE YEARS NOW I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU A CAVEAT HERE BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY, REALLY STRANGE SO YOU NEED TO BE AWARE OF IT WHEN WE DO AN ASSIGNMENT IN THE BUDGETARY SYSTEM WHICH IS A BUDGETARY TOOL THAT WE CAN USE UNTIL THE ASSIGNMENT IS RESOLVED IT COMPOUNDS ON ITSELF . SO THE 27.8 MILLION IN YEAR TWO INCLUDES THE 7.1 MILLION FROM YEAR ONE. SO UNTIL WE RESOLVE THE ASSIGNMENT IT CONTINUES TO ACCUMULATE THERE AND IT STARTS TO DOUBLE COUNT SO THAT NUMBER IS LARGER THAN IT WOULD BE AS WE PAY IT YEAR BY YEAR. BUT UNTIL IT RESOLVES THAT'S THE WAY THAT THE THAT THE STATE ACCOUNTS FOR IT SO THAT SO THAT 57,000,057.6 MILLION IN THE YEAR THREE INCLUDES THE 27.8 AND THE 7.1 FROM THE FIRST TO RIGHT BECAUSE IT CONTINUES TO ACCRUE UNTIL I RESOLVE THAT ASSIGNMENT IN THE SYSTEM. >> DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO EVERYBODY? YES.
SO WHEN WE RESOLVE IT SO FOR EXAMPLE IF WE RESOLVE THE 7.1 MILLION CORRECT THIS YEAR THEN NEXT YEAR'S NUMBER WILL CHANGE TO 20 POINT CORRECT? >> CORRECT. OKAY. BUT IT'LL ALSO RESOLVE ALL THE WAY ACROSS BECAUSE THEN WE'LL KNOW THE ACTUAL FINAL FACTORS AND SO THAT ASSIGNMENT WILL GO AWAY AND IT'LL JUST BECOME AN EXPENDITURE. AND SO WHAT YOU'LL SEE ONLINE IS YOUR SHORTFALL FOR THE DISTRICT WILL INCREASE BY WHATEVER. ONCE WE CLOSE THOSE AGREEMENTS ,WHATEVER THE AMOUNT IS WILL THEN GO UP TO THE EXPENSES WHICH WILL INCREASE OUR DEFICIT ACROSS THE BOARD. BUT I WANTED TO PUT SOMETHING IN HERE AS A PLACEHOLDER BECAUSE AS THE BOARD HAS ASKED ME BEFORE IT'S REALLY TOUGH FOR US TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THERE'S A BIG UNRESOLVED EXPENSE THAT WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT FOR THE YEAR. THE ASSIGNMENT IS THE ONLY FUNCTION I HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT IT'S NOT AN ELEGANT ONE BUT IT KEEPS IT ON OUR MIND. RIGHT. BUT I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN
HOW THAT WORKS. >> YEP. SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT OUR LOCAL RESERVE FUND 17 BALANCE WANTS THESE ASSIGNMENTS ASSUMING THAT THAT OPEN AGREEMENT ASSUMPTION ASSIGNMENTS ARE ACTUALLY ASSIGNED, DOES THAT MEAN THAT THAT LOCAL RESERVE BALANCE NUMBER WILL GO UP OR THAT WE WILL ACTUALLY HAVE LESS MONEY? THAT'S THE HOPE. YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. YEAH. SO DEFICIT WILL BE BIGGER BUT SO WILL OUR ENDING RESERVE CASH BALANCE, CORRECT? CORRECT. BECAUSE WE WON'T BE COUNTING IT CUMULATIVELY ON THAT LINE. >> RIGHT. HOWEVER WHAT THIS ALSO SHOWS AND EVEN TAKING AND EVEN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT VICE PRESIDENT HULING, WHAT YOU'RE RAISING IS THAT WHEN WE GO TO ADOPT THE TAS AND SECOND INTERIM THE DISTRICT IS TECHNICALLY TECHNICALLY ON PAPER, RIGHT IN POSITIVE TERRITORY AGAIN BUT WE WILL BE ADVANCING A QUALIFIED CERTIFICATION BECAUSE WHEN WE ADOPT A FEW MONTHS
LATER WE'LL BE BACK IN NEGATIVE AND SO THAT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD THAT WE'RE GOING UP AND DOWN IN IN POSITION. SO THE BOARD'S NEXT CHANCE TO CHANGE CERTIFICATION THE ONLY TIMES YOU CAN CHANGE CERTIFICATION ARE DURING FIRST AND SECOND INTERIM. SO THE NEXT OPPORTUNITY AFTER NEXT WEEK WILL COME IN DECEMBER. THAT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER BECAUSE I'M GOING TO BRING YOU THROUGH THE EVER SO CONTROVERSIAL AS FSP OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE BAKED IN HERE BECAUSE I NEED DIRECTION FROM THE BOARD AT EXACTLY WHICH ONE THEY WANT TO APPEAR NEXT WEEK BECAUSE WE CAN'T GO AND WE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE STATE THAT WE CANNOT GO ANOTHER BUDGET PERIOD WITHOUT PASSING ONE. >> OKAY. SO I'M GOING TO REMIND THE BOARD THE NEXT PAGE IS THE FISCAL STABILIZATION PLAN DESCRIPTION THE FISCAL STABILIZATION PLAN IS IS A PART OF THE INTERIM REPORT. IT'S REQUIRED BY LAW WHEN WE'RE IN NEGATIVE OR QUALIFIED CERTIFICATION WHICH OF COURSE WE STILL ARE. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY SAW BUT ON THE STATE WEBSITE THEY FINALLY MOVED US TO QUALIFIED SO IT'S OFFICIAL IT PROVIDES A
PLAN. SO THE FSP PROVIDES A PLAN TO REDUCE SPENDING TO BALANCE THE BUDGET ON THE UNRESTRICTED SIDE OF THE GENERAL FUND. NOW IT GETS A LITTLE COMPLICATED BECAUSE IN THAT THIRD YEAR AT ADOPTION ANYTHING THAT'S NEGATIVE ON THE RESTRICTED SIDE ALSO HAS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR ON THE UNRESTRICTED SIDE BECAUSE THE RESERVES WILL BE GONE AT THAT POINT. OKAY. THAT'S WHY I'M STARTING TO PUT THAT FOURTH YEAR OUT THERE BECAUSE THAT'S A LOT TO WRAP OUR HEADS AROUND. >> WE HAVE UPDATED THE PLAN MEANING THE FISCAL STABILIZATION PLAN FOR SECOND INTERIM TO REFLECT REDUCTIONS UNDERWAY AS A PART OF OUR BUDGET DEVELOPMENT. THERE'S A LIST OF THOSE THERE NOW I'M GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH THOSE PORTIONS RIGHT? SO ON PAGE 16, THESE TWO ITEMS ARE WHAT WE ARE ALREADY DOING AND WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE UNDERWAY AND THESE TWO FIGURES ITEMS NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO ARE ALREADY ALREADY IN THE PRIOR PAGES MULTI-YEAR PROJECTION. SO ONCE WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT WE'RE OPERATIONALIZING WE ARE ALLOWED TO INCLUDE THOSE REDUCTIONS IN COSTS IN OUR
MULTI-YEAR PROJECTION WHICH MAKES OUR FISCAL STANDING BETTER. SO THE TWO THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE NYP ALIGNING STAFFING WITH PROJECTED ENROLLMENT SO FAR WE'VE SHIFTED $17 MILLION IN EXPENSE FROM THE UNRESTRICTED TO THE RESTRICTED SIDE AND THEN THE OTHER 3 MILLION IS FROM SOME SLIGHT REDUCTIONS IN STAFF TRIMMING AROUND THE EDGES AS WELL AS THE PEAKS. NUMBER TWO THE CENTRAL OFFICE REDUCTIONS WE'RE STILL ON TARGET FOR THAT FOR NEXT YEAR. THE PLACEHOLDER THAT WE'RE USING BEFORE OF 14.6 WE ACTUALLY NOW HAVE A MUCH MORE EXACT NUMBER FOR WHAT PEOPLE HAVE TURNED IN FOR THEIR BUDGET DEVELOPMENT FROM CENTRAL OFFICES. SO THAT WOULD BE 15.264. >> SO THOSE TWO NUMBERS ARE INCLUDED. >> NOW I'M GOING TO MOVE ON TO NUMBERS THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY INCLUDED IN THAT. WE NEED BOARD DISCUSSION OR FEEDBACK ABOUT GO AHEAD. JUST FOR ITEM TWO FOR REDUCED POSITIONS AND CONTRACT SERVICES IS PART OF THAT CONTRACT SERVICES PORTION
ANTICIPATED SAVINGS BASED ON THE CONTRACTING TO THE WE THAT IS PART OF THE AGREEMENT NOW THAT IS ACTUALLY ALL CONTRACTORS THAT I'VE ELIMINATED SINCE I'VE GOTTEN HERE. I'VE CLEANED A LOT OF CONTRACTED SERVICES OUT SHORT AND LONG TERM ONES AND INSISTED THAT WE TRAIN STAFF TO DO THAT WORK WHICH IS WHAT STAFF IS SUPPOSED TO DO. SO MOST OF THAT SAVINGS IS FROM ACTUALLY MY DEPARTMENT WHICH HOLDS THE DISTRICT CONTRACTS FOR CONTRACTING THINGS OUT AND NOW WE STILL HAVE SOME CONTRACTORS THAT ARE GOING TO CONTINUE THROUGH THE REST OF THIS YEAR AND SOME INTO NEXT YEAR BECAUSE WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT AREAS THAT WE NEED SIGNIFICANT TRAINING ON BUT FAR FEWER THAN I THINK WHAT THE DISTRICT HAS BEEN USED TO IN THE PAST. RIGHT. SO ALL OF THOSE ACTUALLY CAME OUT OF THE BUSINESS OFFICE WHO HELD THOSE CONTRACTS FOR THE DISTRICT. THANK YOU AND I APPRECIATE DELETING THAT BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THERE'S STILL SOMETIMES PUBLIC NARRATIVES ABOUT LIKE WELL IF WE JUST CUT THE CENTRAL OFFICE IT'S BLOATED AND IF WE
JUST REDUCE CONTRACTING BUT PEOPLE SOMETIMES MISS THAT. WE MADE MASSIVE CUTS TO THE CENTRAL OFFICE LAST YEAR AND OUR NUMBERS ARE ACTUALLY BELOW AVERAGE NOW EVEN INCLUDING OUR ACCOUNTING OFFICE OR THAT YOU ARE ACTUALLY ALREADY CUTTING CONTRACTING. >> SO IT'S JUST GREAT TO DELIGHT THAT AND I THINK THERE'S MORE THAT WE CAN DO BUT WE ARE TRIMMING THINGS DOWN. I THINK THE BOARD NEEDS TO BE PREPARED PREPARED FOR BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS THE MOST PALATABLE PLACE TO CUT FROM RESPONSE TIMES ARE GOING TO GET LONGER ACROSS THE BOARD. THERE'S NOT MUCH MORE TO CUT PARTICULARLY IN THE OPERATIONS SIDE. WE'RE PRETTY MUCH GOING TO THE BONE THIS YEAR. JUST BE AWARE AT SOME POINT THERE'S I'VE SAID THE BOARD BE PREPARED FOR A TIME THAT THERE'S NOTHING MUCH LEFT TO CUT IN CERTAIN AREAS. SO WE'RE WE ARE GOING TO GET THAT TO THAT PLACE WITHIN THIS THREE YEAR BUDGET CYCLE. SO PAGE 17 NOT YET INCLUDED IN THE MULTIYEAR PROJECTIONS NUMBER ONE LINE SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCES WITH IEPS.
THIS HAS TO DO WITH DATA COLLECTION AND MAKING SURE THAT DATA ALIGNS WITH THINGS THAT WE ARE BOTH CONTRACTING OUT FOR OUR N P S IS A NON PUBLIC SERVICE I'M SORRY MPA'S NONPUBLIC AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES AS WELL AS MAKING SURE THAT OUR STAFFING AND OUR VACANT POSITIONS ARE BOOKED CORRECTLY AND NOT DOUBLE BOOKED WHICH WE STILL THINK IS GOING ON SOME OF THOSE THINGS B AS A RESULT OF THE TA BECAUSE THE UNION IS AWARE OF THAT TOO ARE ACTUALLY COMING OVER TO MY SIDE OF THE HOUSE BECAUSE THEY JUST AREN'T BEING DOCUMENTED AND TRACKED WELL AND THAT MAKES SENSE THAT SPECIALISTS DON'T EXIST ON THE ON THE NON OPERATIONAL SIDE OF THE HOUSE. SO WE ESTIMATE THAT THAT SAVINGS OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS BEING ABOUT $6 MILLION FOR THE DISTRICT AND THEN WE ARE PROPOSING THAT IN FISCAL YEAR 28 WE CONTINUE SOME CENTRAL OFFICE REDUCTIONS BOTH IN BUT MOSTLY FOCUSED ON THE SUPPLIES AND CONTRACT AREAS IF I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THIS DO YOU WANT ME TO HOLD IT AND WAIT TILL THE END OR THAT'S UP TO YOU. >> THAT'S WHAT WE CARE.
OKAY. OKAY. AND THEN THERE'S A THIRD PAGE OF PROPOSED FCP ITEMS ALSO NOT ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE IN THE MULTI YEAR PROJECTION. SOME OF THEM ARE PRETTY SPECIFIC OTHERS STILL UNDER DEVELOPMENT NUMBER ONE PORTFOLIO OF PROGRAMS AND SITE CONSOLIDATIONS. THIS IS SOMETHING THE BOARD HAS TALKED ABOUT BEFORE. IT'S BEEN IN PREVIOUS FS P'S THE ACTUAL SAVINGS IS NOMINAL BUT IT IS STILL A SAVINGS FOR THE DISTRICT. SO WE WE PUT IT IN THERE. NUMBER TWO ALIGN STAFFING WITH PROJECTED ENROLLMENT EVERY YEAR NOT TO BEAT ON A DEAD HORSE BUT ONCE WE START THE PROCESS WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE ALIGNING OUR STAFF ESPECIALLY SINCE WE ARE DECLINING ENROLLMENT SCHOOL DISTRICT. THIS INCLUDES IMPROVED BUDGET CONTROLS, SHIFTING THINGS TO RESTRICTED BASED AVAILABILITY AND FUND BALANCE AS WELL AS POTENTIALLY REDUCING VOCAL STUDENT ALLOCATION IN THE FUTURE IF WE CONTINUE TO STRUGGLE FINANCIALLY. NUMBER THREE ALIGN SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCES WITH IEPS. THIS IS MORE SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE DOUBLE BUDGETING OF POSITIONS AND CONTRACT SERVICES.
SO THIS IS SORT OF A TECHNICAL ISSUE BUT WHEN YOU HAVE A CONTRACT TO PROVIDE A SERVICE TO A CHILD THAT NEEDS IT IN THEIR IEP, THAT'S GREAT AND IT'S REQUIRED AND WE HAVE TO DO IT. HOWEVER, WE SHOULDN'T ALSO BE BUDGETING FOR A FULL TIME PERSON AT THE SAME TIME TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES. IT'S EITHER ONE OR THE OTHER SO THE WAY MOST DISTRICTS DO THAT IS THEY BUDGET FOR THE PEOPLE THAT THEY NEED AND THEN IF THEY CAN'T FIND THE PERSON THEY GET A CONTRACT SERVICE AND THEN THEY TAKE THE MONEY FROM THE SALARY AND BENEFITS THAT'S BEEN BUDGETED FOR THE PERSON THEY COULDN'T FIND AND THEY PAY THE CONTRACT. WE'RE CURRENTLY BUDGETING BOTH IN SOME CASES, RIGHT? SO AGAIN THAT'S JUST THAT'S NOT OUT OF ANY INTENT TO DO SOMETHING BAD. IT'S JUST THAT THE SPECIALISTS THAT DO THAT KIND OF WORK ARE NOT THE ONES HANDLING IT. SO THAT'S TRANSITIONING OVER TO PROCUREMENT AND TO THE DATA DEPARTMENTS IN MY DEPARTMENT SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THEY'RE ALIGNED AND WE'RE NOT DOUBLE COUNTING FOR RESOURCES. CENTRAL OFFICE REDUCTIONS CONTINUED POSITIONS IN CONTRACT SERVICES AND THE RECONCILIATION OF AGED VACANCIES.
SO WE ARE SEEING PARTICULARLY AS THE BOARD SAID AN APPEALS PROCESS IS NOT NECESSARILY THE MOST ELEGANT AT SOME POINT IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT'S A BIT MORE FORMULAIC AND NOT JUST GRANT APPEALS BECAUSE THOSE ARE STILL YOU KNOW, A LITTLE SQUISHY WHEN IT COMES TO THE RATIONALE OF WHY AND THE PREDICTABILITY FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. SO REMEMBER AND FSP CHANGES AT THE FIRST INTERIM THE SECOND INTERIM AND BUDGET ADOPTION AND IT HAS TO BE DYNAMIC TO ADDRESS THE SHORTFALL IN THE CURRENT PLUS TWO YEARS. SO IT ALWAYS SHOULD CHANGE AND THE NUMBERS SHOULD CHANGE BASED ON HOW MUCH WE NEED TO CUT TO GET BACK TO STABILITY. RIGHT. THE FSP FOR ALL THREE PAGES SO FOR ALL THREE PAGES ILLUSTRATES WHAT IT WOULD TAKE IN THE CURRENT NYP THAT I PUT IN FRONT OF YOU TONIGHT TO GET YOU BACK TO A POTENTIAL POSITIVE CERTIFICATE FOR DECEMBER OF NEXT YEAR WHICH IS THE NEXT TIME THAT WE WILL BE CERTIFYING OUR BUDGET, RIGHT? IF THE BOARD SAYS WE AREN'T THAT EAGER RIGHT THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF NEEDS TO
KNOW SO THAT WE PUT IN SOMETHING LESSER. BUT KEEP IN MIND IT'S JUST AS ELIOT SAID LAST TIME THIS IS JUST A PLAN THAT YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE. IT CAN CHANGE BASED ON THE FISCAL STATUS. I WILL TELL YOU THAT BOTH MYSELF AND I HATE CALLING YOU STAFF I JUST DON'T LIKE CALLING IT NAIRU AND JENNIFER AND DANIEL AND ALL OF OUR STAFF MEMBERS AND FRIENDS. WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK THE BUDGET HARD TO MAKE THE MOST SAVINGS OUT OF IT AS WE CAN EVERY YEAR AND IMPROVE YOUR FISCAL STANDING. BUT WE DO HAVE TO SUBMIT A PLAN WITH THE SECOND INTERIM. SO THAT'S THE PART THAT WE NEED INPUT ON THIS IS IT IS NOT THE TIME NOW IS THE TIME THAT I WOULD CLARIFY QUESTION AND THEN OKAY SO I'LL START WITH MY CLARIFYING QUESTION ON SLIDE 17 AND 18 ABOUT ALIGNING SPECIAL EDUCATION RESOURCES WITH APS AND WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION BEFORE YOU KNOW THIS HAS COME UP AT OTHER BUDGET SESSIONS BUT THE TENSION I SEE IN THIS IS YOU KNOW IN AN IEP MEETING AND IT'S BY ED CODE YOU KNOW THE THE SERVICES THAT A STUDENT
NEEDS ARE DETERMINED BY THE IEP TEAM NOT US BUREAUCRATS HERE IN THIS ROOM RIGHT? SO I WANT TO MAKE THAT BLATANTLY CLEAR FIRST AND FOREMOST YOU'RE TOTALLY WRONG BECAUSE I HATE IF CHRIS IS CALLING THEM STAFF I'M CALLING YOU GUYS BUREAUCRATS. >> OKAY SO STAFF FOR ME. OKAY. THERE YOU GO. ALL RIGHT, WE'RE POLITICIANS. EVERYONE OKAY? ALL RIGHT. CALL YOURSELVES WHAT YOU WANT, OKAY? REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE'RE ALL GOING TO CALL OURSELVES IN THE ROOM, WE ARE NOT THE ONES THAT DECIDE WITH THE SERVICES THAT A STUDENT NEEDS IN THEIR IEP. SO I WOULD JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT. BUT THE TENSION THEN BECOMES ESPECIALLY WITH NEW SERVICES IF WE DON'T HAVE A PERSON WHO CAN DO THAT WE HIRE A CONTRACTOR FOR AT THE SAME TIME AS WE GENERALLY WILL OPEN A POSITION AND TRY TO HIRE INTERNALLY SO I BELIEVE THAT HAS HISTORICALLY LED TO THE DOUBLE BUDGETING AND ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE JUST AGREED WITH OUR UNION THAT WE WANT TO REDUCE OUR RELIANCE ON CONTRACTORS. I GUESS I JUST WANT TO
UNDERSTAND HERE LIKE I WOULD HOPE THAT THE GOAL WOULD BE TO KEEP MORE INTERNAL POSITIONS OPEN LIKE HOW HOW IS THAT GOING TO GET NEARER? I SEE YOU'RE CHOMPING AT THE BIT. HELP ME UNDERSTAND HOW WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HIRE FOR MUCH NEEDED POSITIONS. I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THAT WORKS ON THE BOOKS. YEAH. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALLOWING US TO CLARIFY. >> SO THE INTENT HERE IS TO ACTUALLY REDUCE THE CONTRACT BUDGET BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN IF YOU WE'VE RECEIVED COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS THE CONTRACT BUDGET HAS BEEN EXPLODING YEAR AFTER YEAR AND SO WE WERE WE NEED TO FULFILL OUR END OF THE YEAR AGREEMENT WHICH ASKS US TO RENEGOTIATE CONTRACTS, RENEGOTIATE THE PRICING RATE, FIND THOSE POSITIONS AND SO THERE ARE SOME THAT THAT IS THE INTENT OF THIS PLAN IS THAT WE HAVE LIKE FIVE OR 6 OR 7 STEPS TO GO BEFORE WE CAN ACTUALLY PULL BACK THAT CONTRACT BUDGET AND MAKE SURE THOSE CONTRACTORS ARE IN OUR INCUMBENTS OF THE
DISTRICT AND FILL THOSE POSITIONS SO THAT THAT IS OUR INTENT. THAT IS THE PLAN HERE. I MEAN IT'S NOT SPELLED OUT STEP BY STEP BUT THE INTENT HERE IS TO REDUCE 6 MILLION IN CONTRACTS AND HAVE THOSE CONTRACTORS FELT DISTRICT POSITION SO THAT THOSE THERE'S NO INTERRUPTION IN SERVICE. THAT IS THAT IS THE INTENT HERE. SO WE ARE FULLY COGNIZANT OF THE FACT THAT IF THE IEP REQUIRES THE SERVICE WE HAVE TO PROVIDE THAT SERVICE REGARDLESS OF AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS. THE INTENT HERE IS TO REDUCE THE CONTRACT BUDGET AND ALSO COMPLY WITH US REQUEST IN THE CONTRACT. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE AND I KNOW ONE OF THE THINGS IT'S ON THE NEXT AGENDA IS POSITION CONTROL POLICY, RIGHT? AND I ACTUALLY ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS AROUND THAT LIKE CHILD FINE AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN CASE ANYONE HAD ANY LIKES. THAT WAS ONE BUT SO YEAH I AND SOME OF MY QUESTIONS WERE WHAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO US SO FAR HAS BEEN KIND OF VAGUE.
SO IF THERE ARE POLICIES, PROCEDURES OR WAYS WE'RE GOING TO GO ABOUT THIS, ARE ARE THOSE PUBLIC FACING YET OR LIKE KNOW WE WE HAVE TO WORK WITH COLLEAGUES IN DEVELOPING ALL THIS STUFF SO WE HAVE TO MEET WITH OUR SPECIAL ED PARTNERS, OUR PROCUREMENT STAFF AND PUT TOGETHER A PLAN IN ORDER TO SPELL OUT ALL THE STOPS HERE. BUT I WE JUST WANT TO BE VERY TRANSPARENT ABOUT WHAT IS OUR END GOAL. SO OUR END GOAL IS TO REDUCE CONTRACTORS AND BRING THAT STAFF ON BOARD THEM INTO THE DISTRICT AND HAVE THEM BECOME DISTRICT EMPLOYEES SO THAT WE'RE NOT DOUBLE BUDGETING FOR BOTH POSITIONS AND CONTRACTS. THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY INTERRUPTION IN SERVICE TO STUDENTS WHATSOEVER. SO THAT'S THAT'S OUR INTENT. I APPRECIATE THAT AND I ESPECIALLY APPRECIATE THE STUDENT FOCUS OF IT. I GUESS I JUST MY REAL CONCERN IS THE TIMELINE OF THAT YOU KNOW, IN THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT YOU SAY AND OUR ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. YEAH. SO I GUESS THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT
THE $6 MILLION THAT IS THAT IN THE 2728 SCHOOL YEAR WE'LL FINALLY BE ABLE TO REALIZE THAT AND WE'RE NOT EXPECTING YEAH THAT'S OUR DEADLINE SO BUT WE'RE GOING TO START RIGHT AWAY AS SOON AS WE'RE DONE WITH SECOND TERM. THAT'S A MEETING THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A STUDENT WITH OUR COLLEAGUES AND GET THE PLAN IN PLACE IN ORDER TO START THAT. SO IT MAY ACTUALLY BE EARLIER THAN JULY 1ST. SO I HOPE THAT MAYBE 6 OR 8 MONTHS FOR NOW I HAVE BETTER NEWS FOR YOU THAT WE'VE ALREADY DONE ALL THIS WORK BUT THERE ARE SEVERAL PROCEDURES THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH. >> I DO ASSUME THAT RENEGOTIATING THOSE CONTRACTS AND BRINGING THEM BACK TO BOARD IS GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME SO THAT THERE'S A RUNWAY LEAD TIME THERE THAT IS REQUIRED FOR THIS TO GO INTO EFFECT. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION I COULD SHARE. >> THANK YOU. I THIS MIGHT BE A VERY SILLY QUESTION. SLIDE 16 VERSUS SLIDE 18. >> THERE'S A CENTRAL OFFICE REDUCTIONS AT 15,000,015 MILLION PLUS AND THEN THERE'S
THE SAME FISCAL YEAR 2728 ON PAGE 18 LINE FOUR IS 18 PLUS WHAT'S IN SO SO YEAH I WOULD SAY IT'S WELL 17 IS IN THE CONTEXT OF OH YEAH IT'S ON ALL THREE. YEAH WELL TELL ME ABOUT WHY THOSE NUMBERS ARE DIFFERENT. I CAN HELP ANSWER THAT QUESTION SO IT'S OKAY. SO THE FIRST SLIDE IS CURRENT OFFICE MEASURES UNDERWAY AND THAT 15 MILLION IS FOR THE IS TO BE IMPLEMENTED THIS COMING JULY 1ST 2026 SO IT'S FOUR WHERE IT THIS FISCAL YEAR 27 ONGOING THAT MEANS JULY 1ST 2026 SO WE'VE ALREADY WORKED WITH COLLEAGUES IN VARIOUS DIVISIONS THEY'VE ALREADY PRESENTED ITEMS FOR REDUCTION ABOUT HALF OF THIS I IF I RECALL OFF THE TOP OF HAND IS ACTUALLY CONTRACTS WITHIN CENTRAL OFFICE. >> SO THIS THIS REFLECTS THE 10% REDUCTION THAT WE'VE ALREADY BAKED INTO THAT MAP THAT WE'RE USING TO HELP OFFSET THE COST OF OUR AGREEMENT. AND TO YOU KNOW, KEEP US ON A SUSTAINABLE PATH SO THAT THAT'S STEP ONE. >> SO THE THE WHAT I INTERNALLY
WHAT WE CALL THE BABY FSP IS THE 7.9 MILLION WHICH IS THE 8 MILLION WOULD BE A SECOND STEP ON TOP OF THE 10%. RIGHT. AND THAT SECOND STEP IS JUST LOOKING AT CONTRACTS AND SUPPLIES IN CENTRAL OFFICE. THE DIVISIONS I'VE ALREADY SAID WE CAN IF WE WERE TO DO A 20% SCENARIO THESE ARE THE CONTRACTS AND SUPPLY WE'D GIVE UP SO THAT SECOND STEP IS WHAT THAT IS AND THAT WOULD GO INTO IN FACT NOT UNTIL A FISCAL YEAR 28. SO THAT'S JULY 1ST, 2027. >> RIGHT. AND THEN THE LARGER YEAH. >> AHEAD THAT'S THE DEADLINE. YES, THAT'S RIGHT. AND THEN THE BIG EVER YOU THIS IS IF THE BOARD AUTHORIZES THE RELEASE OF THE OKAY YOU'VE GOT TO BE CAREFUL OKAY SORRY. >> SO THE LARGER PORTION I KEEP FORGETTING THESE MAKES SO WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WITH LANGUAGE IN THIS ON THAT THIRD PAGE BECAUSE THIS GOES INTO NEGOTIATIONS AND LABOR RELATIONS. RIGHT. AND SO THIS IS FOR THIS IT REFERENCES THE ASSIGNMENT THAT WE'VE MADE THAT WE WENT OVER EARLIER DEPENDING UPON HOW SIGNIFICANT THAT ASSIGNMENT
ACTUALLY TURNS OUT TO BE FOR THE UNIONS YET TO CLOSE TODAY'S THIS WOULD ACCOUNT FOR THOSE ADDITIONAL EXPENSES WHICH WE HAVE NOT YET ACCOUNTED FOR. SO IT DEPENDS UPON HOW MUCH OF THAT WE END UP SPENDING, HOW MUCH MORE FSP WE HAVE TO DO. I HOPE THAT'S CLEAR ENOUGH BUT I CAN'T GO INTO SPECIFICS ON THAT THIRD PAGE AS MUCH. >> BUT THE NUMBER YES THAT YOU CAN GO INTO SPECIFICS. >> SO I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THAT 18 THAT THE 18,000 NUMBER VERSUS I'M SORRY 818 YEAH WE WISH SO SO I UNDERSTAND OKAY. THAT 15 MILLION IS WHAT'S BEING IMPLEMENTED JULY 1ST DOWN 10% THAT NEARLY 8 MILLION IS IF THEY WENT UP TO 20% AND CUTS 15, 15, 15%. YES SO SO AT THIS POINT 6 MILLION IS THE SCENARIO IS IF THEY DID ANOTHER 10% CUT IN FISCAL YEAR 28 SO THAT WOULD BE 25% TOTAL CORRECT 2020 SO SO ACTUALLY I WANT TO I WANT TO CLARIFY THE 8 MILLION ON THE PAGE BEFORE IS INCLUDED IN THE 18 SO THE BABY OF US IS JUST SAYING OKAY, IN ADDITION TO YOUR 10%, IF YOU HAVE SUPPLIES
AND CONTRACTS THAT YOU WANT TO REDUCE NO PEOPLE ALLOWED THIS IS WHAT THIS IS A SCENARIO THAT ACTUALLY OUR COLLEAGUES HAVE ALREADY PROVIDED US AND SO THE THIRD PAGE IS IF I WENT TO 20% AND HOW TO CUT BOTH PEOPLE AND CONTRACTS IT WOULD BE 18.6 IN ADDITION TO THE 15 THAT WE'VE ALREADY CAPTURED FOR FACILITIES IN ADDITION. OKAY OKAY. THE FIRST IS DONE. YES. THE SECOND TWO ARE SCENARIO SCENARIOS. YES. YES. SECOND ONE IS THE BABY PART OF IT? YEAH. AND IT'S NOT CUMULATIVE. IT'S INCLUSIVE. YEAH. SO JUST TO CLARIFY FOR THE PUBLIC LIKE MYSELF FOR THE START I THOUGHT IT WAS OKAY SO SLIDE 16 ALREADY DONE IN THE PROCESS OF BEING IMPLEMENTED AND PROJECTED AND PROJECTED FOR 17 AND 18 ARE CRYSTAL BALL WORKING TOWARDS THEM? SURE BECAUSE LIKE YES BECAUSE IN YOUR MULTI YEAR PROJECTION
OF YOUR UNRESTRICTED GENERAL FUND WE GAVE YOU THE CURRENT SCENARIO INCLUDING THE CURRENT TAS AS WELL AS SOME PROJECTED EXPENSES FOR TWO YEARS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN SETTLED. SO PAGE THREE IS SAYING WHEN WE SETTLE ALL OF THOSE THIS IS LIKELY THE EXTENT THAT AN FSP WILL HAVE TO GO TO TO GET US BACK TO POSITIVE BY DECEMBER IF THAT'S THE DESIRE OF THE BOARD. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? OKAY. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND ONE IS A VERY GENERAL QUESTION THAT I'D LIKE TO ASK. IT'S FOR MR. MUNOZ I'M SORRY IF I'M MISPRONOUNCING YOUR LAST NAME. I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO FOLKS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU DO IN POSITION CONTROL AND THE SORTS OF ESSENTIALLY THE A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE WORK YOU DO, WHAT YOU'RE WORKING ON AND WHAT YOU ANTICIPATE COMING UP OF COURSE. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. SO PART OF POSITION CONTROL WHEN I GOT HERE IT WAS VERY APPARENT TO ME THAT THERE WERE NO CONTROLS IN PLACE FOR POSITION MANAGER AND SO THAT
LED TO HAVING UNACCOUNTED VACANCIES OR GHOST POSITIONS, SCHOOLS AND OFFICES BEING ALLOWED TO JUST OPEN POSITIONS WITHOUT THE PROPER APPROVALS, WITHOUT THE PROPER FUNDINGS ATTACHED TO THESE POSITIONS. SO PART OF MY JOB IS GOING IN AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THESE VACANCIES ARE. ARE THEY REALLY NEEDED? IF THEY'RE NOT, CAN WE ELIMINATE THEM IF A NEW POSITION REQUEST COMES IN BEFORE WE ACTUALLY APPROVE IT? IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE HERE THAT WE CAN REPURPOSE BEFORE WE ACTUALLY ISSUE A NEW POSITION NUMBER? SO REALLY RECONCILING AND MAKING SURE THAT THE INCOMING REQUESTS CAN BE FILLED BY ANYTHING THAT'S CURRENTLY ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. I'M SORRY AS CHRIS MENTIONED, WE JUST FINISHED THE THE FIRST POSITION RECONCILIATION. SO PART OF THAT PROCESS WAS TAKING EVERYTHING THAT CAME OUT OF FROM THE SCHOOL BUDGET DEVELOPMENT ALL OF THE POSITIONS THAT WERE REQUESTED BY SCHOOL SITES TO CLOSE WHETHER IT WAS FOR WHATEVER REASON SCHOOL BASED DECISIONS,
ENROLLMENT YOU NAME IT MATCH THAT UP WITH ALL OF THE OTHER SCHOOL SITES THAT ARE ASKING FOR NEW POSITIONS AND THEN RECONCILING THOSE TO TRY AND FIGURE OUT OKAY, WELL WHAT IS BEING CLOSE? CAN THEY COVER WHAT IS BEING NEW THEN THE THE DELTAS NOW? OKAY. THAT'S WHAT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO BE AFFECTED IN TERMS OF LAYOFFS ,LAYOFFS AND CONSOLIDATIONS AND ALL OF THOSE NEXT STEPS THAT H.R. IS GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR. SO MY JOB IS REALLY TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT AUTHORIZING OVERALL AUTHORIZING POSITIONS AT SCHOOL SITES AND MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE STICKING TO THE STAFFING MODELS THAT WE'VE ESTABLISHED MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE MAXIMIZING THOSE POSITIONS THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT. OKAY. THANK YOU. CAN YOU JUST AT THE END PART OF MY QUESTION HAD BEEN ABOUT WHAT YOU ANTICIPATE COMING UP TO THE EXTENT YOU CAN ANSWER THAT, IS IT ESSENTIALLY CONTINUING WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN DOING OR ARE THERE OTHER THINGS ON THE HORIZON THAT YOU WANT TO GIVE US A HEADS UP ABOUT OR THAT WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT WHILE IN TERMS OF WHAT'S COMING UP ON THE HORIZON IS JUST NOW GETTING INTO THIS THIS PRACTICE OF MAKING SURE THAT BEFORE WE
AUTHORIZE NEW POSITIONS THAT WE JUST REALLY LOOK AT THE BOOKS AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY IN PLACE THAT CAN TAKE ITS PLACE AS OPPOSED TO JUST CREATING NEW POSITIONS JUST FOR THE SAKE OF CREATING NEW POSITIONS. SO THAT'S JUST GOING TO BE AN ONGOING PRACTICE GOING FORWARD FOR THE DISTRICT AND IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING NEW FOR THE DISTRICT TO BE CATCHING ON. I'VE ALREADY RUN INTO A COUPLE OF SCHOOLS WHERE THEY'RE NOT REALLY FAMILIAR WITH SOME OF THESE THESE PRACTICES SO GETTING THEM USED TO THESE NEW PRACTICES IS GOING TO BE WHAT'S UPCOMING ON THE HORIZON. SO YOU MENTIONED COMMISSIONER FISHER THAT WE ARE WORKING ON A MORE POSITIVE POSITION CONTROL SO THAT IS COMING NEXT WEEK AND SO THAT IS PART OF WHAT'S COMING ON THE HORIZON. ACCOMPANYING THAT IS ALSO AN ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATION THAT DETAILS THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR HUMAN RESOURCES BUDGET POSITION CONTROL AND PAYROLL. SO IT'S GOING TO BE A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE WE'RE ALL RECONCILING POSITIONS WHAT WE'RE BUDGETING, WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY PAYING OUT AND WHAT'S ANY DIFFERENCES ASSOCIATED SO
WE CAN CAPTURE THOSE SAVINGS BECAUSE THOSE SAVINGS ARE WHAT'S GOING TO HELP OUR FISCAL STANDING IN THE COMING YEARS ALIGNING ALSO LINKED TO THAT IS WHAT I'VE DRAFTED A BUDGETARY CONTROL MANUAL THAT WILL BE SHARED WIDELY THAT ACTUALLY DESCRIBES A HOW TO SO HOW DO YOU CREATE A NEW POSITION WHEN YOU CREATE NEW POSITIONS IT'LL HAVE DESCRIPTIONS FOR THE APPROVALS THAT HAVE REALLY USEFUL JOB AIDS EXPLANATIONS FOR WHAT APPROVALS ARE REQUIRED FOR WHAT TYPES OF POSITION ACTION. SO ALL OF THIS IS ALL NEW AND THAT'S WHAT'S EXCITING MEANS LIKE NEW PROCESSES FOR THE SCHOOLS TO FOLLOW AND ULTIMATELY HELP THE DISTRICT IS GOING TO BETTER FINANCIAL SITUATION. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. MY OTHER GENERAL QUESTION IS MORE DIRECTED TO MR. MOUNT BUT HE DOES AND ALTHOUGH PERHAPS OTHER STAFF WANT TO TAKE A STAB AT IT, THERE WAS A LOT OF CONCERN IN DECEMBER OVER THE FISCAL STABILIZATION PLAN AS IT WAS THEN PRESENTED SO I GUESS
JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL THE SAME PAGE HERE WITH OUR UNDERSTANDING, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHETHER OR NOT THE DECISIONS MADE IN JANUARY WITH THE STAFFING MODEL AND THE APPEALS WILL BE CHANGED OR IF THOSE WILL STAND FOR THE NEXT SCHOOL YEAR? AND ALSO CAN YOU GENERALLY CAN YOU EXPLAIN IN LAYMAN'S TERMS HOW THE FISCAL STABILIZATION PLAN BEING BROUGHT TO US THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED NOW HOW THAT COMPARES TO THE ONE PRESENTED IN DECEMBER? SO THE FISCAL STABILIZATION PLAN IN JANUARY I DID NOT IMPACT THE STAFFING MODEL DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS REALLY DRIVEN BY THE LAW BY THE CBA AND ED COTE WHICH IS WHAT WE REFERENCED EARLIER THE ONLY THINGS THAT WE IMPLEMENTED FROM THAT PLAN WERE THE CENTRAL OFFICE REDUCTIONS WHICH WE KNEW THAT WE WERE GOING TO NEED WHICH IS WHY THOSE ARE INCLUDED ALREADY IN IN YOUR MULTIYEAR PROJECTION AND THAT HAS TO BE DONE FRANKLY FAR IN ADVANCE OF A SECOND INTERIM. SO IF WE DIDN'T START IT, IT WASN'T GOING TO GET DONE THIS
YEAR AND WE'D BE IN A IN A WORSE SHAPE THE THINGS THAT ARE IN THIS PLAN. >> SO THE OTHER THING THAT APPEARED IN THIS FISCAL STABILIZATION PLAN WHICH OF COURSE WAS NOT CONTENTIOUS WERE ALL THE THINGS THAT WE WERE DOING TO IMPROVE THE BUDGETING SYSTEM. I WILL TELL YOU WE'VE DONE ALL OF THOSE AND THE ESTIMATES THAT I GAVE YOU AT THAT TIME WERE CLEARLY CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATES WE'VE OUTPERFORMED THEM WHICH IS WHY EVEN THOUGH WE JUST PASSED OR I'M SORRY WE HAVEN'T PASSED THAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT TUESDAY EVEN THOUGH THE TAS THE NEW TAS HAVEN'T COME TO YOU THIS MULTI YEAR PROJECTION. SO IT SHOWS THAT WE ARE MAXIMIZING RESOURCES AND SO IT'S NOT HAVING AS BAD OF AN IMPACT FINANCIALLY ON THE DISTRICT THAT ONE MIGHT HAVE IMAGINED FOR THE COST OF A 160 $280 MILLION AGREEMENT OVER A THREE YEAR PERIOD OF TIME. SO IN OTHER WORDS WE CAN STILL MANAGE IT AND STILL MAKE YEAR TO YEAR REDUCTIONS AT A REASONABLE. AND REMIND ME OF THE OTHER PART OF YOUR QUESTION. I'M SORRY COMMISSIONER. SURE. I GUESS I'D ALSO JUST LIKE TO FOLLOW UP AND CLARIFY FIRST THE DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE ON
APPEALS IN JANUARY AND THE NUMBERS THAT WERE ALLOCATED AT THE TIME. WILL THOSE BE CHANGED? I KNOW I MEAN WE DISCUSSED A LITTLE BIT INTERNAL MEAN I'LL USE MY MY TECHNICAL SCHOOL SPEAK WE HAD ALREADY DONE STAFF ASSIGNMENTS AND WE'VE ALREADY DONE APPEALS AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL ALLOCATIONS AND SERVICES AND THE SUPERINTENDENT WORKED THROUGH THAT AND AS A PRINCIPAL AND I THINK I SHARED THIS WITH THE BOARD BEFORE EVEN THOUGH WE HAD A BIG SORT OF CLIFF COMING OUR WAY FINANCIALLY I DON'T BELIEVE IN TAKES BACK SEES THIS LATE IN THE YEAR IF WE'VE TOLD SCHOOLS THAT THIS IS WHAT THEY HAVE BASED ON THEIR ENROLLMENT THEN WE NEED TO STICK TO THAT FOR NOW FOR NEXT YEAR. THAT'S THE PREDICTABILITY AND STABILITY I THINK WE'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE TO OUR SCHOOL SITES. HOWEVER, ENROLLMENT WILL BE TRUED UP OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS AND IT DOES CHANGE A LITTLE BIT BUT WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT TRUE UP BECAUSE WHAT WE DID SAY AND PUT IN EVERYBODY'S ALLOCATIONS IS THAT IF YOU HAVE AN ADDITIONAL
CLASSROOM OF TEACHERS SHOW UP THAT WE DID NOT ALLOCATE THEN CLEARLY WE'LL BE ALLOCATING YOU ANOTHER T.K. TEACHER AND PARA IF YOU HAVE A KINDERGARTEN THAT DIDN'T SHOW UP THEN WE WILL BE TAKING THAT KINDERGARTEN THAT DIDN'T SHOW UP AND MAYBE MOVING IT TO ANOTHER SCHOOL THAT DID HAVE A KINDERGARTEN SHOW UP. SO THERE WILL BE AROUND IN MARCH AND APRIL OF BRING UP ACTUAL ENROLLMENT JUST LIKE WE DO AT THE BEGINNING OF THE SCHOOL YEAR AFTER THE TEN DAY COUNT AND WE FIND OUT THAT WE HAVE A TEACHER THAT DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH STUDENTS SHOW UP AT ONE SITE AND MORE STUDENTS THAT SHOWED UP IN ANOTHER SITE AND WE HAVE TO MOVE STAFF TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THAT SO THOSE MOVES WILL STILL OCCUR. SO THOSE ARE CHANGES THAT WILL STILL BE HAPPENING. BUT AS FAR AS CHANGING THE BASE ALLOCATIONS, NO AND I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S GOOD PRACTICE AND I THINK MYSELF AND ED SERVICES AND THE SUPERINTENDENT ALL AGREED THAT THAT JUST DOESN'T PROVIDE THE STABILITY THAT WE WANT TO NOW HOW THE APPEALS WORKED THAT WAS MORE
WITH SO THERE WERE A COUPLE OF GROUPS THERE WERE AUGMENTATIONS PROVIDED A LITTLE BIT I THINK THAT'S WHAT NEERA WAS REFERENCING EARLIER THROUGH SUPPLEMENTAL CONCENTRATION AUGMENTATIONS TO THE BASE PROVIDED BY ED SERVICES BASED ON THE PROFILE OF THE SCHOOL. AND THEN THERE WERE ADDITIONAL APPEALS GRANTED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT AND ED SERVICES BASED ON THE NATURE OF THE ISSUES AT THE SCHOOL AS DESCRIBED BY THE PRINCIPAL AND LEAD WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE TO SCALE BACK ON SOME OF THOSE IN THE FUTURE AS WELL BECAUSE WE JUST WON'T BE ABLE TO BE AS GENEROUS AS WE WERE FOR NEXT YEAR. >> OKAY. THE SECOND PART OF MY QUESTION HAD BEEN SORRY I WAS JUST FOLLOWING UP ON THAT FIRE PART. THE SECOND PART OF MY QUESTION WHICH YOU HAD ASKED ME TO REPEAT WAS ABOUT HOW THE FISCAL STABILIZATION PLAN THAT IS COMING UP COMPARES TO THE DECEMBER ONE SO PORTIONS OF THE DECEMBER WHEN PEOPLE DIDN'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT BECAUSE IT WAS ALL ON THE FINANCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO DO IT AND WE WERE OKAY WITH THOSE. SO THOSE HAVE BEEN DONE AND WE'VE OUTPERFORMED WE
ACTUALLY DOUBLED MORE THAN DOUBLED THE YIELD THAT WE ANTICIPATED ON THOSE WHICH IS HELPING IMMENSELY THE FIRST TWO PAGES OF THIS FSP, THE TWO ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED AND THE TWO THAT WE'RE SAYING SHOULD DEFINITELY BE IMPLEMENTED OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT 18 MONTHS. THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT I WOULD SAY ARE PROBABLY MINIMALLY GOING TO BE LOOKED FOR BY THE CDE TO BRING YOUR SECOND INTERIM MULTI YEAR PROJECTION INTO ALIGNMENT AND THE THIRD PAGE IS WHAT WE'RE SAYING WE CAN DO IT NOW OR WE CAN DO IT AT BUDGET ADOPTION BUT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A NEW THIRD YEAR IN BUDGET ADOPTION WHICH WE PROVIDED TONIGHT AND IN OUR WAY OF THINKING BECAUSE FISCAL SERVICES FOLKS AND OPERATIONS FOLKS TEND TO BE PLANNERS WE ALWAYS SAY DO IT AHEAD OF TIME SO PEOPLE KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT, WHAT THE POTENTIAL THINGS THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT COMING SO THAT THIRD PAGE WE CAN IMPLEMENT NOW OR ADOPTION OR A VARIATION OF THAT DEPENDING UPON THE FISCAL STANDING THE FIRST TWO PAGES ARE LESS THAN THE ONE IN DECEMBER. ALL THREE PAGES ARE GREATER
THAN THE ONE IN DECEMBER. >> IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING? I BELIEVE I GOT IT. OKAY. I DON'T WANT TO PUT OKAY. >> SORRY IF I'M NOT I'LL HAVE COMMISSIONER VICE PRESIDENT HULING GO. IT IS SEVEN ALMOST 720 OR 20 MINUTES PAST THAT TIME THAT WE HAD ALLOCATED FOR THIS. SO I'LL HAVE COMMISSIONER HULING GO THERE ARE ANY FINAL CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. LET'S GET THOSE OUT NOW AND THEN WE WILL HAVE WE WILL CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION OF COURSE AT THE NEXT MEETING NEXT TUESDAY. SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THE IMPACTS OF BASICALLY THE BOARD PROVIDING DIRECTION THAT WE WOULD ONLY WANT TO GO WITH THE FIRST TWO PAGES VERSUS ALL THREE PAGES. AND I HEARD YOU SAY THAT DOING ALL THREE PAGES IS WHAT WOULD BE NECESSARY IN ORDER TO GET TO A POSITIVE PHYSICAL CERTIFICATION AT FIRST INTERIM NEXT YEAR. SO DECEMBER OF 2026 THERE END THAT THERE'S NOT AN OPTION AT THIS POINT FOR US TO GET TO POSITIVE THIS YEAR WITHOUT IMMEDIATELY GOING BACK INTO
NEGATIVE BASICALLY WELL I'M GOING TO LISTEN FOR WRESTLING TO MY RIGHT BECAUSE WE'VE DEBATED THIS A LOT AND I PUT IT IN A LOT OF CALLS TO THE STATE TECHNICALLY WHEN YOU APPROVE AN FSP I'M ALLOWED TO INCLUDE THOSE SAVINGS IN YOUR MULTIYEAR PROJECTION. AND IF WE DID ALL THREE OF THESE PAGES AT SECOND INTERIM, WOULD IT POTENTIALLY PUT US BACK INTO POSITIVE FOR SECOND INTERIM FOR LONGER THAN JUST THIS YEAR? >> THE ANSWER IS YES. IF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO BE THAT FORWARD LOOKING KNOWING THAT THEY CAN CHANGE IT MOVING FORWARD, HOWEVER, THE STATE IS GOING TO I THINK I GUESS I MORE THAN THINK I KNOW THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PUSH BACK PRETTY HARD BECAUSE THEY QUESTION WHETHER WE HAVE THAT ABILITY TO DO THAT MUCH LONG TERM PLANNING AND TO FOLLOW UP WITH OUR DECISIONS THAT FAR INTO THE FUTURE WHICH IS WHY MINIMALLY I WOULD RECOMMEND THE FIRST TWO PAGES AND MAXIMALLY MAKING UP A TERM I GUESS MAYBE IT'S EVEN A REAL WORD. IF YOU WANT TO INCLUDE THE THIRD PAGE THEN WE CAN CERTAINLY MAKE THE ARGUMENT
THAT YOU'RE BACK IN THE POSITIVE NOW BUT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO FACE SOME HEADWINDS AND IF WE DID JUST DO THE FIRST TWO PAGES THEN IS THAT ESSENTIALLY UNLESS AN ADDITIONAL FURTHER FSP IS ADOPTED IN THE FUTURE ASSUMING WE JUST WERE WE TO ADOPT ONLY THE FIRST TWO PAGES THEN DOES THAT ESSENTIALLY LEAVE US IN QUALIFIED IN PERPETUITY UNLESS AND UNTIL A LARGER CUT FSP IS ADOPTED? WELL IT'S ONLY FOR EACH REPORTING PERIOD SO WE WILL HAVE TO ADOPT AN FSP AND ADOPTION AND THAT'S WHY I PUT THE FOURTH YEAR IN HERE FOR YOU TO START DIGESTING BECAUSE THAT WILL BE YOUR THIRD YEAR AND THEN THE REQUIREMENT WILL BE THAT THE FCP COVERS THAT YEAR WHICH IS A MUCH BIGGER NUMBER WHICH IS WHY WE PUT THIS PRELIMINARY DRAFT OUT OF PAGE THREE RECOGNIZING IT'S A BIGGER NUMBER AND WE'RE FLOATING A PLAN THAT WE THINK IS IT CERTAINLY IMPACTS THE DISTRICT RIGHT? >> YOU CAN'T DO A REDUCTION AND NOT IMPACT THE DISTRICT BUT IT IT IMPACTS THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS ARE THE LEAST WHICH IS WHAT OUR JOB IS IS TO MAKE SURE
THAT IT'S THE LEAST NEGATIVE IMPACT. I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT AT LEAST FROM WHAT OUR CONVERSATION HAS BEEN TONIGHT AND WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED HERE, IT SEEMS LIKE THIS BUT EVEN THE ALL THREE PAGES THE BIG FSP VERSION IS MUCH, MUCH MORE STUDENT CENTERED AND HAS CUTS FURTHER AWAY FROM SCHOOLS THAN THE FSP THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD IN DECEMBER WHICH HAD A NUMBER OF LINE ITEMS THAT WERE IMMEDIATE CUTS TO STAFF AND SERVICES PROVIDED TO STUDENTS AT SITE. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT THEY AGREED. HOWEVER, REMEMBER AND KEEP IN MIND THAT SOME OF THE LANGUAGE HERE AND WHAT YOU SAW ON THE RESTRICTED SIDE SAYING THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO CONTINUE TO FUND POSITIONS UNRESTRICTED RESOURCES WHEN THEY EXPIRE SOME OF THOSE SAME CONVERSATIONS WILL COME BACK. RIGHT, BECAUSE WE'RE ALSO GOING TO RUN OUT OF RESTRICTED MONEY. RIGHT. AND IF WE DON'T PAY FOR WHATEVER WE RUN OUT OF IN THAT THIRD YEAR RESTRICTED, THE GENERAL FUND HAS TO PAY FOR IT AND IT WON'T BE ABLE TO AFFORD IT AT THAT TIME. SO SO IT HASN'T ELIMINATED THAT
IT'S IT'S MORE INCREMENTAL THAT WE REDUCE STAFFING AT SCHOOL SITES BY THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS THAT ENROLLMENT IS GOING DOWN IN THOSE SERVICES. BUT THAT THIRD YEAR IS STILL GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE SOME SIGNIFICANT DECISIONS BECAUSE WE JUST ARE GOING TO RUN OUT OF MONEY. AND I SPENT MY FINAL FINAL I GOING TO DO PART ONE PART WELL ONE QUESTION I HAVE IS A HOLDOVER CLARIFICATION QUESTION FROM THE FIRST FSP IS THE FIRST FSP HAD $3 MILLION IN SAVINGS FROM US EVENTUAL PORTFOLIO AND PROGRAM CONSOLIDATIONS AND THERE WAS JUST CONFUSE I THINK AMONG BOTH BOARD MEMBERS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS AS TO WHETHER THAT $3 MILLION WAS REPRESENTING THREE PROGRAMS OR SCHOOLS TOTAL BEING CLOSED CUMULATIVELY OR WHETHER IT WAS REPRESENTING THREE PROGRAMS OR SCHOOLS PER YEAR FOR EACH YEAR OF THREE YEARS WHICH WOULD BE NINE TOTAL PROGRAMS OR SCHOOLS BEING CLOSED. AND THAT CREATED A LOT OF ANXIETY I THINK IN THE COMMUNITIES. >> I JUST WANTED TO ASK THAT
QUESTION TO CLARIFY THAT GOES INTO A WHOLE DIFFERENT SORTS OF AREAS. LET'S SEE SO WHEN WE DO IT AS A BUDGET WE HAVE TO MAKE ASSUMPTIONS AROUND THE FIGURE THAT WE PROVIDE YOU TO SUBSTANTIATE THE FIGURE, RIGHT? SO OUR ROUGH ESTIMATE RIGHT NOW IS AS WE DO PROGRAM CONSOLIDATIONS, WHAT IS THE INCREMENTAL SAVINGS PER SITE? WE'VE COME UP WITH AN INCREMENTAL SAVINGS OF ABOUT A MILLION DOLLARS PER SITE AND WE BASE THAT ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT IF WE WERE CONSOLIDATING PROGRAMS THAT WE WOULDN'T CLOSE OUR LARGEST PROGRAMS, WE'D CLOSE OUR SMALLEST PROGRAMS AND SO THAT'S THE AVERAGE COST INCREMENTALLY OF SMALLER SITES AND SMALLER PROGRAMS IF THAT MAKES SENSE. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BASING OUR BUDGET ESTIMATE ON. THIS IS JUST ONE YEAR FOR FISCAL YEAR 28 WHICH WOULD MEAN THREE SMALLER PROGRAM CONSOLIDATIONS FOR NEXT YEAR THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GAIN THAT THAT SAVINGS OF IN FISCAL YEAR 28 IS THAT REPRESENTS A POTENTIAL ESTIMATE OF THREE NOT NINE. CORRECT.
AND CAN I JUST ASK ONE MORE? >> OKAY. I KNOW YOU'RE TO KILL ME BUT THIS QUESTION IS FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT AROUND THE CENTRAL OFFICE REDUCTIONS WHICH ARE A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THIS WHOLE PLAN AND I KNOW THAT THERE ARE CENTRAL OFFICE SERVICES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN CUT A LOT AND THAT MAY NOT THAT MAY ACTUALLY BE IN A POSITION WHERE THEY NEED TO BE EXPAND IT FROM WHERE THEY ARE NOW BECAUSE THERE ARE VACANCIES OR THINGS NEED TO BE BUILT UP TO FUNCTION ADEQUATELY. DOES THIS TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT LIKE WITH THESE REDUCTIONS IN SOME TEAMS ALSO BE OFFSET BY INVESTMENTS IN OTHER TEAMS AND WOULD THIS BE TOO DRACONIAN TO ALLOW THAT FOR EXAMPLE? THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION AND I DO APOLOGIZE FOR COMING LATE. I WAS AT THE CUB CONFERENCE AND WAS NOT ABLE TO TO LEAVE ON TIME IN TERMS OF THE THE CENTRAL OFFICE CUTS AS YOU HEARD FROM NAIRU, THE THE
THERE'S A LARGE PORTION OF THE CUTS COMING FROM CONTRACTS AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE'RE WE'RE MAKING A VERY JUST YOU KNOW DECISIVE DECISION TO REDUCE CONTRACTS IN LOTS OF DIFFERENT AREAS AND HAVE STAFF TAKE ON SOME OF THAT WORK WE'RE ALSO MAKING SOME SOME SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THE WAY OUR STAFF ARE DOING WORK. SO WE'RE GOING TO BE MOVING STAFF TO CONSOLIDATE WORK, CONSOLIDATE STAFF, CONSOLIDATE POSITIONS. IT DOES MEAN AND YOU KNOW WE WE HAD SOME TOUGH CONVERSATIONS THIS MORNING. IT DOES MEAN THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MAKE A DECISION ON ON CERTAIN PROGRAMS OR CERTAIN ACTIVITIES IS THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY DOING THAT WE WILL NO LONGER DO. WE'RE GOING TO SIT DOWN AND HAVE REALLY FOCUSED CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR PARTNERS ,WITH THAT PARTNERS WITH OUR STAFF ABOUT WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND AND IT YEAH IT'S THIS IS THIS IS A REALLY PAINFUL BUDGET. IT'S IT'S REALLY IT'S GOING TO HURT BUT WE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR THAT WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR SCHOOLS
AND SERVICES TO OUR STUDENTS AND SO WHEN WE'RE YOU KNOW WE'RE FACED WITH REALLY TOUGH BUDGET DECISIONS THIS IS WHERE WE'RE DECIDING TO MAKE CUTS AND SO FOR EXAMPLE, WE'RE GOING TO ASK SOME OF OUR STAFF TO TAKE ON LARGER CHUNKS OF WORKS AND THEN THERE'S OTHER PARTS OF THE WORK THAT WE ARE GOING TO SUSPEND OR PAUSE UH, COMMISSIONER FISHER AND THEN COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER AND SO I WASN'T TRYING TO STEAL THE MICROPHONE FROM YOU. >> VICE PRESIDENT HULING I PROMISE AT FIRST I'LL TRY AND KEEP THIS BRIEF BUT JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON COMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONER RAY'S QUESTION WHAT THE MORE YOU INTERRUPT ME THE LESS BRIEF I WILL BE JUST OKAY. >> BUT TO FOLLOW UP ON COMMISSIONER RAY'S QUESTION, YOU KNOW, SHE HAD ASKED ABOUT BASELINE STAFFING VERSUS APPEALS AND AD BACKS AND WE SAW THAT THIS YEAR IN WEST VALLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL, FOR EXAMPLE. RIGHT? LIKE WHERE LAST YEAR THERE HAD BEEN A HUGE NUMBER NOT A HUGE NUMBER BUT THEY HAD LIKE SEVEN STAFF THAT WERE ADDED BACK BASED ON APPEAL AND IT WAS
DEEMED APPROPRIATE. SO AND I THINK I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW UP DOES DOES THAT MAKE THAT THEIR BASELINE OR DOES THAT MEAN EVERY YEAR THEY HAVE TO APPEAL TO GET LIKE THAT SEEMS EXCEPTIONALLY CUMBERSOME FOR STAFF AND YOU KNOW IT ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'VE GOT ALREADY SO I GUESS IF WE DETERMINE ONE YEAR THAT THAT IS APPROPRIATE WHY DOESN'T THAT AT LEAST BECOME CLOSER TO BASELINE? I MEAN THAT WAS VERY, VERY DISRUPTIVE FOR THAT COMMUNITY AND OTHERS IN ESPECIALLY THE AD BACK PROCESS IS A LOT OF WORK FOR EVERYONE AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING HOW AND I DON'T THINK THIS IS A QUESTION ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING OR LIMITED TIME. PRESIDENT KIM MAYBE THIS IS A QUESTION TO GET ANSWERED ON ANOTHER DAY BUT I GUESS MY QUESTION REALLY IS IF WE'RE FINDING SO MANY ADD BACKS ARE NECESSARY THEN IS THE THE BASELINE STAFF MENTAL MODEL ACTUALLY SUFFICIENT FOR SOME OF OUR SCHOOLS AND DOES IT REALLY TAKE EQUITY INTO ACCOUNT THE WAY THAT WE WANT IT TO BASED ON OUR MISSION AND OUR VALUES? I APPRECIATE YOU LETTING US HAVE MORE TIME TO ANSWER SO WE COULD DEFINITELY CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION AT THE NEXT
MEETING BUT JUST REALLY QUICKLY OUR STAFFING MODEL IS CREATED BASED ON THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS IN OUR SCHOOLS AND THE CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT WE HAVE WITH OUR LABOR PARTNERS AND SO WE NEED TO TAKE BOTH OF THOSE THINGS INTO CONSIDERATION AS WE DECIDE HOW TO ALLOCATE STAFF TO SCHOOLS. SO IT IS QUITE UNFORTUNATE THAT WE ARE CONTINUING TO SEE A DECLINE IN PARTICULARLY SIXTH GRADE ENROLLMENT AND ALSO NINTH GRADE ENROLLMENT AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE SEEING THE BIGGEST PAIN IN TERMS OF STAFF REDUCTION OR ADJUSTMENTS TO STAFF ALLOCATION IN BOTH OF THOSE COHORTS OF SCHOOLS. I CERTAINLY DON'T THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT WAY TO BUDGET. WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING THIS BECAUSE OUR OUR SCHOOLS, OUR STUDENTS, OUR STAFF NEEDS STABILITY. SO ONCE WE GET OURSELVES THROUGH THIS MOMENT IN TIME AND MAKE THE REALLY SECOND YEAR OF TOUGH DECISIONS, WE'RE GOING TO BE AT A PLACE WHERE WE'LL HAVE GREATER STABILITY. WE'LL HAVE A WAY FOR US TO HAVE GREATER CUSHION. SO WHEN WHEN WE DO SEE THE EBBS AND FLOWS OF ENROLLMENT HIT US,
WE'RE NOT WE DON'T NEED TO DECIMATE THE SCHOOLS. THAT WAS ONE OF THE ORIGINAL THINKING AROUND BUILDING THE FUND 17 SO THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOME CUSHIONS TO BE ABLE TO SOFTEN THE BLOW OF OF CHANGES IN ENROLLMENT. SO WE HAVE TO DO A BETTER JOB AT MANAGING THAT. WE HAVE TO DO A BETTER JOB AT CONTINUING TO TO KEEP AN EYE ON OUR ENROLLMENT SO THAT WE CAN BE REALLY NIMBLE AND MOBILE WITH THAT. >> SO SO SHORT ANSWER FOR THAT . >> SORRY, I APPRECIATE THAT AND I DO LOOK FORWARD TO GETTING TO A PLACE WHERE WE'RE NOT BUDGETING TO OUR CONTRACTS BUT ACTUALLY BUDGETING TO OUR VALUES AND OUR VISION VALUES GOALS AND GUARDRAILS AS WELL. SO THAT WILL BE A LATER CONVERSATION. I I'D LOVE AND I BASED ON LIMITED TIME I'LL ASK THIS MAYBE AS A PLACEHOLDER FOR NEXT WEEK BUT YOU MENTIONED THAT WE OUTPERFORMED OUR FIRST INTERIM NUMBERS OVER WHAT WAS PRESENTED IN DECEMBER. COULD YOU EXPAND ON THAT NEXT WEEK? IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE RIGHT NOW HELP US UNDERSTAND IF IT'S A LENGTHY ANSWER. I WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF TIME OR IF THE DEFICIT REPRESENTS
100% OF EVERYBODY'S EXPENDITURES AND THEY DON'T USE THEM, WE ARE MORE QUICKLY TAKING SAVINGS SO WE SHOULD BE OUTPERFORMING THE BUDGET RIGHT. THE BETTER THAT WE DO THE BETTER SHAPE THE DISTRICT IS IN. THAT DOESN'T MEAN PEOPLE LIKE THEIR MONEY BEING TAKEN AWAY. IT'S JUST THE RIGHT THING TO DO IF THEY'RE NOT SPENDING IT APPROPRIATELY AND QUICKLY. >> OKAY. AND I THINK THE THE LAST QUESTION BUT THE LAST QUESTION FOR TODAY IS YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT WITH THIS TENTATIVE AGREEMENT WAS RENEWING DUTY AND YOU KNOW, FINDING OTHER REVENUE STREAMS TO OFFSET THESE INCREASES. IS ANY OF THAT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN ANY OF THIS OR I KNOW A LOT OF THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY START IN 2028. SO I'M WONDERING 2728 SO WILL WE BE ABLE TO SEE THOSE PROJECTIONS AND WOULD THAT MAYBE IMPACT THE NUMBER OF DRACONIAN CUTS THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE? GOOD QUESTION. SO THE PROJECTION DOESN'T GO THAT FAR OUT YET? I DON'T BELIEVE AND THE
ASSUMPTION IS THAT BASED ON THE CONVERSATIONS DURING NEGOTIATIONS INCLUDING WITH THE CITY AS WELL AS IN VARIOUS CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD THAT WE NEED TO GO OUT OUR UNIONS NEED TO SUPPORT THE PASSAGE OF RE PASSAGE OF OF RTA AND IT NEEDS TO BE INCREASED THE PER PARTIAL AMOUNT IF IT'S GOING TO TRULY COVER THE THE THE HEALTH CARE FOR ALL THAT WE PROMISED IN THE TA. SO THAT HAS TO BE DONE OR IT'S GOING TO OPEN UP A VERY LARGE HOLE IN THE BUDGET IN A VERY, VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. >> COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER THANKS. I'LL TRY TO BE AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE AND I THINK THE BABY BABIES FISCAL STABILIZATION PLAN LOOKS REALLY SOLID. I THINK MY I WOULD HAVE CONCERNS WITH ADOPTING THE OTHER ONE NOW BOTH BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE IT MAY NOT MATTER THAT MUCH IN TERMS OF THE STATE THE STATE MAY NOT BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE YET SHOWN CREDIBLY THAT WE CAN DO THIS. IT SOUNDS LIKE AND SECONDLY, I THINK IT NEEDS I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THIS LEVEL
WHICH IF WE WE FIRST NEED TO BE REALLY CLEAR THAT WE NEED TO AND THEN WE NEED TO BE REALLY CLEAR ABOUT WHAT THESE WHAT THE IMPACT OF THESE REDUCTIONS ARE . BEFORE YOU GOT HERE, SUPERINTENDENT, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ENROLLMENT A BIT AND WHEN I LOOK AT THE ENROLLMENT NUMBERS THIS YEAR WE WERE DOWN BY I ACTUALLY JUST DID THE MATH. IT WAS LIKE 385 KIDS COMPARED TO LAST YEAR. SO THAT'S MY QUESTION WAS IS THAT A BLIP OR IS THAT OR IS THAT A TREND BECAUSE RESPONDED THAT THE DEMOGRAPHERS HAVE DONE THAT ANALYSIS AND SO I THINK IT'LL BE REALLY IMPORTANT FOR THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC TO SORT OF SEE THAT TO UNDERSTAND AND I FOR ONE WOULD LOVE TO SEE ALSO A PLAN IN A STRATEGY OF INCREASING ENROLLMENT IN SFI USD. I MEAN IF WE HAVE A I DO THINK THERE'S THIS KIND OF DANGER IF WE ADOPT A PLAN LIKE THIS, IT OF SORT OF SENDING THIS SORT OF DOOM LOOP SIGNAL TO THE FUTURE OF LIKE WELL WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE THESE DRASTIC CUTS, YOU KNOW SO I DO THINK THERE'S LIKE A BALANCE HERE OF HOW DO WE
MOVE FORWARD IN A FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE MANNER BUT ALSO SAY WE HAVE A PLAN TO INVEST AND ATTRACT FAMILIES TO ASSET USD SO THAT THEN WE CAN ACTUALLY CHANGE IT AROUND, RIGHT? I MEAN THERE ARE CERTAIN THE SOME OF THE DEMOGRAPHICS ARE THE DEMOGRAPHICS, RIGHT? IF THERE'S FEWER KIDS IN THE CITY THAT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE . ON THE OTHER HAND, 30% OF THE K THROUGH 12 AGE KIDS IN THE CITY GO TO PRIVATE SCHOOL. SO AND WE'VE SEEN THAT SOME OF THE COVERT COVID DROP WAS RELATED TO FOLKS MOVING OUT OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOL. SO I JUST THINK THAT OVER THE NEXT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE BETWEEN NOW AND JUNE SOME REAL EXPLORATION OF THOSE IDEAS BEFORE WE SORT OF SAY WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO GO TO THE MORE DRAMATIC UM FISCAL STABILIZATION THAT WE GOING FEEDBACK THINK OH YES REALLY QUICKLY. YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER WE NEED TO ALSO SHOW OUR PUBLIC THAT WE ARE DOING WE'RE DOING AMAZING THINGS. I WAS JUST AT A CONFERENCE OF I
DON'T REMEMBER I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE THAT WAS IN THAT ROOM AND PEOPLE WANTED TO HEAR THAT WE ARE STANDING UP FOR OUR STUDENTS. WE JUST COMMITTED FOR THIS DISTRICT TO BE A SANCTUARY DISTRICT. WE'RE PUTTING EVEN MORE INTO INSTRUCTION AND TRYING TO MOVE THE NEEDLE FOR ALL OF OUR STUDENTS. SO I THINK THAT IS EXCITING AND WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE OPEN WELL THIS YEAR WE'RE OPENING UP MISSION BAY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. WE'VE GOT LOTS AND LOTS OF APPLICATIONS FOR THAT SCHOOL TONS OF INTEREST IN EVEN MORE TRANSITIONAL KINDERGARTEN SPOTS AND THEN NEXT YEAR WE'RE OPENING UP A K-8 MANDARIN SCHOOL AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WAYS TO TO SUPPORT OUR STUDENTS IN SPECIAL EDUCATION WITH SERVICES THAT'S IN THE DISTRICT . SO THERE ARE LOTS OF THINGS AND I THINK YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT WE NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB AT JUST SINGING THAT FROM THE HILLTOPS OF ALL THE HILLS IN SAN FRANCISCO ALL THE HILLS WELL IT'S GOING TO GO INTO MY SOUND OF MUSIC AND THIS IS WHERE I WILL WRAP BY THINKING SO MUCH TO STAFF FOR THIS STUDY
SESSION. WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE TRANSPARENCY, THE DATA, THE HONESTY AND THE ABILITY TO HAVE THIS TO PROCESS BEFORE WE CHEW ON THIS A BIT MORE NEXT TUESDAY. AND SO WITH THAT I WILL BRING US TO A CLOSE HERE AND ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:39 P.M.