Good morning. >> Good morning. I'm I I'm so sorry. I need to apologize. I was having some technical difficulties getting my computer up and running. This is interesting.
>> Can you guys hear me? >> We can we can hear you. We just can't can't see you. >> I can I can see your background background. >> Yeah. Sometimes when that happens, it's the um shutter was closed on the camera. I know that's happened to me a few
times. >> That's strange cuz I actually have a little thing that I put over my camera. I've never actually >> Well, there it is. >> You are. Yeah, >> I'm glad you're there.
>> Technical difficulties today. >> All right. agenda here. Right. So, good morning. I'm Kim Craraven. It is 8:09 and we'll open the finance committee subcommittee of the
North Mil 6 Regional School District. And just to let everyone know, this meeting is being recorded. The first item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes from December 16th. Everyone had a chance to look at
those. >> I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. >> I'll second. >> Can't can't do that yet. Um let's do a roll call of members here. Um
so um I am Kim Graven. I am here. Um, Lisa Martin >> here, >> Michael Basier >> here, >> and Keenan Francois is um, excuse absent today.
And from the administration, um, while not voting, members, we have Nancy Haynes, Jeremy Hanman, Brad Morgan, Kevin Cormier, and of course, Robin Ivy. And now we can uh
>> I don't know if we want to note that uh just for the the record that Randy is in attendance. >> Okay. As um >> yeah, she's she's logged in. I just haven't promoted her as a panelist. If you want me to, I can. I just wanted to note for the record that she is in
attendance. Um, she's not a subcommittee member, so I'm guessing that would be out of order. >> Okay. >> But thank you for letting me know that. Let's move to the approval of the minutes from December 16th.
>> I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. >> I'll second. >> Motion by Lisa Martin, second by Michael Basier, and roll call vote. Lisa Martin. >> Yes. Michael Bosier. >> Yes.
>> And I'm Kim Craraven and I am a Yes. Did we have anyone for the first public comment today? >> Uh let me check. >> No, we have no one for public comment. Okay, moving to the next item on the
agenda, uh, the FY26 budget. And Nancy, are there um any updates that you can provide us on the spending to date? >> No, I've been uh uh following it, but um I haven't seen any major changes from our last meeting.
>> Okay. Um so suffice that to say that there's nothing that um is going to be looking like there's requests for overages or any adjustments. >> Uh we will end up probably having a
um a transfer at some point. Um but at this moment um it's not absolutely necessary because those sections are I can have them covered at the moment. At some point I'll need to have the finance subcommittee approve uh a list of
transfers between lines. But but uh probably maybe maybe I'll be ready at the next meeting, but some of it I'm waiting on um some of the tuition and out of district costs before we do it because I if those change dramatically one way or another um in the next few
months then um it would be unnecessary. So um I'll just if I can just hold that'll be um and take that up in a later date. >> Okay. Um I think it would be good as we're um moving into the next budget
year to to take a look at any of those just um as refer reference points. >> Absolutely. >> Thank you. Does any of the um members have any questions on the FY26 budget? >> No. >> None from me.
>> Okay. Thanks. Um so let's move into the 20 FY27 the budget planning. Obviously in the packet and in our email we had all received a copy of the um the budget message um for the
upcoming year and let me open it up. You know we have a lot of different categories that we've been discussing ways to address the budget. Um, I'd like to open it up to the administration if you have any opening comments before we start our discussion.
>> I don't have any at this point unless there are questions from the finance committee. We can certainly um just do a quick overview of the FY27 if that would be helpful. >> Um, sure you if give that overview. Um,
sure. Um, so the FY27 budget, um, and some of these numbers have been shared, you know, again, where it's just still really in draft form. Um, these numbers were discussed at our most recent, uh, budget summit. So, they were shared with
town leadership, letting them know, of course, again, this is just, um, all draft at this point, just to give them a heads up. um and they have been sharing their budgets with us as well or their proposed budgets or where they may land. And at this point, we're looking at a a 3.06%
increase to FY U 26. Uh for the most part, it really is um a level service budget. Um we are using um or recommending to use $2 million in excess and deficiency, which again is a very
high number. Um and and certainly just some concerns because our current budget uh recommended budget increase of 3.06 is beyond what the towns can afford. Um the towns at least one town has asked us already to consider closing a second
building which is really not doable at this point in time as far as the central office team is concerned. And you know, the reality is is that we made in addition to the consolidation last year, we made um cuts in other areas coming
pretty close to a million dollars um in what was really a reduction of close to a total of $2 million to make our FY26 budget work. So, the hope I think from the administrative team is that um we can avoid having to look at closing a
second building and that potentially if we can get some more money back from the state to be able to reinstate some of these positions to alleviate um some class size concerns, but also some of the issues that are being created by um
you know, not keeping up with technology due to reductions there as well as reductions to curriculum and construction and and quite honestly this just uh at least from a concern the central office has is that as we're
looking at FY27 in using $2 million of END again that's a very high number and not something that we should be we should be moving away from that as opposed to continuing to use END is that as we look to FY28 um the issue we're going to have is that
is when FY27 closes so do all five of our collective bargaining agreements. Um so we will need to be negotiating um next fiscal year all five of our CPAs which I would imagine would come in in the vicinity of at least a million
dollars um as far as a budgetary impact to the district. So just keeping that in mind um you know that that's what we're looking at right now. Um, and hopeful that if again if we do get extra monies that money will be able to be utilized
to alleviate first and foremost some of the class size concerns that we have. I don't know Nancy, uh, Jeremy, Kevin. Anything you'd like to add? >> I think you pretty much covered it short of any questions the committee members might have.
Yeah. And I guess uh my only uh addition would be that we should be coming into uh some of the more um settled uh health insurance rates relatively soon. Uh maybe in the next couple weeks, I would
say that we'll have a pretty good idea. I'm hoping for the GIC assessment in the next few weeks as well. So between now and when the governor's proposal comes out, we should have a few more answers on some of those line items that we have in the budget.
The only other thing that I wanted to add is that um and again I don't have a definitive number on this but I I do know that we have a number of staff in the district that are and I have not looked at the numbers on this and I'm not even sure it would be possible to
determine an actual number but we do have a number of staff in the district that um have spouses that are teachers elsewhere and many districts have GIC And if the GIC numbers are going up as
they're projecting, we could see a large a a number of staff who may be getting health insurance from their spouse through the GIC, which is pretty comparable right now ratewise, shifting back to North Middle Sex next year
because of what's what's projecting to be a large increase to GIC rates. I know last year it was pretty close. Um but certainly something for us to consider is that even a small shift in health insurance could have a pretty
significant cost to the district if that in fact happens. And I know of a number of people that may be in that situation next year because it looks like our increase um based on what we're hearing is not going to be um as high as GIC.
And you you're predicting those numbers should be out fairly soon. Is it something that can be proactively requested once those numbers come out um of the the the staff to see if they're
going to switch? >> Um I think once the numbers come come out, we can certainly do do a survey. The problem is going to be is that um you know I don't know if they're actually going to have the numbers until the open enrollment process begins to
actually see >> see the difference >> what those what those numbers what the final numbers are and where they fall. Um you know in some cases you know someone that's in GIC may just change their plan where in other cases um you know our HMO blue plan may may be a much
better option for for some people that may be on GIC now. Okay. >> So, that may not be able to happen. We may not be able to do that until the springtime, I guess, is what I'm saying. When they actually see the numbers and they can compare the plans.
>> Okay. Um, so unfortunately an unknown for us as you go through the budgeting. So, that can be an unexpected change to any budget that you set. Okay. Um, thanks for making us aware of that. Um,
from the the budget message perspective, um, for the members of the subcommittee, what questions do you have for the administration? >> Was that directed right at me, Kim, or did you >> or Mike or I? >> Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> Either of you. I I'm I'm I've looking at it and you know, I don't know if I have any specific questions. I mean, so the tuition to non-public schools is going down a bunch. I assume that's just fewer students going to non-public schools
because we're bringing more back into the district or at least that's the plan. >> Yeah. So, uh if I I could respond to that. Um the tuitions this year are running lower overall across the board. So we're seeing um lower numbers than we
originally projected for FY26. >> Oh, okay. >> We're following it this year. So I again that translates into lower numbers for 27 >> theoretically. Um and both the director of special education and myself keep a very close eye on that right now because
there if there's any major changes mid year we would want to capture those for both this year in 26 and next year and 27. >> Mhm. So, it's good news in the sense that um it could be could be a result of some students coming back, but it also could
be students aging out once they hit >> um 22, age 22, they might age out of programs. Um so, she she has a a more specific list on any ups and downs as far as uh tuitions or transportation. >> Mhm.
>> As far as special ed transportation goes, we're we're also watching that. We have to we have a uh this is our final year with uh our vendor and we have the option of extending that contract for an an additional year. Um and we've been in
discussion about that but I don't believe a final decision has been made. >> Okay. Thank you. Nancy, when you say extend that, is that extend at the current um the terms or do you have an
opportunity to renegotiate if you extend a year? >> Uh there's a clause in the contract to extend for year four and five at a at a minimum of 4%. Um, I believe we can negotiate uh either
way, but um, we're kind of projecting that on average it's likely to be around 5% increase in the special ed transportation, but again, we have haven't gone through that process yet. >> Okay. And what is the earliest time you
can start to go through that? >> I would say really anytime. I mean, we should be able to get that going. Brad, do you have any feedback on that at all for extending the special ed transportation contract?
>> Um, not at this point. I think we have to have further discussions with Vanpool. >> Yeah. and and uh you know depending on how this year goes and how uh the ridership has been um there may be like I guess there definitely could be some
conversations with Vampoo on that and realizing that there's limited options when it comes to school-based transportation. um it's not like you're that the district is in the driver's seat to have uh all these different vendors at
our um sort of heels wanting the contract. But um I don't know the the thoughts of the other committee members, but from my perspective anytime we have the opportunity um to ask those that are um you know benefiting from the district
and their role in it if we're all cutting back to see if they can at least you know level it out for for a year and not go up or you know go down some percentages. So what are the thoughts of the other committee members? So, so are you I mean
are so you're you're saying that basically go and ask the the the transportation companies to accept less money it instead of uh more
because I mean you could ask but I'm I'm 99% sure the answer will be no. >> It it it might be no. Um it might be yes. I mean, if they're evaluating um some of their fixed costs, you know, if if their fuel costs have gone down, if
the writership has gone down, if there's, you know, anything within that contract that can be negotiated, um you know, even even just a a half a percent off, you know, of what the intended increase was if we're, you know, if we're all looking at cutbacks,
I think just again from my respect perspective, um the the answer is always no if we don't ask the question. >> Mhm. And >> I think that we may actually be in in a a little bit stronger of a position this
year to look at any potential reduction on an on an intended increase or projected increase that Vanpool or even D is doing only because um again from from what I'm hearing from other districts is that um some of the budget
issues this year seem to be statewide as opposed to you know the past couple years have been just regionals. Um, so I I think that, you know, there are several other districts um even districts to our east that are going to
see um significant um issues this coming year. And and and and the big issue that's out there is is what's going to happen with federal funding, especially around Title One as we go into FY 27. So, um, you know, if that money is is
truly impacted next year and we don't receive it, um, what is that going to look like? So, and that's something all districts are going to have to deal with. But on top of that, all districts are dealing with these large increases first and foremost. Many of them are GIC, so they're going to be dealing with
that significant health insurance increase. So, it's something that we're all sharing in, I think, at this point in time. >> Okay. Um, I do think it's worth the ask to ask Vanpool. Um, always worth the ask.
>> Um, I do think that like Brad had mentioned that health insurance is going to drive us a lot here. Um and there are the unknowns and I know that um even there's a potential of people
losing their jobs and things in the economy and I think we have to be careful with how because they could be coming to us for the health insurance. So >> right and and just to share too I think that's the biggest concern that the towns have as well is is that health
insurance piece and what that is going to look like. So, I think we're all concerned and looking at what the um what the looming figure is going to be. And again, based on what we're hearing, it does not appear as though our increase is going to be as high as others, but there is of course going to
be a substantial increase nonetheless. >> Brad, how much do we take in for title one money from the federal? I know. >> I would need either Gary or Nancy to answer that, but um you know, we do have a pretty robust Title One program in the
district. Nancy, do you know what what we bring in for that? >> Sorry to put you on the spot, but I don't have that number in front of me. >> Yeah, it's uh for FY26 this year is 386,000. Just over that. 386619.
And uh we do uh in that preliminary just to let you know that's in there. There's a lot in that budget message, but towards the end of the message we have a section where we've put in the federal grants that we've received for FY26 so far.
So if you wanted to um I think it's like way towards the end page 33. One thing that um in going through the the budget um message adding to the work of course um having
all the titles with a um a table of contents with live links into the document would be really helpful um just for future. You don't have to do it for this one because this one's done of course. Um, yeah. So, when I when I look
at those grants and I know um you you can only apply for what is out there, it does seem like you're you're getting several several smaller ones and that title one is um just under 400. And those grants
need to be essentially over and above what your regular do they all have non-supplant um clauses in them where it has to be something that is not replacing. >> I mean for the most part I would say yes
but they should be non supplant. There are some I think like the I'm not sure if like the life sciences STEM grant has any language like that in there. Do you know uh Kevin? >> Um I don't believe so. Sometimes the
private grants won't have those kind of stipulations restrictions. Okay. >> Okay. Um so staying on that that page actually there's a a question. So when when we look at
the the END that's at the top of that page um going from the FY14 through the FY 2024 and you know the the change and this is you know for the municipal side I can't
remember the the percentage but I had to run the analysis of how many municipalities are going into and using all their free cash and it was very high. you we're not unique um whether it's on the school side or the municipal side, but there was some higher years um
uh 16 and 17 um with a you know higher remaining balances and then it coming down. Um and then so interestingly the the the
shift of increase in use of END at the same time the enrollment is going down. So when community members or folks are looking at that um and you explain in there about the additional um sort of
strain on the budget from the special education and the needs of the students. Is is that what you would say is one of the main drivers of your longitudinal increase in the budget? like like if we're if we're having this
decreasing enrollment but increasing costs, is that one of the main drivers that the specialized um >> Well, I think uh I think >> happening. Yeah, I mean there's definitely that as a driver uh as far as
what you know students needs and especially you know as we've gone through COVID and come out of CO um but also just having a very limited increase in any other revenue for our budget. So it just continues to be that pressure on
the budget even if we level fund it. We have no other new sources of funding, >> right? Again, and I would just say that, you know, >> becomes a math problem. E >> even with, you know, they haven't updated the per pupil costs um I think since 2023. So, right now we're around
195 $19,500 per student. even our in district students that are in special education, you could argue inclusion, you know, just um you know, with with limited support, not even specialized programs uh or subsparate programs as as they're
referred to often. Um those students are are requiring much more than $19,500 a year to educate, you know. So we have the students that we you we may um you know the best
option is to move some students out of district so to in order to ensure that they get the education that they need and we're able to utilize some circuit breaker money but even with that that is still far beyond the $19,500. So the issue is is that even though our
enrollment's dropping, our special education population is increasing. Um I do think a part of that is postcoid because students fell behind and parents in turn requested that their students be tested. Um and oftentimes when you test
a student um you can find something uh especially when they have advocates and attorneys that are working with them. Um, so that's really the issue that's driving I I think that's our most significant budget driver that's not, you know, health insurance or collective
bargaining agreements or transportation is that special education piece and how those, you know, students that are on IEPs and even multilingual students are costing more than $19,500 to educate. Um, so that is a significant
issue that that we're continuing to face. And in turn, we're hiring more special education and MLL staff because that's mandated both at the federal and state levels. And then we're reducing um general education staff because that
isn't mandated. So we have to make the cuts somewhere. >> And I would also say that um the the dry declining enrollment spread out, right? So if you have, you know, 20 kids that are one grade level in one building, you
could make a reduction that would reflect that. But if you have 20 kids that are one kid in 20 classrooms, you're not going to make any cuts that reflect that. We're going to have less revenue coming in because we have 20 fewer kids, but there's nothing we can do to offset that. So what you have to be careful when you just kind of point
to declining enrollment because it doesn't actually mean there's a there's a measurable impact somewhere that we can we can offset that, >> right? So, what I So, I I tried to I created a little one page. I can't get it on the camera >> for you guys to see.
>> Um, but but just looking at like the change areas, um, the overall increase, health insurance increase, salaries could be because of collective bargaining, the transportation, special education, tuition. So, those are like biggest changes. And then budget
drivers. I've got the um the IEPs and things of that nature. the premium cost, contractual growth with transportation, um contractual growth for the collective bargaining, um and then like trying to
look at savings opportunities. So, um special education expansion, maximizing what we can with with transportation. I know early on the superintendent you there have been some um consolidations that happened some work that have been
done with debus to save time and and make that most efficient and then you know the biggest thing when I when I look at this is the the building reconfiguration and I know that you know that is a really sensitive subject um
and then the other savings you know um is the infra instructure like how do we maximize the facilities um the technology things like that. So this is not you know unplanned replacements and then looking at what all the reserves
are um with you know where are their funds um are there times when you're consistently and I know Kevin you were looking at the the under um spent categories to see if there was any consistency there if there's
any way to look at that without the impact. Um and then in in reviewing the impact from the closure of Ashby, looks like it was a uh about 11 um person actual cut, not reallocation of staff
that resulted in that. So that impacts your your class size. So if we're you just kind of thinking ahead and I and I capture that for myself after trying to read the budget message so that I can weed through it, right? So if I'm on the committee, we meet, I'm looking at this
stuff a lot. One is what is the the message from the message for the community members so that they can understand it. I think there's a few things that we're faced with is over the amount of what the municipalities say
that they could uh contribute on the the school department with all the other departments they have to consider. if there's an override, which has been, you know, a challenge for the communities to do an override,
the the wise of of what it is. And then for our perspective, long range looking at the issue of municipalowned buildings with no control over the maintenance and the planning
versus school departmentowned buildings. While I know it's all in the municipality, I think that's a little bit of the struggle of what we're looking at is, you know, how do how do you maximize the facilities that you
have when there's sort of issues at hand um potentially with with one of the facilities that I'm not sure, you know, when it comes to the the Ashby facility, we had that as one of the topics is like do we have any more information on that ADA compliance issue?
because that in order to to build the budget and look at the budget objectively the consideration of Ashb while there was the initial savings what happens now um and and do we have
anything back yet on the the ADA compliance issue? >> Um not as of yet. I believe um Lisa reached out to the TA and um Ashby um either over the weekend or or on Monday um asking for an update. We have not
heard of anything. Um I don't know um Jeremy if you want to speak to that at all. I know you were involved in some of those discussions. >> Yes. So Brad, Kevin and I all attended as well as Dave Mari the buildings and grounds
director. Uh my personal sense from the uh the people from the state who came to look at it is that the ramp is not significantly out of compliance but it was I think about one degree out of
compliance which was uh it sounded based on the discussion it sounded like that was going to be enough. Uh there was also a couple of other issues that I can see when it was installed were easily overlooked. Uh
where there's uh no lower railing for wheelchairs that is continuous. Uh so the break where there's vertical supports becomes an issue. Uh which makes the width of the ramp an issue as well because we can't install a lower
railing without moving the railing entirely. It is wide enough right now, but not once that railing is installed. There's also questions on the turnaround. And uh they also questioned the lack of uh railing coming up from
the parking lot area as well as the need for handicap spaces towards the top. Uh the need for handicap spaces towards the top sounded like it might include some need to do some regrading uh to ensure that there are level handicap spaces. We
don't have the actual findings. That's based purely on conversations that were occurring. Uh we did some of the district representatives went into the building afterwards to take a look at a couple things having heard that discussion uh because
uh the investigation was specific to that front entryway and therefore they limited themselves to that front entryway uh with no interest in looking at other areas. Uh but based on what we learned from those discussions, we personally felt or at least I
personally felt, I'll speak for myself, uh that the entrance that Ashb, the town leadership in Ashb wanted to propose as an alternative handicap access probably would not meet compliance because the
door cannot be opened uh full 90° uh based on the swing and where the wall juts. out a little bit. Uh there's also a heater that we believe is a little bit too close to meet with and it does not
include any looks at the uh the chair lift going down to the cafeteria area which will we don't know yet, but I'm guessing will likely need to be examined uh or evaluated to some degree prior to
opening the building. Uh my concern is that that front entry is going to cost some level of money, but I I believe depending upon how strict someone gets the lift down to the cafeteria area is probably the bigger concern. Mhm.
>> Some something else to consider too was that um while we were there um I I know that there was at least one community member who was not happy that um other things were not looked at um up to including the inside of the building and
the playground area. And I can't imagine that that um individual is not going to push that that that those items be looked at as well where they were not looked at the first time around. So there they there there's the possibility for more to be coming um
from the person that actually filed the complaint in the first place. >> Okay. So in in budget planning it means that you I if there's any type of
reconfiguration. So right now a reconfiguration in in my mind is moving kids back into that facility as an option. If if that were ever to be an option, this would have to be addressed
first. And if it's addressed and the school is using it, that becomes I'm I'm guessing, please correct me if I'm wrong, a liability now on our part or would that
be a liability on the town's part? >> I think it depends. Um I could probably speak to that. I think it depends on how that was funded. So, if it's a relatively small uh cost, like say maybe some minor adjustments to a ramp or something like
that, it's possible the district could cover that with some of the capital planning money. >> So, that would be could be one way to approach covering those costs. If the costs get extensive where um that's not a possibility, then it would end up um
likely being something that we would take a vote, school committee would take a vote on to borrow the money. Um in that case, if that were if we were to go to a larger uh cost, say warrant article, the school committee would vote
first and then it would go to the three towns to approve that borrowing. Um, so all three towns, it's unanimous to borrow money. Um, would have to would have to take a vote if they decided that they didn't need to take a vote. Say, and this has happened in the past. Um,
I'm sure some of you have heard this before, but I know this Mike wasn't here back then, but um, sometimes the towns don't necessarily have any impact. And the way the way that the costs are allocated is based on the number of students in the building.
So if we needed to make say written renovations that required borrowing money for Ashb um the current regional agreement says that the school committee will make a determination as to who would have been in that building. Um and this has happened before with Squan Cookook where there was very few
students in the building. um one of the driving reasons we've been looking at the regional agreement because it doesn't really have a mechanism for um like a district-owned building on how that debt would be allocated. So any
case, long story short, um if the school committee decided that there was a project there that required borrowing, it would go through that process um require town meeting approvals um at least by Ashb. And if the other towns didn't want to vote, for instance, they
could elect not to vote. And if it 60 days passes, then it's deemed passed. >> Okay. >> And Nancy, does that have to pass by 2/3 or all three towns? >> All three towns. >> All three
>> for for debt if it was a debt service borrowing. Um, alternatively, um, I think we could look at and and again, I don't, it depends on if schools involved or not, but the town certainly can raise money for their building. Um, they could do a warrant article, too. So, that would be outside of the school
committee, though. That would be their decision to do that. >> Okay. So essentially um looking at different documents here but the the projection of reconfiguration
and reopening for students to use ashb the 1 six could be closer to to 2 million or we don't know right so I'm just putting that cost out there for for
the repairs as opposed to keeping that status quo and not considering that part of reconsideration for any cost savings. like I'm just as a finance committee when I look at this and the numbers that you've presented
and talking it through, you know, with our with our colleagues in the full school committee, it it seems very difficult to try to put forth a budget from the administration that would include that when we don't
know what the results are yet of that um walkthrough audit that happened on the 18th. We don't know the cost implications. And then even to do that, to get students back in, if there was even a
vote accepted by all the communities to to have that happen, my my thought is that even if you know that you get the vote through, there's it's not possible to even have that work done once
town meetings happen. if it was voted in, if those costs were voted in because it would have to be part of an override, would not even allow the school to be open in September because by the time you go out to contract, get bids in.
Am I looking at that timeline correctly? >> So, I think unfortunately you're you're very accurate on the it's a big unknown. Uh I'd say the 1.6 Six is if anything a conservative number in costs for reopening. Uh cuz I know
certain aspects like security system upgrades uh were based on a paired down and uh wiring costs from about a year ago. Uh but the ADA compliance is the big question mark and I think that could
be yeah any it depends upon what else gets questioned and what doesn't meet compliance and I think it starts with the findings from the most recent uh complaint. Uh that could be anywhere from a few thousand to quite a bit as
you indicated. Um I'd hate to throw a number at it. time frame also kind of depends because it depends on what we are required to do in order to open. If the concerns remain purely based on the
list that the district provided to the school committee uh plus the entryway I would I hate to put too much of a time frame on it. Nancy might be able to chime in, but I would hazarded guess probably
somewhere in the four months range. Uh assuming that it's kind of limited to redoing that front entry, but that probably is conservative as well. Um it really depends on the scope and we would need a contractor to give us a a better
idea of what that would take. If it were to involve more such as the access to the cafeteria, I think then yes, we'd be looking at a much larger time frame. >> So, you know, Lisa and Mike, I'd love to hear from you on this topic because we
have as part of budget planning reconfiguration. >> And so, I I I have a thought, but Lisa didn't see your hand up. So, I'm going to ask you your thoughts. So talking about the ADA compliance within the front of the building and the
ramp, what is the amount that triggers all of it to be done? Like cuz we've talked about an amount. It will trigger something, Nancy. I know we've talked about it and that triggers that
everything be done if you do a a certain construction amount. Is that right? >> Yeah. Um there's there's different rules about it. So I don't want to just arbitrarily say it, but the last time I
looked at it, it's a percentage of um the value of the building. So believe it was like 35%, don't quote me on that number. If if you are constructing or
reconstructing 35% cost um then you'd be required to bring everything up to compliance. >> But there is a trigger. There's a trigger out there. >> Yeah, there is. >> But small projects um generally wouldn't
hit that threshold. So you wouldn't be required to do that. Um again, we'd have to depending on what project we're doing and how much that costs and its impact. Um now having said that the inspection obviously that we'd probably be required to do that what whatever those um
changes are if we if we were given a response on that. Um it's also possible they might allow us some grace period to get those done. So, I don't think they would necessarily, you know, they'll work with usually
they'll work with you on ADA compliance for especially if um you know, you're on the way to doing them. >> So, so just as a thought experiment, let's suppose the ADA compliance issue could be resolved for a relatively low
cost. Let's just let's just imagine that the the the remaining costs that are associated with with you know reconfiguration with reopening AES you know obviously the majority of it is staffing it's you know salaries and
benefits and whatnot and then there's all the various other things that need to be addressed that um you know the security system network switches etc etc but like you know really all of that is relatively marginal compared to just the cost of staffing the building. Correct?
Like that's, you know, the majority of it. So, you know, if we're going to if we're going to reconfigure reopen AES, we have to contend with how do we absorb that cost or how do we deal with that that additional cost? Correct. Like that's that's kind of the the major
the major issue there. So, I I I would just alert the finance committee to the reality that um you know, the numbers we've come up with are in the you know, $1.6 million neighborhood to reopen
Ashby Elementary. In addition to that, that would require another um significant move which um which our staff would likely not be able to do again because it created um all
sorts of issues for them last year. Um the other piece that the committee would need to consider is it would it would for all intents and purposes um overextend the amount that we would like our current budget. If you look at our
current budget ask and the END um amount, it's likely going to overextend that. And then on top of that, um we're going to have our five CBAs to negotiate
next year. >> Um and just to point out, the towns have repeatedly asked, um including the ASHPTM, for us to be looking at closing a second building. Um, so, so that's I I
I'm not sure how we would create a situation where we're not closing at least or keeping one building closed. And it's important to point out that right now Spalding really can't be one
of those because if it were just because of the sheer size of Spalding um which would which we owe the least amount the the least amount of clawback money from MSBA on Spalding but Spalding is the largest building of the three that could be considered by far.
Squanakook would be far too expensive to close because we still have debt service on that. But if we were to ever consider closing Spalding, we would likely have to redistrict at least fourth grade into Hawthorne Brook, possibly more than just fourth grade, and then we would
eliminate the possibility for there to be any type of relief at Varnham Brook where all of our special education programs currently are. Now when we moved the programs to PEPL back you know five six years ago it made sense because
most the majority of the students were from Peril and the programs weren't as large as they are now. Our programs have grown and in fact some of our programs have more Townson students than Pepperrell students in them. So, any
type of redistricting that would include potentially the closure of a building, which to me, we have to take a building offline because we have space. Um, at least for the time being, we have space and I don't know where else we're making that money up. Um,
that's going to create a problem. Uh, um, then right now that problem at Varn and Brookke is pretty significant. They they absolutely need some assistance. Um, and we need to look at spreading out some of those uh programs, potentially looking at moving the steps program to
Townsend alto together. Um, but again, we're going down that path of if we're going to talk about reopening a building using all of our free cash without knowing what will happen in FY28, without knowing what will happen with
federal funding, without knowing what will happen with our CBAs. And to be frank, our CBAs are going to come at an increase because we have to compete now with all of the other districts that are
paying their staff. And there's not a pool, as I've mentioned several times before, of qualified teachers, especially that are coming out of college now. Um, you know, there is a significant national shortage of educators.
So, we don't want to put ourselves in a position where we've we're spending money on buildings as opposed to staff and then we can't afford to keep the talented staff that we have in place. That's just my opinion, but I think that, you know, that's that's kind of
the situation that we're in right now. And I think our priority should be looking at class sizes and how do we um alleviate some of the issues that last year's budget reductions have created. >> Yeah.
Yeah, from my perspective, I I agree with that because the you know, the class size issue has been an issue this this school year. You know, my my son's class is 28 or 29 or 30. I forget exactly how many at this point. It might
have shifted, but it's it's big and it's causing issues. Um, and so, >> um, yeah, that and that's been the thing that's been on my mind. you know, I've been, you know, thinking about the Ashb Elementary and, you know, the
possibility of reopening it, but I just keep coming back to the fact that like so much additional money would be required that would have to be have to come from somewhere. And, you know, looking at the budget, you know, there's not really a lot of places that that
money could come from unless you could somehow convince the towns to, I don't know, pay for it with an override or something like that. But even then, that would just be a one-year stop gap. It wouldn't solve the longer term like problem of how do you sustain that
budget? So, that's that's kind of where where my mind is right now. That doesn't mean that my mind is made up, but like looking at looking at the situation, I just I don't see a way forward that involves opening
Ashb Elementary without making some really de devastating sacrifices in terms of like number of staff and class sizes. So when I look at this um you know it's
from my perspective is trying to distill the areas into something that is easily digested by the community. So you know right now I've got a sixoot table in front of me with with these papers everywhere. >> Um and trying to absorb it all I think
is hard. So when I look at the budget that you presented, um, first and foremost, there has to be an attempt at meeting
what the town administrators asked for. So I think we need that budget and what those reductions would look like and then a budget and you and you have all the all of the information is here
but for for you know sort of planning purposes. This is the budget that you think that you need. This is what the municipal leaders have said that they would like you to keep your budget at. It would look like this. A reconfiguration to
open Ashb would look like this. And I think you need to put some assumed cost in there over the 1.6 for the ADA compliance because wherever it comes from when we say the municipal budget or the school
budget, it's all one budget. All it's all one package, right? So the money's got to come from somewhere. Um, so what that would look like and then I I do think and it and it might not be appropriate for FY27,
but we have this space issue with the current configuration. So how does that space get alleviated if if finance-wise somewhere there has to be a building
closed? looking looking at this reconfiguration of what a reconfiguration looks like for your needs whether that's modular classrooms what that looks like
if you if right now for FY27 to alleviate the space concerns which you have listed as a priority area right and that's what you're here for is educating the to get that extra space that you need right now.
What does that look like? Like if if you needed two modular classrooms at this site and three at this site, what what does that look like if you asked for it in the FY27 budget? Because that's a part of reconfiguration. You your
classroom sizes are not adequate. Is it more space? Is it more teachers? like what what does that look like to be at the optimum student teacher ratio? Um, and what does that budget look like? Because that's your reality, right? Is
what you're showing is is the class sizes are too big. So, if you're going to separate them, do you need more classrooms? Do you just need more teachers? Like, what is that scenario and what does that budget really look like? We would actually just based on our on
you know the work we've already done um currently we do not have a space issue. um even if we were to create additional sections um you know the only place where there are space concerns uh really are at
Varnbrook but again if we're looking to uh spread the special education subsparate programs out those concerns would be eliminated because there there is space at both Hawthorne Brook Spald and Spalding um so there's certainly space um there's also space
considerations for what we're ultimately going to do at the high school, you know, um we could potentially look at um you know, um eighth grade being at the high school. Um we could potentially look at uh keeping the eighth grade at
the middle school level and then moving prek to the high school if we need space at Squan Cookook. So there's there's definitely um opportunities to move some things around with the current space that we have, but I I wouldn't say that we have a space
issue right now. Um, and you know, I cannot predict the future, but ultimately as as we talked about down the road, um, and it's in the narrative, uh, we do really need to consider something being done on the Squanakook
Hawthorne Brook campus to bring the that, um, Hawthorne Brook Middle School in that facility up to par. Um, and that's something that would certainly eliminate um likely any um space issues that the district may have because it
could be part of that project right now. And again, it's not in writing anywhere, but what the MSBA always looks at and asks about is space. what do you have for space in the district where um Ashb is currently offline um and it's a lease building we have less space with the
potential of utilizing Spalding which is another lease space uh for any type of a building project for overflow and student placement to get us through a building project with the plan of potentially moving on from Spalding as well and turning it back over to the
town that could potentially address another space issue that the MSBA has. Now, again, they're not going to come out and say, "You have too much space." Those are just conversations that I have had with Diane Sullivan at the MSBA. Um, and that's something that they always
look at is space. And that's one of the um you know certainly I don't think it was helpful in the the fir the last time we applied for a project at Hawthorne Brook uh with the amount of space that we had but you know any potential space issues or growth that the district is
going to see over the next you know five to potentially 10 years could be addressed through a building project and that would give us the data that we need and quite honestly um the backup that we need to get the MSBA a to support a project because um Hawthorne Brookbrook
has to be addressed and it's not something that the district can handle on its own. >> Right. I looked at some of those um preliminary numbers that you had given um with with the walls that you had um and the elevators and things of that nature
um for the future. Um Jeremy, I see you just one thought here. So, so if it's if the reconfiguration doesn't require new space, you have the existing space to get to the lower class sizes. You know, the increases for the FTEE seems very
moderate. And tell me if I'm wrong, doesn't seem like you're going to alleviate the class size issue with the FTE that you're asking for. So, it's almost like that additional column of like here's
what you're asked for. Here's what the municipalities say they can give. Here's really what you need to optimize your learning environment. And if if if it's the will of the people to have Ashby be open, here's what that costs. So that
it's if that can go on one sheet with that high level, Nancy, the way that you have sort of this page I can't >> can't see it. >> You can't see it. Yeah, it's the one um
doesn't have a page number on it, but it's 1720 26 that you did it and it's the um the NMFY by appropriation category. So, if if the you've got the administration, then the instructional
support, the pupil support, >> that's the Yeah, that's a budget summary page, the very first one. Yep. >> Yep. Um so if that page was replicated and rather when you go right you have like the budget transfers and the remaining unencumbered and all of that
if it was the current requested from the administration what it would look like with keeping to the TA's amount what it would be for you to have the optimum class sizes and everything that you need
and then what it would look like with adding a and all of those numbers. So for maybe the the expanded um uh staff so that it's a lower uh student um to pupil ratio is like in this big packet,
but I think it's just harder for people to look at and the the budget to get to the percentage that the ETAs were looking at somewhere in all of these numbers,
right? and and it's not for us to tell you whi where because that's part of your day-to-day, but to look at these categories um of what could potentially be areas to to shift
funding or to really look to make sure that there's not duplication of funding like when you asked for the teachers and I know Nancy you were getting us information on actual numbers hired as opposed to the projected numbers of hired
how many positions were left vacant that you had to take in contractual services. Um, you know, whatever that might look like because I think I think the communities need to see the impact of each one of
those scenarios. Um, and if if the ask for the override, a potential override, small numbers, right? If it's $100, that is the ask right now, but you still
don't have the optimum learning environment, but for $103 you do, like I think we just need to to see that um on one sheet to really decide from a policy perspective of of what we say the budget
is, >> right? Because we're going to have to take a vote at some point to say this is what we vote on for your budget. Is is that making sense? >> Yeah, it does make sense. Um I guess I'll jump in. Um one of the things I I would recommend especially for the
town's approved what what they think what they can um support is to wait for the governor's proposal because that may or may not impact any particular town um andor you know the obviously the state
aid portion will be coming in at that point. So, it's the tricky part is it's it it wouldn't be too difficult, I think, to do a one pager that has the current budget. Um, a town approved
budget pending those changes. Um, the AES column we've already been working on and um the optimum meaning class sizes are where we'd like them to be. So, really it's four four scenarios. Yeah, if I have that correct?
>> Yeah. Um and then the differences between those. >> Yeah. And and un I understand you don't have all the information um that you potentially will have um in the future, but even just kind of setting that up as a straw man with some drag and drop. I
think the other thing that could be helpful for community is to understand, you know, you've got the going backwards in the document here. um the all of the different funds, revolving funds. Um if
that was a a table for when we start talking about um the the budget in its totality because now the budget message is out there. Um so that we can look at the budget and
budget planning to say these are areas that are designated funds that can't be used. these are grants. um this is the operating um and just as you're looking at that because the underspending was
not consistent enough from what I initially saw from what um Kevin had shared with me doesn't have clear trends if there can just be a real extra look back and not saying anything would be intentional but of sort of the
duplication of funds and what I mentioned about you you had planned to have a teacher And so that it's in this teacher budget, but you had to shift it to another budget because to get from where you're at to what the municipalities initially said isn't a a
huge amount. It would have an impact on the budget. Um but just sort of, you know, double double looking at all of the different areas um to see. And then my final thing is, you know, long-term we're not going to um solve it because
we don't don't know this is that the impact of the insurance and what that might mean for for an override ask. I did just want to point out too and sorry Lisa um Lisa I don't mean to jump over you but I just want to be clear so
that everyone's aware of this because I'm not sure and again if anyone from the public is on but um as you know the towns asked for 3% we're at 3.06 06 we are really not close to what the towns have asked for because the assessments
they were asking for a 3% assessment. Um so that would require a substantial reduction for us to get there. Um just to clarify that for anyone that may not know that. The other piece is is that um one of the issues in this budget because
we were trying to be cognizant of what the towns were asking us was to try to put forth a budget that was um as uh minimalistic as possible. um and we haven't really addressed um all of our
class size issues and our ask, but I will say that the way things will shift next year um again, this is we're not sure what kindergarten's going to look like. Um and we never are until late in the summer. Um but those large
kindergarten class sizes um won't be as large in first grade because we have more staff in the first grade. um and some of our other so things seem to be matching out well and we do have a potential solution to address the grade
seven and 8 issues in both buildings which isn't um optimal by any means but it it would um it would alleviate the large class sizes in grades seven and eight without the addition of more staff as well. So, we're trying to be as
creative as possible, use um optimize our staff to the best of our ability while at the same time again being cognizant of what the town's um asks are because they have, you know, some sign they have significant issues of their own that they have to deal with,
>> right? And I don't I mean in big big picture I know you don't think it's or you think it's large the difference between the 3% and the 4% for the assessment um relatively speaking from looking
around the state is not as large as some I know it's an impact for you um but quite honestly I expected it to be a bigger delta from what the administration will be asking asking for and what the municipalities
could support. So I I I I expected it to be much larger. Um superintendent. So >> I'm not I'm not dismissing that it's not a impact to you, but it's it's not at all what I expected, but we we have to
have people see what that looks like. Um go ahead, Lisa. I know we put you on hold a little bit there. >> No, I was going to So, Kim, I'm just going back to what you want them to do. You want them that
their wish list. Is that correct? You want a wishlist budget. I I don't call it a wish list, Lisa. What I hear from the administration is there's some specific needs that probably are not in this current budget. Um, >> yeah. >> For the optimum. And so, when it's the
education of the kids that I I I see no fluff anywhere. Sorry, people moving on the screen here. Just move from my left or my right. Um, so, so I don't think it's a wish list. I think it's to to operate in the highest most effective manner for
the education of the children. It would be this our true needs list. >> Like our true needs list is what budget you're looking for. Like the true needs. >> Yeah. Yes, we can optimize it down to this, >> but we would prefer this one,
>> right? I I I feel like the the administration is moving the chairs on the deck right now. >> I think I think I think they're doing that at the request of the towns, though. I think that we've had these issues for long enough that like the towns said, "This is how much we can afford to increase the budget." And so
the the administration has said, "Okay, we're going to try to meet that target." and presenting like I understand what you're saying is like here is if we were trying to do everything the right way and weren't like making all of these sacrifices what would the budget look
like and then here is all the things we're going to sacrifice to get the budget down to the level that you guys want it to be at b you know basically saying we're already >> right >> not doing all of these things to ask us to not do even more things is to say
that like you know we're cutting we're cutting you know, we're not doing all this stuff already because we can't afford to. To tell us to not do even more is to like to really hamstring the district, >> right? >> Yeah. So, that's exactly it. So, the
reconfiguration topic reconfiguration to go back to to Ashby costs a reconfiguration right now you don't need for buildings. In the future, you might from what I'm hearing from you. So the reconfiguration for that is a reconfiguration
with teachers within the current campuses. So it's you know if there's 10 classrooms in the hallway and seven are being used the reconfiguration is using all 10 classrooms to get class sizes down to 21. whatever that scenario is or
and then the previous under spending what we've looked at doesn't have enough of a trend but there might be some areas that in order to meet what the municipalities
have requested this is where it would have to come from this this is where it gets shaved out um I think that's the only way that we can truly analyze all the great information that you pulled together for us in a way
that's condensed enough to look at this is what the potential override to fund the school would look like. >> So, let me ask the administration, is this something that can be done?
>> Yeah, I don't see why we can't do some kind of uh scenarios uh especially since we're doing it at that high level. >> Yes. Um, I will point out that the the one reason we're at a 3.06 or the one of the largest reasons we're at a 3.06 and not like last year we were at 5.48%
increase is is due to the tuition changes. So, if you look at that section under the the bud the budget by function, >> you'll see large reductions. I mean, it's really between all those lines down the 9,000 series.
um you're looking at, you know, almost an $800,000 reduction in tuition cost in the general fund budget. So without that, if we were level funding tuitions from last year to this year, this this next year, you wouldn't have we wouldn't be having these we wouldn't be in as good a shape
as far as the increases go and we wouldn't be that close to meeting what the towns are looking for. It's really I'm just trying to point this out because this won't be here next year. >> Yeah. >> Right. I mean, I I can't imagine that for two years in a row, we'll have a $800,000 reduction in tuition. So, I just
>> No, it it >> it's long term and and I think that's the other thing about projecting the budget for, you know, this is what it looks like for 20 FY27, but you also then have to realize that you're keeping that. Let's say we change, we have a reconfiguration, we're keeping that
going forward. So, I mean, I I think there's I don't think there's any scenario where we don't have one building closing because even if we did a reconfiguration, as an example, that'll be the hardest one to reconfigure to give a scenario because
we have Ashb at the moment u not being utilized. That means all the students that are at Squanakook are going somewhere. Um that building is now not utilized. So, what are we I need to know. I kind of need to know what we're we'd be looking at with the other buildings.
>> I >> in order to project it. >> I And I think on top of that, I think we need to know what we're being asked. I mean, if we're being asked to um look at a plan where Ashby Elementary is reopened, what does that reopening look
like? Um just keeping in mind that I mean just based on the past we absolutely will need an administrator there. We we can't have an we can't not have an administrator in all of our buildings which we've done without previously. We we just can't do that
anymore. Um but are we talking about a K to2 option? Are we talking about K to4? Are we talking about just Ashb or are we talking about Ashb and Tensent? That's something that we really need to know is are we looking at just reopening
Ashby and going back to the way it was previous. >> So, so for that level, my perspective is that that is then us taking over day-to-day operations.
And so if if we're we're asking you to look at um reconfiguration and so we know that there's a sentiment from folks some that Ashby needs to be reopened. So daytoday what does that
look like for you? Like I'm not going to tell you who needs to be in that building. You know what you need. So if it's an administrative, if it's a nurse, it's this, it's that. Um, and to make it work, you you need it to be these grades
and they need to come from these towns. That's I think more on your technical expertise of what you need, >> okay, >> than than us saying it has to be these grades. We're asking you for the
scenarios. And it's the same with, you know, reconfiguration. you know, if you don't need to reconfigure structure of any of the current facilities that are in use and it's just reconfiguration internally of
those structures but by more staff that's okay. Um, you know, long-term reconfiguration looking at I think is another another discussion topic. Um, but I don't think hearing from what
you've said that the feasibility to close an additional building, which was requested of you from a town administrator, is feasible or possible at this moment without other changes that would require
funding. So, if you closed another building, you would have to at at some point have additional space. So I don't think that's our ask from my perspective from the finance committee for this year. Um unless something drastic
happens. Um so so that is just a reconfiguration of what it would look like in that building from your perspective. You've got to manage the whole process. So the the only the only remaining
question or questions that I have is that any any type of reopening is going to require some type of vote whether it be an override um if we were
to consider redistricting towns again towns would be in fact buying into Ashby Elementary School and capital projects that's going to require voting. And yes, >> just so the central office team is clear, the expectation was is we were going to have a decision on Ashby
Elementary by our January 27th meeting. This is potentially putting us into um the voting season which is late spring potentially and not having a direction from which to work in until we have the
results of a vote on determining if a building is being reopened or not reopened. I just just want to be clear on that. We are in fact going to be putting ourselves back into the same situation unless I'm misreading this that we were in last year. Well,
if if I were to look at it now without all those figures in front of me, just distilling everything from the packet, financially the impact is larger to reopen that facility.
Right. >> Right. So, so the money isn't even there right now to operate your basic needs to keep the school functioning. let
alone what I'm hearing from our different meetings um full school committee and and our subcommittees is that the learning environment for the children is not optimum
because of lack of budget to have the staff that you need. So, so you've got multiple issues that you're facing with town says you have this much. This is what you actually need to have the
optimum learning environment. That's one budget. So, then we have the budget that you asked for or you've developed. And then there's the additional line or column in the budget of the
reconfiguration. If Ashby were to reopen, that would cost X. And and you've got it in the packet, but it it's just moving some of this information into columns so it's all in one spot so that people can see it to make that decision. Like you said, we as the
committee will ultimately make that decision based on the information that you bring us. Um and and the the biggest thing with Ashby right now, aside from long-term is the ADA compliance,
>> we have an unknown that we have no control over right now. >> And and so you've got to put a best guess placeholder from what Jeremy knows from the the walkth through. Um you know, so trying to get a hold of that report
is paramount. Ashb needs to get that into the hands of the school committee. >> Yeah. But I think I don't think Ashb has a lot of control over that though because that's you know the state is is sort of in their hands at this point. You know there's a whole lot of things
that none of us either in the district or in the towns have any real control over unfortunately. >> Understood. But us as a school committee >> until we get that, >> we don't know what that implication is.
>> But so I think we kind of have to just go forward with a I don't know a guess or an assumption like it's going to cost some amount of money. It could be a relatively small amount. It could be quite a large amount, but it's going to cost something. Uh so we just kind of, you know, you move forward with, okay,
it'll cost something. Maybe it'll be $10,000. Maybe it'll be $100,000. Maybe it'll be a million. I I have no idea. I have no conception for how much fixing that would cost. But >> that's why that placeholder I'm okay with Jeremy doing his best estimate >> based on what he knows.
>> That's what everybody's doing right now. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So, >> yeah. So, I think but I do like the idea of, you know, like here's optimum fund like like here's what we would really need. Here is what we would need plus
opening Ashb and here's what we're asking for. Here's all the things that we have taken out of what we need to get to that like 3% figure which is actually still too high. But, you know, like anyways, the the the point is, you know, I think people I think I can see what
you're getting at, which is we need to we need to make people understand that like the budget that we're asking for is already sacrificing a lot. it's already not addressing some things that, you know, were we not dealing with all of these budget constraints, we would be
spending more money on these things and we're choosing not to in order to bring the budget under a certain amount. So, what are all of those costs that we are not not spending for this fiscal year because we're trying to keep the budget
under a certain amount? Like, what are all those things? Because if you point all of those things out to people and say, you know, here's the things we're not doing specifically to save money in the budget, it might be an easier cell to say like the that's why this
budget is the way it is, >> right? And I think the other thing that would be informative um you know for the class size, I think it's hard for when you just have the average, right? So I want to look at mean, median, and mode. most people a simple there's this number
under at or over what is optimum and we might not have any that are under but I think rather than looking at the average if people knew grade five there's this many in the correct spot and this many has
way too many kids and this one you know >> could move a kid I think that's easier for the public to understand um with the implications. So if if the budget that the municipalities ask for means that there's x number of
classrooms over the optimum and then the budget that you're going to give us that corrects this, right? Then they can see >> what the give and take is and then it's not just a budget figure. It shows the
direct connection to the children. >> Yeah. Yeah. Because fundamentally that's that's you know the the need the the need that really needs to be met is the the educational needs of the students and you know class sizes in the 30 plus
range are not conducive to uh to a good classroom environment you know which hampers learning >> right Jeremy I see your hand up >> uh so I guess a couple points
clarification. I respectfully disagree that put creating an estimate on the ADA costs is a good good plan. Uh my concern there is that we don't know the scope of what might be involved. uh we at best
might get an answer when the town gets an answer as to what is required for the front entry but that is not necessarily a complete look and I don't know we don't have a path at the moment to get a complete look >> I'm afraid that if we put a number to
that uh it is either going to be woefully underbudgeted or it's going to be seen as over bloated uh and that is not going to help the conversations either. Uh as it is the
numbers we put in there I think for the if we opened ash we we tried to answer that in the narrative and the numbers we use were somewhat purposely conservative when in doubt >> uh because we don't want to be we want
to make it clear that we're not trying to overbloat the budget for these purposes. So, I like the first part, the correction of this is not ADA compliance. This is just addressing the front entry. Um, I think that's a really good thing to point out and we need to
change our language on that because that does give a misinterpretation that what's being looked at now is ADA compliance. So, we should probably make that of the current complaint um addressing the current ADA complaint of the front entryway because you're 100%
correct. It doesn't address at all. >> Yeah. There's other potential issues, but we have no no sort of insight into no real insight into any of those because those weren't looked at because they were only looking at that specific complaint. >> Yep. Um so I I agree with with that um
disagreement that you have, Jeremy. Um what I what I think we we have to somehow though have what that perspective could be and I would I I don't know an easy way to get that. um you know is it do we go on like this is
what a replacement cost would be that would be overloaded right because it's not full replacement unless it needs to be widened like if if adding that railing on the lower end does not have the correct width so then you've got to widen it so then there is a reconstruction piece of it
>> um I think a for example of the grading for the handicap parking That's something that I think could get a a quote on that is fairly reliable from I know that it won't be actual, but
I know that the number that's on the paper right now, the 1.6 million, isn't the whole number. So, I don't want to have people look at that number either. >> Yeah. I maybe we just need to when we're talking about these numbers we you know
we say that they're I mean obviously you can say they're estimates all you want but people are going to see the numbers and they're going to assume that that's the numbers. I mean, maybe you just put a plus at the end of the number and say and and you know, just always note that like there's there's unknowns and that
those unknowns could result in that final in the number being higher because in fact, you know, are likely to result in the number being higher. But again, we don't know for sure. So >> yeah, >> because I think that if you say this is the number and then people say, "Well,
okay, we just need to find exactly that much money and we can solve the problem." And then of course you have to say, "Well, no, that that that's still potentially not enough." And so, you know, >> Yeah. So maybe a footnote, Jeremy, would you be okay with like a footnote of like what we know now of potential? Um, and
and by the time we get this, maybe maybe Ashley will be able to get their hands on the on the report. >> Yeah. So it all depends on the time frame of that which anyone I'm assuming including B uh leadership knows what the time frame will be and I wouldn't want
to put numbers in even without knowing what the state is requiring even for the front entry. >> Uh and it will take time to get all of those numbers times time that I don't know that we properly have
>> in order to put together next year's budget to move forward. Uh my personal feeling and this is speaking only for myself is that this is kind of a minimum cost if we want to prioritize opening Ashb. >> Yes.
>> Uh I agree with you that having a this is what it would take us to get to where we should be would be nice, but there are a lot of variables and a lot of work that goes into that as well. Be aware of that. there's a lot of hours and there's a limitation to that scope. Uh for
instance, do we go as far back as reinstating the librarians we cut several years ago? Um you know, how far back and how far do we go in those scenarios? And I think realistically speaking, we're not going to get that
needs list. Uh and that's personal opinion, granted, but we're not going to get that list anyhow. Uh, I think the budget that we've put forward is probably the max we're going to get. >> Yeah, I I I would tend to agree with
that. I think it's not about expecting to get that budget. I think it's about it's about painting the picture for the public that like this is not like you may think this budget is too high but like if we were actually trying to
maintain like a a level of sort of services and staffing and whatnot that we like would sort of ideally have then this is what it would cost and you know just and I know it will probably be a much higher number and it could vary
depending upon like decisions that you make like how far back do you go? But like I'd say even if you just go back like a few years or maybe you go back to like 2019 or something like the precoid years when before co sort of threw
everything into a disarray. you know the >> other I I think that people are losing perspective on the fact that like the schools are already cutting a ton of things that like again if the budgets were sort of being properly supported we
wouldn't be cutting. So I think that that pre presenting that information in a way and I think again like those that those figures don't need to be super precise. They just need to be kind of ballpark just to give an idea of like okay if we actually wanted to get to
like where we should be realistically in terms of class sizes then like what would that take you know again and and averages versus maximums and all that stuff like you know if you could just set get it so that class maximum class size is below a certain amount or like
26 or something or if because you know average is not really a super useful measure in my opinion because you can have outlines tires that throw it off. But um you know m maximum and median like would be good you know trying to get that down. And I know that's hard to
that's not trivial to do, but I feel like if you could just get a ballpark figure that say it would cost like x millions of dollars more to get to that point, then you know the the budget that we're actually presenting in order to get it passed will seem much more
reasonable when you're looking at like here's what we really should be doing versus what we are doing. >> Right. And and Jimmy, for for me, when I say this, I'm not I'm not telling the superintendent,
I want librarians back or I want this back. I need to rely on his expertise to say for the optimum learning environment with what we're faced with right now, I need X number of this. I need X number of that. I I I can I can be descriptive.
I won't be prescriptive because that's not my job. My job is to say to ask the superintendent, in order for you to most effectively educate the students right now, what do you need? Because I don't think it's the budget that's been presented.
Right. I think you've you've tried to pair back as much as you can to get to the ask of the town administrators understandably but in in looking and I I mentioned like I'm I'm used to looking at mean median and mode and I want to
know right now how many of the classrooms are oversized and I would then guess that the the optimum budget for the superintendent would be looking at getting them all to X. And so I I'll put numbers out there
that aren't real. If if the best number is 100 and 70% of the classrooms right now are at 110 and it would cost X to get it down to 100, then that that's what I want to see. And
if there's something that's been cut that the superintendent knows from his years of expertise is limiting the learning for the children, I need to hear that because I'm never going to be able to create that. And and I don't know, Jeremy, if we're going to ask for
an override, I have no perspective if the budget that you've presented right now, if that override is pretend $5, right? I use fake numbers just for illustrative. If it's $5, but to get to
the optimum it's $65. Well, that might be what we want to ask for. If if we got to ask for an override, have it be an override that's going to change the environment if numbers are
are that close. If it's $5 now and you got to ask for $27, well, that's not going to fly, >> right? But just showing the the difference, I think, is helpful to us from a policy perspective and an ask
perspective if we know that information. And right now, I don't know that. Like, I know some information. That's one bit of information. I don't know. And maybe others on the committee that have been here longer know that. I don't I I I can't I can't be helpful to the
education process of kids if I don't know that. >> Understood. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> All right. I know we've been been here a long time. Is there any um unanswered questions right now from from the
committee? So, Kim, just going back to this for a second. Is finance assigning something for the administration to do so that it's all clear to what we would like them to do? >> Yes. Um I don't think it needs a
procedural vote. It's an ask. If you'd like to take a vote, we can do a vote. Um but the the ask is to consolidate the information that's here into one sheet.
what what it would look like because we have to we have to be prepared for the answer is no to any override. So what does that look like then what it looks like now? Add in the 1.6 million to open Ashb.
What does that look like? And then you know that that figure the superintendent asked like what does that include? Well, we have this 1.6 6. So if if that
whatever that includes for you and it's that 1.6, just use that number for that next column. I think the column that they the they might not have is what it looks like optimumly. >> Yeah. >> For 27. >> Yeah.
>> But I think everything else is in the packet somewhere, right? It's just getting it all onto one page, you know, or a few pages realistically. So, let me ask does the administration understand the task just to
>> Yeah, I think I think >> they have it all clear and everybody >> I'm pretty clear. Um I guess my only I guess this is maybe a question for the superintendent, but does our optimal include a reopening of any buildings? Cuz I guess that would change. Are we
saying optimal without the opening of the building? >> I would >> I don't know how to that's the only column I'm a little unsure. >> From my perspective, >> I would say optimum with what you have right now because for us to ask you to
do that with an unknown like you can easily take what the what has been asked of you. you you you have your ask already.
So what's asked of you and then your ask already and then the next column is just literally placing the Ashb onto that but then we don't know whether Ashb can or can't open and then the the other one
I would say using the facilities that you have now. That's my perspective because we know that. Okay. >> We know what buildings you have right now. >> That makes sense to me. >> Yeah. Brad, Brad, are you good with that? >> I'm good. >> Okay. There's there's probably lots of other things to talk about, but we could
be here for a weekend. >> Um, so our next uh agenda item was on the enrollment projections. Um, is there anything that you wanted to to share forward on that? >> I don't have anything unless Nancy does.
Um I think the only uh comment I'll make on enrollments is that the NASDAQ projections have been released. I believe they're linked in the um >> budget message >> budget message. Yes. >> Um there the difference that I'm seeing in those compared to other releases of
that is that there's a slow reduction continuing for the next 10 years. >> Mhm. >> It's not drastic, but it's before this was rather level. So this and I I reached out to them and spoke to somebody or exchanged uh communication
with them and really the reason for the change is that they go ahead and project what the enrollment's going to be and then in this case we didn't hit the benchmark. So if we had hit their what they
projected say for FY26 enrollment they might have changed the way that the 10-year projection works. So, um I think that's just it's just an information point. It means that we got to watch it. Um >> we got to continue to watch it um and look at the numbers. So, I think that's
just I wanted to just highlight it. That's all. >> Okay. Um I appreciate that and I appreciate um the link being in there. Um and obviously, you know, there are some drivers in pepper that will slowly slowly impact that depending on where
some of those development goes. We don't need to to delve into that, but I appreciate that. Okay. I just didn't know if there was anything other than that that we needed to be aware of. Um, any committee me members have any questions on that? >> No.
>> Okay. um our next meeting. Um do we need to potentially plan one in anticipation um of the the governor's budget um sooner than later or what's what's your
thought um Mike and Lisa on when we should meet again? I' I'd say um well, we probably need enough time for the administration to take that information and turn it into, you know, basically update the draft
budget. Um so I would say I how long would that take um to once once the governor's budget is out, how long does like updating the budget to account for those num those new numbers take? >> Couple of days seem reasonable. Yeah, a couple days.
>> Okay. So, so we could schedule one like, you know, in the the week following the release of the governor's budget. I think that would be reasonable. >> Okay. What is the date that the governor's budget is saying to be released?
>> Nancy, >> I was just digging for that because I think there was an email from Mars on it and uh while we were talking So, I think it's January 23rd. >> That's what I saw >> at the general session. Friday, January 23rd will come the day after the
governor's annual state of the Commonwealth address and just a few days before she is due to file her fiscal 27 budget. So she's that's 27th or 23rd is the Friday. So midweek of >> next week
>> the week of the 26th >> I would say >> and that school committee meeting is on the 27th >> is there. >> That's correct. >> So should we try for that Monday? I think it makes sense.
>> The 25th >> or the 26th >> 26th. >> Yeah, >> we would just um So, >> actually, just let me double check that. >> Oh, that if it did you said the 20? >> Yeah, that's >> that's giving you a day.
>> Yeah, that's probably too quick. >> I mean, I I can I can update the committee. I I'll have updates as soon as they come out as long as that um the chapter 70 workbook is released. I'll be able to give updates on the enrollments and the the revenue projections.
>> Okay. >> Regardless, I just might not have implemented all of the files and for the packet. >> Yeah. So, let's keep it on the agenda. I mean, let's can put that meeting for that date. We'll put the various items
on the agenda. Um, and then if we have to pull them back because we don't have the information, then we can do that. >> Yeah. So, the 26th, do you want to meet at 8:00 a.m. again or that's a Monday? >> That works for me.
>> Um, it works for me as well. I mean, we we can verify with Kenan, too. >> Okay. >> That his >> Yeah. >> that he does not have class that day or that early or >> Yeah. And 26th would also work for me.
>> Is this mainly going to be to discuss the budget? So that's what will be on the agenda. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Um you know if we've got to we'll have the the certifications hopefully we'll have the governor's budget information
um all of those different topics. And so I think keeping the our general topics you know our check-in on the the 26 uh FY26 budget and then you know continue with our planning. Um, you know, we may or may not have the information from
Ashb, from the state, I should say, on Ashby. We know that they're not developing it. Um, and just keep moving forward. And, you know, that will also give us some insight um from any of our discussions
um that come up um at our regular meeting tonight that we might need to add in Robin. So, okay. Um, I don't have any other business not reasonably anticipated and none of the members brought that up. So, I think we're good there. Um, Rob was any sign up for the
closing public comment. >> No, there's none. >> Okay. Um, if there's not any um additional questions or comments from anyone, >> no, >> I'll make a motion to adjurnn. >> All right.
>> Second. >> So, we have a motion from Lisa Martin and a second from Mike Labosier. So, we'll take a roll call vote. Lisa Martin, >> yes. >> Labasier, >> yes. >> And Kim Craraven, I'm a yes. Thank you so much um to all of you and the
administration for you know, getting us through this meeting and and weeding through it all um and hearing us out. I really do appreciate um the attentiveness that you have for for our questions. So, we'll see you soon. >> Have a good day, everyone. See you
tonight. All right. Bye. >> Bye.